Sentences with phrase «such as explanation»

Comment: A commenter noted that the definition of «disclosure» should reflect that health plan correspondence containing protected health information, such as Explanation of Benefits (EOBs), is frequently sent to the policyholder.

> [A] n adequate definition of confirmation will have to do justice to the way in which empirical hypotheses function in theorical scientific contexts such as explanations and predictions -LSB-...]

Not exact matches

For starters, here's an overly simplified explanation of Bitcoin: It's a digital currency (there are more than 800 now) that isn't controlled by a central authority such as a government or bank.

Similarly, problems that require detailed explanations, such as a broken television or a defective refrigerator, are difficult to convey in a text box.

Without such reasons or explanation, Canadians can only guess as to «the wider public policy factors» (Pembina at para. 74) taken into account by the GiC in ultimately granting project approval.

However, I do make an exception for link building related videos (and for videos that get forwarded several times, of course:)-RRB-, such as Rhea Drysdale's realistic link building tips, Stephan Spencer's explanation about what's in a good link and Ray Comstock's link building videos.

As such we felt it deserved more explanation.

Why don't you take a few hours and try to think of another explanation, such as, we're just here, the whole universe, as one.

[2] Among scientists who find the evidence persuasive, a variety of natural explanations have been proposed, such as the anthropic principle along with multiple universes.

They confuse it with an explanation for the universe and a replacement for their God, and attack it as such.

Seems reasonable and logical and scientifically explanable as the explanation for what occurred as the Bible shows forth the works of a Mighty God whose power to create all that there is — is all that is needed to hold it all together until such time as He determines to change things up!

In fact (atheistic) evolutionary theory has no rational explanation for why there is such a thing as rational explanation.

Popular delusions such as the transgender craze offer simplistic explanations and solutions for the multidimensional life crises of identity.

If you are a member of the faith, read 1 Cor 14:33, and question whether God would have his words recorded in such a confusing, disorderly manner, or if, as we are reminded through Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

In any case, in the following paragraphs I will first analyze Whitehead's remarks in Process and Reality on societies as the necessary environment for the ongoing emergence of actual occasions and then show how this analysis throws unexpected light on Whitehead's further explanation of the hierarchy of societies within the current world order, in particular, the difference between inorganic and organic societies, and, among organic societies, those with a «soul» or «living person» and those without such a central organ of control.

Unfortunately for your side, there are countless examples throughout history where believers in supernatural beings such as god and evil spirits attributed various phenomenon to them, only to have science later debunk those explanations.

Instead of diving into an explanation of problems — such as North Korea's religious prisoners, Boko Haram attacks in Nigeria, and the instability caused by Islamic extremism in the Middle East — Tillerson called out only ISIS.

To speak of chance for a universe which presents such a complex organization in its elements and such marvelous finality in its life would be equivalent to giving up the search for an explanation of the world as it appears to us.

If the requisite disjunctive synthesis can not be explained by appeal to the doctrine that God values all possible worlds, this is not so much because evaluation is logically dependent upon gradations of importance, but because (accepting Christian's explanation of the absence of such gradations in the primordial nature) the logic of the doctrine itself entails that God be inextricably involved in the formation of actual worlds as «circles of convergence,» i.e., in «the orderings effected by individuals in the course of nature.»

As such, this explanation of how a loving, in - control God can be reconciled with suffering is more nearly an affirmation of belief than it is an explanation of anything.

When one looks for the secret of such goodness in others or in gratitude thanks God for such a measure of victory as has come to his own life, the explanation lies in humility, loving outreach, a sense of divine forgiveness, and power that comes from dwelling in «the secret place of the Most High.»

However, the continuity of structure and function from nonliving matter to living and from the simplest forms of life to the most complicated strongly suggests that even the most characteristic human activities such as thought and consciousness have an explanation, as yet only partly known, in chemical and physical phenomena.

If it is questionable whether mental activity such as the planning and writing of a book can be fully explained by the sciences of physics and chemistry, it may not be so doubtful that life is also resistant to exhaustive explanation in terms of atomic and molecular analysis.

A similar approach has been employed in recent catechetical courses, such as Anchor and Evangelium, in which religious ideas and understandings are approached initially through paintings rather than verbal explanations.

If then such a zealous learner, though not carrying things so far as to become a disciple, were to discourse loudly and volubly of how much he owed the Teacher, so that his eulogy was almost endless and its gilding priceless; if he were to resent our explanation that the Teacher had been merely an occasion, neither his eulogy nor his resentment could further our inquiry, since both had the same ground, namely, that though lacking in the courage to understand he had nevertheless not lacked the audacity to go beyond.

Their changing arrangements give the explanation of all the changes in the appearance of matter, not only the changes as you look at it, but all the changes which occur, such as burning, decay, generation.

In the bigger picture, it is a slippery and dangerous slope away from God to doubt that the Word of God as available to us now in the entire Bible does not sufficiently provide the explanation of God's nature and grace and the means for our salvation through faith in Christ, and such a situation can not logically stand anyway.

Under Category of Explanation XIII, Whitehead notes that «there are many species of subjective forms, such as emotions, valuations, purposes, adversions, consciousness, etc.» (PR 35).

Even if one might suppose such a purpose for the Chronicles, does that explanation fit some of Lewis other stories, such as The Dark Tower and That Hideous Strength?

A paradigm, such as Newton's work in mechanics, implicitly defines for a given scientific community the types of question that may legitimately be asked, the types of explanation that are to be sought, and the types of solution that are acceptable.

I shall do this under a few headings but very briefly — for further explanation the reader may wish to consult such books as my own Lure of Divine Love (Pilgrim Press and T. and T. Clark, 1981) or Peter N. Hamilton's The Living God and the Modern World (Hodder and Stoughton, 1968).

In addition to these crazy and immoral laws, there are plenty of examples of God's irrationality by his direct killing of many people for reasons that defy any rational explanation such as killing children who make fun of bald people, and the killing of a man who tried to keep the ark of God from falling during transport.

It may be that if we had been there we might have found a «scientific» explanation of what the early Christians regarded as miraculous; and it is legitimate enough to use such knowledge as we now have, for instance, about the treatment of psychosomatic disorders, as a help toward the explanation of some of the cures reported in the gospels.

We are meant to believe that these utterances predict the subsequent history of the Jews with such uncanny specificity so as to admit of only a supernatural explanation.

Of course, as McGrath recognises, atheist explanations for such «fine tuning» exist: the multiverse, for example, which posits that our universe is just one region of a vastly bigger reality, such that the apparently fine - tuned parameters have different values elsewhere.

As Aristotle says at the beginning of the Metaphysics, all men desire to know - and such an explanation leaves us still desiring.

Darwinists disagree with creationists as a matter of definition, of course, but the degree of contempt that they express for creationism in principle requires some explanation beyond the fact that certain creationists have used unfair tactics such as quoting scientists out of context.

Much modern intellectual debate, particularly within the popular arena, centers on disputes between religion and science over such seminal issues as creationism versus evolutionary theory, or theological explanations of the origin of the universe versus the «big - bang theory» of the new cosmology.

«Such is the schematism of analogy, with which (as a means of explanation),» says Kant, «we can not dispense» (p. 58, note).

Any explanation of observed phenomena, that invokes to any extent supernatural influence such as divine motivation, is thus inherently self - disqualified from being a scientific discipline.

Given the character of scientific explanation in terms of efficient causes, it is quite understandable that such evolutionary advance should be explained in terms of natural selection and chance variation as the best possible scientific theory.

While it would be foolish to give up the meteorological explanation for the theological one, it should be said that there may be important aspects of the storm, such as its relation to the powers of nature on which life is dependent and the sense of awe inspired by it, which are present in the latter interpretation but wholly lacking in the former.

If Christians use logical or natural explanations to explain the rise of other traditions, such as the foundation of Mormonism on the visions of Joseph Smith, these explanations must be applied to the Judeo - Christian tradition as well.

The explanation of this distinctive conception, scholars have suggested, is that Mark, fully convinced that Jesus was the Messiah, could find no clear evidence that he had presented himself as such to the Jewish nation; and the reason for this silence, Mark decided, could only be that Jesus was not yet ready to claim his Messiahship publicly and did not want the fact divulged prematurely.

The Catholic explanation called Transubstantiation comes directly from St Thomas Aquinas and was promulgated as the official Church teaching at the Council of Trent to counteract such heterodox ideas as consubstantiation and impanation.

While he always remains God as the chief principle of explanation for such concrete emergents of the good — in all its variety — as do in fact appear, he is «enriched» both by satisfaction in what happens and by the provision of possibilities of future action by that which has happened.

Such instances, for which no convincing scientific explanations have been given, are cited by some Christian biologists as evidence of God's intervention in the process.

The most reasonable explanation of this complicated complex of sayings would appear to be (I) that there is widespread tradition that triumphant Christian (or gnostic) faith is such as to be able to «move mountains» (I Cor.

However, if you're really determined, you can always think of yet another far - fetched factor or explanation, such as matter that comes into existence all by itself, an infinite number of universes in which every possibility has happened or will happen in its own universe, life and consciousness spontaneously arising out of inert matter, etc..

An actual entity can now be described under the aspect of emerging [werdenden] coherence: insofar as such an entity is an emergence of a unified connectedness of coherent factors from incoherent elements, it is the emergence of a totality of meaning whose inner factors have significance only within this whole: «An entity is actual, when it has significance for itself» (PR 38: 21st Category of Explanation).