Sentences with phrase «think about evidence»

For example, when writing your role descriptions you should put yourself in the hiring manager's shoes and think about the evidence you would require to make an informed hiring decision.

Only illiterates should have to depend on some investigation panel to tell them what to think about the evidence.

So, when educators think about evidence - informed or evidence - based practice, they need to think carefully about the rigour of the evidence they consider.

As an educator, how often do you take the time to think about evidence - informed or evidence - based practice, as well as the rigour of the evidence you're presented with?

As an educator, how often do you take the time to think about evidence - informed or evidence - based practice?

Kant died in 1804, so it's hard to say what he would have thought about evidence hierarchy pyramids.

Human Fossils: Thinking about the Evidence.

The U.S. Education Department hopes to get more states, districts, and researchers thinking about evidence use more deeply with new rules to apply standards of research evidence for school improvement and other projects under the Every Student Succeeds Act.

Maybe they're too busy thinking about EVIDENCE, as they were trained to do.

Not exact matches

The indictments issued Friday were sealed, and Manafort's attorneys did not receive a target letter, raising similar questions about whether Mueller thought Manafort would try to flee or destroy evidence if he were notified of his impending arrest three days beforehand.

All the evidence I've seen is consistent with the And model, though you have to think about it differently.

Further evidence comes from the interesting fact that the parchment version of the Declaration of Independence that is on display and kept in the United States National Archives wasn't actually written until July 19th; this being a copy of the approved text that was announced to the world on July 4th, with about 150 - 200 copies being made on paper and distributed on that date (26 of which are still around today, thus pre-dating what is now generally thought of as the «original»).

«I do think there is a lot of evidence to suggest that information technology is playing a large role in that,» Ford said about displacing workers.

A well - phrased series of Socratic questions challenges you to think about why you believe your «answer» to be correct, and to supply some sort of evidence to back up your beliefs...

In that case, the academics could be making the all - too - common mistake of «proving» an adage by using the same evidence that was used to bring about that line of thinking.

For all the headlines devoted to the event, you'd think this was a really big deal — either a signal that our economy has zoomed past the lingering aftereffects of the Great Recession, or evidence of a bubble about to pop, as CNBC wondered a little while ago.

The message is to encourage investors to think carefully about their risk tolerance, their true investment horizon, the extent to which they experience distress if an overvalued market advances without them, the extent to which they believe that historical evidence should inform investment decisions, and the extent to which they would be able to adhere to their investment discipline in the face of what could very well be a 50 % market loss over the completion of this cycle.

Thinking differently about something takes time and effort, and often requires compounding evidence.

«Unfortunately, the convenience of investing - by - slogan, rather than carefully thinking about finance and examining evidence, is currently leading investors into what is likely to be one of the worst disasters in the history of the US stock market.»

Senior fellow Monica de Bolle and research fellow Martin Chorzempa write that the Venezuelan government's proposal «combines serious misunderstandings with wishful thinking about the benefits of blockchain technology, along with evidence that the government is either trying to fool its populace or that it does not understand the basics of cryptocurrencies, or both.»

I don't think it will have a lot of impact on the economy and I worry about the harm of larger deficits — evidence says that if it pays for itself it won't be while this Congress is around — but it does try to go more directly at the problem.

Although there's little evidence to suggest that startups are thinking about -LSB-...]

I think you need to go back and read about the scientific method and what level of evidence in needed to support a hypothesis.

If there is a god then I most certainly want to know about it and what it thinks; however, I find no evidence for any gods described to me to date.

Please adjust your thinking according to reality and FACTUAL evidences about god's ACTIONS as EVIDENCED and not some idealistic egoist psychosis and disillusion projection about «HOW» you think god is.

You have no idea what you are talking about with your fairy tale illusion of what you THINK salvation is all about... it's a ridiculous concept based on flawed foundations right from the get go... here is my EVIDENCE... The record in Samuel tells us that it was the Lord who tempted David to do the numbering; that in Chronicles says it was Satan.

Near - death studies are about the best we have and anecdotally I think that many people do report «conscious» experience whether that's due to anoxia or otherwise there is no substantial evidence suggesting the absence of «consciousness.»

You talk about what you think you know but have no evidence against that which you do not know.

I saw where you think that you can argue about «fine - tuning» and strong principles, and I would assert that's because you don't even know what the most implicating evidence even is... thanks to your god, Copernicus.

My deconversion was a long process, and it had almost nothing to do with what I now believe to be the evil of religion — it was about what I thought to be true, and what there seemed to be evidence for.

wait wait wait... you're using the Babble... I mean buy - bull - oops I mean bible as some kind of «evidence» as to our «past lives»??? I'll bet you're the kind pf person that thinks the TV shows about hunting ghosts are real docu - mentaries!!

Robert See, I find that anyone who denies what scientific evidence objectively reveals in favour of what they personally think must be correct without any evidence whatsoever must be operating out of the same harmful pride you're talking about.

I think just about all humans believe some things that defy the evidence.

Or would the new, evidence - based historical - critical approach to understanding America's war in Vietnam shape your thinking about American responsibilities in the twenty - first - century world?

I don't think most people fully grasp how many people have been killed, tortured, and persecuted by people who just decided with no evidence that something about those people was evidence of evil.

If this is your level of understanding of how Science works — it would explain why you might think other claims about Gods existing as being evidence.

Thus the black / white thinking you mention will require ever more proof from the outsider and will inevitably conclude that there is nothing at all, not one thing, that any of them can do about any of it because the outsider refuses to offer real honest - to - goodness evidence.

Such bromides may be his idea of timeless «spiritual truths,» but I don't think this approach reveals much about Shakespeare, especially as his evidence consists solely of passages wrenched out of context, and therefore rendered quite meaningless.

Is it really likely that when the Romans heard Paul's words about creation being «subjected to futility» in 8:20 they «could well have thought about how imperial ambitions, military conflicts, and economic exploitation had led to the erosion of the natural environment throughout the Mediterranean world, leaving ruined cities, depleted fields, deforested mountains, and polluted streams as evidence of this universal human vanity»?

This kind of thinking is surely appropriate, and we should all be open - minded and scrupulous about the best way to interpret difficult parts of our faith in light of new evidence.

There is quite a difference here I find between those who insist something is not worth thinking about or discussion because evidence or proof does not (and perhaps can not) exist, and those who say «so what?»

He even thought the flu came from outer space (contrary to just about every shred of evidence...) He was an intelligent man but incredibly stubborn and close minded (especially for a scientist).

God has given us much evidence of His existence: how about the intricacies of how the human body works - can you really believe that happened without a master plan; what about the beauty of nature - can we really think that that just happened; what about the testimony of millions throughout the ages including Scientists attempting to disprove God, that point to things beyond their comprehension or doing.

I am not speaking to «attacking all views of God» I was actually talking about your assumed philosophy of science which you think doesn't provide enough evidence for God.

Feeling joy when thinking abstract thoughts about God — that might not be positvely or negatively selected for since it doesn't affect your kids, but there is emerging evidence that it is a side effect of the way our brain is wired to process information, which itself is a product of evolution and will require picking up that neuroscience text to understand.

if you can lie to yourself with immunity, you might be an atheist if you think the indifferent support your side, you might be an atheist if you don't think at all, you might be an atheist if you are drawn to religious discussions thinking someone wants to hear your opinion, you might be an atheist if you copy paste every piece of crap theory you find, you might be an atheist if you think you are right no matter what the evidence shows, you might be an atheist if you can't hold your water when you think about science, you might be an atheist if you can't write the word God, with proper capitalization, you might be an atheist if you think your view has enough support to be a percentage of the seven billion people on earth, you might be an atheist if you think The View has enough support to be a percentage of the seven billion people on earth, you might be an atheist if you live in a tar paper shack, writing manifestos, you might be an atheist if you think you're basically a good person, and your own final authority you might be an atheist if you think your great aunt Tillie was a simian, you might be an atheist if you own an autographed copy of Origin Of The Species, you might be an atheist if you think that when you die you're worm food, you might be an atheist if you think the sun rises and sets for you alone, you might be an atheist if all you can think about is Charles Darwin when you're with your significant other, you might be an atheist if all you can think about is you when you're with your significant other, you might be an atheist if you attend a church but palm the offering plate when it passes, you might be an atheist If think this exhausts all the possibilities of definition, you might be an atheist.

If you wish to continue this line of thought, how about you provide some archaeological evidence like some ancient writings that involve Horus as being born of a virgin.

Atheists (myself included) think there's something scary (and ultimately dangerous) about defining reality by something other than evidence...

The evidence that perplexity and vagueness continue to afflict thought about the ministry is to be found today in the theological schools and among ministers themselves.

Recently, several important studies have appeared that, in addition to contributing historical evidence on Puritanism, also offer some interesting new ways of thinking about the theoretical assumptions concerning religion and ideology in the Weberian tradition.