Sentences with phrase «think about these principles»

Dig Deeper: The 10 Best Slogans of All Time How to Create a Company Philosophy: Hire People Who Match the Culture Understandably, many companies don't think about their principles until they start making hires.

And sales goals are no different, which is why it's important to think about these principles when you're planning your goals, in order to keep your process on track.

But we think about the principles that Apple is based on,» he said.

If you don't like to think about that principle in a sense that involves God, then think about the movie «It's a Wonderful Life.»

In «One Kid at a Time,» Carol Ann Tomlinson (p. 12) recalls the students who challenged her «certainties» about teaching and started her thinking about the principles that underlie differentiated instruction.

My hope is that their artworks will serve as a catalyst for thinking about these principles and concerns, and encourage each of us to consider our own position in society as a starting point.»

Not exact matches

The final deadly mistake is not following common design principles, which is something that Steve Krug talks about in his book Don't Make Me Think.

A great way of avoiding this mistake is to think about the business» principles.

Even those who think the movement misguided should in principle be happy about its idealism.

Create projects (and products) that accomplish social transformation, profitability, and cost reduction all at once Green your company in ways that save money and make money Gain enormous positive reputation as a visionary company worth supporting: your own employees recruit new qualified hires while your customers turn into fans, and then even become your unpaid sales force Expand successfully into totally new markets through strategic thinking, powerful partnerships, and commitment to core principles Turn marketing from a cost to a revenue stream Embrace abundance and transformation — and stop worrying about market share

The principle is so simple and yet so many people think only about customers and not competitors as well.

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.

If a problem arises which is not dealt with clearly in the Qur» an or in the Sunnah, the answer is sought in the schools of thought, the theories worked out by «leaders of thought» who have been careful students of the Qur» an and the Sunnah, have thought profoundly about their inner meanings and understand their general principles, and who have special knowledge of virtue and the general welfare.

I have been doing a lot of reading and thinking about this over the past six years or so, and some of what I have learned will find its way into my upcoming book about giving up our rights, but here is a post about non-violent resistance, and some of the principles involved for living this way.

These are some of the principles on which the schools of thought based their decisions: all things are fundamentally allowable, unless specifically prohibited; toleration and the lifting of restrictions should be the aim of legislation; eradication of mischief is the aim of administration; necessity permits benefiting by things not otherwise allowable; necessity is given due appreciation; preventing mischief has priority over bringing about welfare; commit the lesser of two evils; mischief is not removed by mischief; one should suffer private damage to avert general disaster.

If this principle is followed, it must be granted that one will not find in the Bible the univocally personalistic thinking about God that many Protestants suppose they see.

I am speaking of... what every one must know in his own case: how difficult it is to command himself, and do what he wishes to do; how weak the governing principle of his mind is, and how poorly and imperfectly he comes up to his own notions of right and truth; how difficult it is to command his feelings, grief, anger, impatience, joy, fear; how difficult to govern his own tongue, to say just what he would; how difficult to rouse himself to do what he would, at this time or that; how difficult to rise in the morning; how difficult to go about his duties and not be idle; how difficult to eat and drink just what he should, how difficult to regulate his thoughts through the day; how difficult to keep out of his mind what should be kept out of it.

We must be willing not only to accept, but to embrace the radical transformation brought about by the renewing of our minds and our thinking though the fundamental principles of God's Word.

For instance, when Fowler and Westerhoff think about theological ethics, they tend to think in terms of an ethics of virtue or disposition, in contrast to a theological ethics emphasizing principle and procedure.

This is the guiding principle with which to think about Christian communication, the place of the media, old and new technologies, and the work of WACC as a community of communicators.

Indeed, I have that fear about much of my work, as some seem to think that «an ethics of character» may be a new alternative to an ethics of principle or a situation ethics.

Such a principle of historical thinking has led to significant reinterpretation of biblical materials, including the miracle traditions about Jesus, the resurrection, and the ascription of titles of divinity to Jesus.

If you want principles to guide us about how Christians should look at immigration, then the OT is the place to look because there we have God's direct thoughts and principles on the matter.

«People look at us and think we are principled and good people, but there isn't much joy or happiness about us.

Although space will not permit exploration of the point here, it is important to note that Christian thought about just war predated the rise of the modern state system in the 17th century, and rests on fundamental moral principles not essentially tied to that system.

I'm certainly open to changing my mind on the basis of practical revenue - flow projections, but not, I think, on a set of tax - policy principles that I suspect too few are really serious about.

On Hartshornean principles, and apart from those principles, when I think about God that relationship is internal to me.

I liked the book because the principles he shares encapsulate my thinking from the past five years about the kind -LSB-...]

If we can not afford to reflect seriously about the meaning of Christian faith in relation to new issues that confront us, Christian faith ceases to be the central organizing principle of our thinking and living.

But Nagel (1970, pp. 217 - 218) believes that «a thought has no location at all»; Feigi (1967, p. 39) writes: «it is simply nonsense to ask about the location of a concept»; and Polten (1973, p. 55) even pretends «that physiologists certainly have not shown any necessary connection of memory with brain tissues and it is arguable that it can not be done in principle.»

By rationality I do not mean the self - consciousness about the principles of thought that is expressed in explicit logic or reflection about methodology.

[10] It is not clear whether he thinks the soul is just a myth, but one would hardly think that Aristotle was writing about a mythical concept of the soul in his De Anima, since he argues for the soul quite scientifically: what distinguishes all living from all non-living things in the world we see must be some primary principle of life which he says is the soul.

Instead of believing with Hartshorne that man's convictions about the ultimate character of reality can and should be determined by allegedly neutral logical principles, the understanding here being argued is that man's thinking about God is and should be governed by a vision emerging in the context of faith, a vision that is itself decisively conditioned by its rootage in history and in the prereflective levels of consciousness.

(When you think about it that way it may not seem so surprising that such a search should lead to the Golden Rule and universal principles of right and wrong applying to everyone, like the Commandments — though the steps involved in getting to these results are by no means trivial.)

But virtual worship challenges us to think deeply about theological first principles.

I liked the book because the principles he shares encapsulate my thinking from the past five years about the kind of life I want to live among the people at my job and in my neighborhood.

Of course, if you are talking and discribing a wrong principle about biblical success, I agree — but then your talking of feeling like your carrying a leaking pail makes me think — «desire... success story... is the problem ---- I wonder?

Pull out from under democratic principles the beliefs of Judaism and Christianity about the transcendent dignity of the person and the human propensity to sin, and the existing edifice of democratic thought is exposed to radical doubt.

Drawing from the Islamic imperative that «God is one» and from the Qur» an's teaching about Adam and Eve, Rauf arrives at two essential principles: that all humans are equal «because we are born of one man and woman,» and that «because we are equal... we have certain inalienable liberties,» such as the freedom to accept or reject God, to think for ourselves (ijtihad) and to make individual choices without coercion.

Although Locke is pessimistic with regard to what we can actually know about these particles, believing as he does that we will always be in «incurable ignorance about them since we can not know the minute parts of matter nor the manner of their interaction, he thinks that at least in principle it is possible to discover the causes of natural events.

The thread throughout the article that the principle reason for Lewis» popularity is / was predicated the Christian themes it uses is, I think, missing one very important point about his books: They are well written and entertaining.

The US is a secular country not a christian country.Our country was founded on the principles of freedom fo religion and seperation between church and state.I am a muslim, I can tell you that the reason men and women don; t pray in integrated environments is to avoid distractions and to focus on the prayer not because women are less than men.I personally don; t want to be praying next to a woman because all I'll be thinking about is her and not god.Jews also do the same thing in temples by seperating between men and women in temples.A house of worship is built solely for that purpose, worship!

This makes me think that if you are truly motivated by love for someone, and if you follow biblical principles on how to prophesy (building others up, glorifying Jesus, prophesying «in accordance with your faith» as Paul says in Romans 12:6), then you have nothing to be worried about.

As to what is being touted as «health insurance», I think it quit being insurance (meant to spread out risk over a larger population) back about the time someone figured out how to apply the principle of «an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure» to it (probably the early 1980s.)

It examines religious behaviour from a non-Christian perspective, with some thought - provoking comments about some Biblical commandments and principles.

One of my guiding principles when thinking of what to do with my kiddo is to think about what he's naturally working on or practicing lately.

CHRISTINE STEWART FITZGERALD: You know, I have to say that's really interesting that you can talk about understanding the principles and then when it sounds like when you plays out, sometimes, you have to apply it slightly differently to your twins because they each having the things they'll needs and I think that's really important element that we as parents, you know, have to remember that they are individuals.

However, rather than simply accepting the opinion of states and critical Western scholars as the point of reference, the edited book Responsibility to Protect: Cultural Perspectives in the Global South by Rama Mani and Tom Weiss addresses the important and so far under - researched question of what scholars and activists from the global south really think about the R2P principle and how the R2P implementation process can account for those southern concerns and insights.

«I think it's a sad day when we can't defend the principle of a welfare state that provides some degree of safety net for everybody... I think we should just be clear about what life is like for those on benefits.

As individuals and communities, we should think about how we can assist vulnerable people in our neighbourhoods — doing our bit to help them, out of the principles of kindness, compassion and companionship.