Sentences with phrase «with rational people»

Given that we are dealing with rational people the leader's argument reaches sympathetic ears and after some months, the compensation adjustment is finally executed.

In the early days, scientists, who are normally associated with rational people, got associated with fringe environmentalists without intending to.

You can call me a coward and say I «ran away» or whatever your malicious, childish mind wants to make up to make yourself feel better, but I prefer to actually have adult conversations with rational people who can articulate their opinions based in reasonable, rational thought ========= Apparently, since you are still addressing me, I must be «adult» in my conversation and displaying rational thought.

You can call me a coward and say I «ran away» or whatever your malicious, childish mind wants to make up to make yourself feel better, but I prefer to actually have adult conversations with rational people who can articulate their opinions based in reasonable, rational thought.

They quickly run out of techniques that would work with a rational person.

Not exact matches

«And therefore, as with a lot of media, having an advertising - supported model is the only rational model that can support building this service to reach people.»

People who work with a financial advisor feel more confident, they save more, they take action (and don't procrastinate retirement planning) and they make rational moves with their money.

And therefore, as with a lot of media, having an advertising - supported model is the only rational model that can support building this service to reach people,» he said.

As for the current market, I like to think that people are still rational in playing the gravity game with interest rates, albeit the recent optimism is slightly far fetched, but I think it's fine.

I have met God and know him and so have numerous people other people I have talked to so my rational thought is telling me to go with what I know is true.

His non-existence is being acknowledged by people with rational minds.

It carries no weight in the scheme of things with any rational and logical person.

If you wish to convince any rational person of the validity of your bible, you'll have to come up with a little bit more than what you've got.

@BoldGeorge — So a woman hit's a child and uses the «My hands are so weak I can barely hold a bible» defense when any rational person would know gripping strength in your hands has nothing to do with your ability to swing them at a child.

What you say does nothing to invalidate my point, which is that when people believe in the supernatural they'll attribute phenomenon in the real world to with even though they have no rational reason to do so.

Kids and teens today grow up watching people get screwed over and mistreated with no rational explanation at all.

If persons were only intelligent organisms with finite wants, the problem of adjusting demand and supply could in principle be easily settled by rational calculation.

No rational person could for vote a 72 yo McCain with Palin a heartbeat away from the oval office.

But I would argue that people are having trouble with this (and many other issues) because they are expected to accept it without evidence or rational arguement.

It isn't true that scientists are trying to change the beliefs of others, but rather they are observing and testing natural phenomena with tomes of evidence telling the rational person that the notion of a deity as a NATURAL being rather than SUPERNATURAL one is absurd and silly.

He is thus against natural law theory but for a DCT in which God, by creating rational creatures, is bound to make their highest end a relationship with the divine persons, but free to pursue that end via any number of routes.

Rational reflection on the world could lead intelligent people with no religious commitments to the conclusion that there is a First Cause or Unmoved Mover responsible for the existence of this world and its progress toward its own natural ends.

Thornton, for example, does not envisage change or development in God, whereas I postulate that the three divine persons undergo change in their relationships to one another as a result of their involvement with their (rational) creatures.

With that kind of benevolent rational control, people for the first time experience themselves as unalienated or happy.

«To the extent that I'm a rational choice person, with a small R and a small C, all I'm saying is that religious commitments are not discreditable acts.

Endowment with reason and conscience, and hence that a human person is a rational and moral being, is commonly accepted by all peoples, whatever their philosophy, ideology or religion.

The mentally healthy person is the productive and unalienated person; the person who relates himself to the world lovingly, and who uses his reason to grasp reality objectively; who experiences himself as a unique individual entity, and at the same time feels one with his fellowman; who is not subject to irrational authority, and who accepts willingly the rational authority of conscience and reason; who is in the process of being born as long as he is alive, and considers the gift of life the most precious chance he has.

Can't have a rational discussion with an irrational (religious) person

I guess if you don't have a rational argument you can only threaten people who disagree with you.

From these considerations it becomes clear that mathematics, which superficially appears to have no relevance to the knowledge of human nature, actually affords important insights about human beings, not only as rational agents, but as persons with freedom yet also bound by necessities in the spatiotemporal order.

Boethius is not wrong when he says that the human person is an individual substance with a rational nature.

As people come to realize that the concept of «God» is just an ancient human fabrication «spiritual but not religious» seems to be a rational way to deal with this dichotomy.

If to be a person in the fullest sense is to be conscious, rational, and have a moral sense, then a fetus is, at best, a probability of a person, hence those who equate abortion with murder are engaging in demagoguery.

========== Atheists are on this board all day every day with one basic message: «people that believe in the God of Abraham are stupid» (the nice version is «people that believe in God are engaging in holding rational and irrational beliefs simultaneously, but we wont call them «stupid»)», and you never see this kind of outpouring of incensed righteous indignation from Christians.

Boy, with rational thinking, you can do what many religious people have done!

According to Hartshorne, «The only thing that the proposed form puts pressure on people to do, and that I think constitutes the essential element in rational procedure in metaphysics, is to face the dilemmas, trilemmas, or quatrilemmas that their beliefs or disbeliefs confront them with» (Foreword to Viney, Charles x).

Some people have nothing better to do than get on the internet and argue for the sake of arguing, with no rational thought behind it.

«Some people want Jews to walk into gas chambers,» I offered, «and we can have a rational and civilized debate with them.»

A God who at first glance is comparable to the picture of the Oriental ruler, who governs his people with complete arbitrariness, bound by no rational law; but a God who is conceived as wholly different from an Oriental ruler, since all physical traits are lacking, all tyrannical desires alien; a God who desires justice and righteousness and punishes sin, a God who loves His people as a father his first - born son, a God to whom the religious man ills as to his father, and in whose help he trusts in all situations of life.

History deals with empirical facts of the human past that are accessible to any rational person who uses historical method.

All of these approaches are valid and rational and reasonable, and based on the fact that this man's actions are inconsistent both with the non-religious person's experiences, and what the non-religious person sees the vast majority of religious people doing, we can say that this man was most likely delusional.

so having a person who thinks that «satan» is real, and is at «war with the US» and «god» is a rational person.

It also doesn't sound like those words were put together by any rational person with any knowledge of the world around them.

@martog - «Like I said earlier in this thread... you can not have a rational discussion with an irrational (religious) person.»

Then the lucid addition of «So Satan may not tempt you with your lack of self control» I mean one can easily make the rational assumption or argument that masturbation is a good remedy in this regard as well to help relieve the desires of the flesh that might other wise lead a married person to adultery.

People who, while they believe they are rational, don't operate with a sane thought in their heads, like those from the West Borough Church.

With all due respect, as an Atheist, I am far more level headed, rational and have more morals than many people who are believers.

typically, when people make outlandish claims, others of undoubtedly more rational thinking, prefer to see said claims substantiated with some evidence.

Your problem is obviously that you go into your rationale with the intent to make people feel like their beliefs are childish and they are inferior to you and your so - obvious rational adult mentality.

It's great for winning others to the side of reason, of course — but I assume you want to slow the flight of rational people from Christianity rather than making them flee so as not to be associated with the nutters.