Engaging the brain by slowing it down can help people appreciate incompatibility and reject claims they might otherwise accept as true.
|
|
"Based on the allegations of the complaint, which the Court must accept as true, Trump's statement at least "implicitly encouraged the use of violence or lawless action.
|
|
Her ability to choose a response — to decide for herself what to accept as true for her and what to deny — was key to unlocking her own capacity.
|
|
Under the provision requiring recusal for actual bias, they said, judges are only supposed to weigh the legal sufficiency of the allegations, which they are bound to accept as true.
|
|
In scientific medical writing, the verb 'believe' can mean "actively accept as true" on the basis of external evidence (for example, a statement of the type, "we believe that x is a better treatment than y in this disease" can imply that "after examining the available evidence, we have concluded that x is...").
|
|
The following highlights the deep mathematical and philosophic problem behind what it means to "know", and also helps elucidate what the "law" implies (i.e. what the law really means). Their difficulties with the law emerge: that they do not want to accept as true implications drawn from that which is unverifiable (untestable, unknowable) or from the impossible or the false. (All quotes are from van Heijenoort, italics added).
|
|
Positive and negative self-worth beliefs and evaluative standards. Revista De Psihologie, 56(3-4), 219-230. Once people have developed a schema about themselves, there is a strong tendency for that schema to be maintained by a bias in what they attend to, in what they remember, and in what they are prepared to accept as true about themselves. In other words, the self-schema becomes self-perpetuating.
|
|
The main limitation lies not in the standard, but in the human inability to acquire all facts of an experience. Only an omniscient mind could be aware of all of the relevant information. A scholar must accept this limitation and accept as true the most coherent explanation for the available facts. Coherence is difficult to dispute as a criterion of truth, since arguing against coherence is validating incoherence, which is inherently illogical.
|
|
Retaining six shares, he created an owners' syndicate with the remaining 34 members. Shergar was stolen from the Aga Khan's stud farm by an armed gang on 8 February 1983. Negotiations were conducted with the thieves, but the gang broke off all communication after four days when the syndicate did not accept as true the proof provided that the horse was still alive. In 1999 Sean O'Callaghan, a former member of the IRA, published details of the theft and stated that it was an IRA operation to raise money for arms.
|
|
First, the tenet > that a court must accept as true all of the allegations contained in a > complaint is inapplicable to legal conclusions. ... Second, only a complaint > that states a plausible claim for relief survives a motion to dismiss. > Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief will, as > the Court of Appeals observed, be a context-specific task that requires the > reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense. In > keeping with these principles a court considering a motion to dismiss can > choose to begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more than > conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of truth.
|
|
While Pomponazzi himself does not follow Aristotle in this respect, he argues that Aristotle very clearly argues for the absolute mortality of the soul, with only limited features of immortality. He was not the first to make this claim, and appears to have been influenced by the Greek commentator on Aristotle, Alexander of Aphrodisias. He further claims that the immortality of the soul cannot be determined through reason, and thus must be left to the powers of God. Since the scriptures reveal that God has made the soul immortal, argued Pomponazzi, we too can accept as true the immortality of the soul and thereby go beyond the limits of reason.
|
|
In her contextual empiricism, she argues that observations and data of the sort taken by scientists are not by themselves evidence for or against any particular hypotheses. Rather, the relevance of any particular data for any given hypothesis is decided by human beliefs and assumptions about what kinds of data can support what kinds of hypotheses. Moreover, even when the relevance of evidence is decided, there remains a logical gap between evidence and full justification of interesting scientific theories (the traditional philosophical problem of underdetermination of theories). This gap, too, must be bridged by beliefs and assumptions about legitimate reasoning in order for evidence to help us decide which hypotheses to accept as true.
|
|