Difference between revisions of "Human being"
(Whether human nature ought to be the exclusive province of biology is a matter of debate. Theologians continually raise objections to such a viewpoint.) |
(first sentence fits Homo sapiens better) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Human | + | '''Human beings''' were created in the image of [[God]], according to Judaism and Christianity. "Male and female He created them." (Genesis 1) |
Scientists, educators, philosphers, and sociologists who embrace the perspective of [[philosophical naturalism]] deliberately overlook man's spiritual nature. | Scientists, educators, philosphers, and sociologists who embrace the perspective of [[philosophical naturalism]] deliberately overlook man's spiritual nature. | ||
Revision as of 15:43, July 13, 2007
Human beings were created in the image of God, according to Judaism and Christianity. "Male and female He created them." (Genesis 1)
Scientists, educators, philosphers, and sociologists who embrace the perspective of philosophical naturalism deliberately overlook man's spiritual nature. Methodogical naturalism deliberately overlooks the possibility that human behavior, emotion or thinking is influenced by any influences by anything other than natural causes (see also determinism).
Academic of human beings falls under any of the following fields of study, which collectively are known as the "social sciences"::
Whether human nature ought to be the exclusive province of biology is a matter of debate. Theologians continually raise objections to such a viewpoint.