Quotes About Context

There is not a right and a wrong answer to every question.

Memory implies that there is some static time and place you can go back to, whereas if you relive it by trying to put yourself back in that context, its more nuanced, less black and white. More traumatic, but also more exciting. When I knew I had to write about things that would be painful, I put off doing it for ages. But then eventually the fear of not doing it becomes greater than the fear of doing it.

There is no time in prison, unless you create it for yourself. People on the outside seem to believe time passes slowly in prison, but it doesn't. The truth is that time doesn't pass at all. It's an eternal vacuum, and each moment is meaningless because it has no context. Tomorrow may as well be yesterday. That's why there's so much stagnation inherent in prison life - because there is no momentum of any sort.

You can cite a hundred references to show that the biblical God is a bloodthirsty tyrant, but if they can dig up two or three verses that say 'God is love,' they will claim that you are taking things out of context!

E]motional suffering cannot be disowned from its sociocultural context. In other words, relationships are critical to virtually every psychiatric illness and its treatment. Those relationships stretch far beyond the therapist-patient relationship.

Before you make a move, remember to take the whole position into account. In poker, your position includes everything you know: about your hand, about the players at the table, the chip counts, the situation - anything that can provide a clue about how the people you're facing will behave.

If we don't look at the context, we can easily come to all sorts of conclusions that don't align with what the Bible is actually saying. The Bible is an ancient book written across centuries, and we must use the minds God gave us to examine these claims against the Bible to see if they are true and accurate in the way they are presented.

We need to step back and look at the more fundamental question: What was the author originally saying? We cannot simply read our own understandings into the meaning of a word or statement someone else wrote or said. And when we look at some often bizarre-sounding parts of the Bible, we have to try to discover who the original audience was and view the text through their lens, not ours. If we don't, the possibilities for confusion are endless.

We believe the Bible was written for us, that it's for everyone of all times and places because it's God's Word. But it wasn't written to us. It wasn't written in our language, it wasn't written with our culture in mind or our culture in view. —DR. JOHN WALTON, PROFESSOR, AUTHOR1

Orwell understood that a government that is beyond the reach of accountability has little incentive to tell the truth. Indeed, its power may arise from the obliteration of objective facts. In the world of 1984, contradictory statements lose all sense of context and we are left with preposterous slogans: "War Is Peace. Freedom Is Slavery. Ignorance Is Strength." And yet Orwell asks us, if there is no one with the power to call out a lie as a lie, does it end up ceasing to be a lie?

That's what real leadership is: Creating and clarifying the vision (the "what"), and giving that vision greater context and importance (the "why") for all Whos involved. Once the "what" and "why" have clearly been established, the specified "Who" or "Whos" have all they need to go about executing the "How." All the leader needs to do at that point is support and encourage the Who(s) through the process.

That's what real leadership is: Creating and clarifying the vision (the "what"), and giving that vision greater context and importance (the "why") for all Whos involved.

This relocation of the picture raises an important issue when looking at works of art – quite often they are no longer in their original location, and we see them as part of a historical sequence

The economics we need is of the "seminar room" variety, not the "rule-of-thumb" kind. It is an economics that recognizes its limitations and caveats and knows that the right message depends on the context. The fine print is what economists have to contribute.

The world is better served by syncretic economists and policymakers who can hold multiple ideas in their heads than by 'one-handed' economists who promote one big idea regardless of context.

The Queen died. The King died." "The Queen died. And the King died of a broken heart." The first line was fact. The second line was a story. It placed the facts in context, added emotion and made us connect to it by making it memorable.

We often understand something better when we see it in comparison with something else than when we see it in isolation.

The left hemisphere specializes in text; the right hemisphere specializes in context.

When facts become so widely available and instantly accessible, each one becomes less valuable. What begins to matter more is the ability to place these facts in context and to deliver them with emotional impact.

It's about leading with my ears instead of my mouth," Ferlazzo says. "It means trying to elicit from people what their goals are for themselves and having the flexibility to frame what we do in that context.

The differences in the two thinking styles, as Baron-Cohen describes them, are intriguing. "Systematizing involves exactness, excellent attention to local detail," and an attraction to fixed rules independent of context, he says. "To systematize, you need detachment." 21 (Baron describes autism as an "extreme" male brain.)

People at work are thirsting for context, yearning to know that what they do contributes to a larger whole. And a powerful way to provide that context is to spend a little less time telling how and a little more time showing why.

Empathy is related to Symphony—because empathic people understand the importance of context. They see the whole person much as symphonic thinkers see the whole picture.

Our American past always speaks to us with two voices the voice of the past, and the voice of the present. We are always asking two quite different questions. Historians reading the words of John Winthrop usually ask, What did they mean to him Citizens ask, What do they mean to us Historians are trained to seek the original meaning all of us want to know the present meaning.