A Quote by Nawal El Saadawi

moral codes and standards in our societies very rarely apply to all people equally. This is the most damning proof of how immoral such codes and standards really are. — © Nawal El Saadawi
moral codes and standards in our societies very rarely apply to all people equally. This is the most damning proof of how immoral such codes and standards really are.
We agree that language functions in a certain way so that we can understand each other; but within that are built all sorts of sentimental codes, codes of authenticity, codes of certain kinds of emotion.
We used to have adults who set standards, moral standards, cultural standards, legal standards. They were better than we were. They gave us something to aspire to. They were people that we described as having dignity and character. That's all gone now, particularly the upper levels of the Democrat Party. There isn't any of that kind of decency, dignity, character, morality.
There are people with Asperger's whom I've met who certainly would be very upset to learn they'd hurt another person's feelings. They often have very strong moral consciences and moral codes. They care about not hurting people.
We are not saying that all women should be thin like these very thin and young girls. We are creating a show, with its artistic codes and rules, and we have to try not to mix up all the codes together.
President Trump's critics call him an immoral lout. By strict moral standards, so are we all.
The irony is that kids are treated equally when it comes to tests and standards and expectations but not treated equally when providing funds to meet those standards and expectations.
Rarely do schools acknowledge the power of peer culture in defining standards, and rarely do they take advantage of this power as an engine for quality. When students themselves are in charge of projects that they care about, peer pressure can become a powerful force for high standards.
Who's married and who isn't married. I have my standards but I shouldn't have to impose my standards on others. Other people have their standards and they have no right to impose their marriage standards on me.
We do all, myself included, we tend to hold ourselves to pretty low standards. But when it comes to judging public figures or politicians or people we've never met, we tend to hold people to very high standards, and, if we held ourselves to those standards, we'd always fall short.
There is no particular Socratic or Dimechian or Kantian way to live your life. They don't offer ethical codes and standards by which to live your life.
ISIL is not 'radical Islam.' Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood - these are radical Islamic groups. They resort to armed struggle and terrorism to move toward their goals. But they are also deeply political organizations that have internal rules, standards, and codes of conduct.
Indian standards of artistry, and Indian standards of humanity, and Indian standards of love, and of family, devotion, commitment, stand for me as the standard for how one should behave.
I set very high standards, normally for myself. For other people, I try to lower my standards.
Philosophy is an odd thing... There is no particular Socratic or Dimechian or Kantian way to live your life. They don't offer ethical codes and standards by which to live your life.
It's in our ability to selectively engage and disengage our moral standards, and it helps explain how people can be barbarically cruel in one moment and compassionate the next.
One of the central developments of 19th century mathematics involved a dramatic increase in the standards of mathematical rigor. This was for a variety of reasons, but the short version is that there was a need to be stricter about the standards of proof, because certain familiar modes of reasoning had started to lead people astray, or at least threatened to do so.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!