Classifiable used in a sentence

Classifiable in a sentence as an adjective

Or an app that tracks crime, classifiable by type? That would be useful.

And of those that remain, many grow hair but it would not be classifiable as a beard. So I would stand by my statement that this only affects a small percentage of women.

You might be classifiable as a money transmitter in which case you would possibly be regulated in your state as such.

Technically classifiable as self-assembling intelligent constructs, spewed forth from the bald nothingness of space and time by mere coincidence? What if WE are the beast we fear?

I wonder if the teeth thus formed are recognizable/classifiable as molars/incisors/canines. If so, that could shed further light on the development of the normal teeth.

But we're now in the stage where there's a dozen frameworks out there, probably classifiable into at least three distinct paradigms, and then we have the languages that target the browser. And I suspect we're a long way from shaking this out into a semi-stable point.

It's so outside of social norms as to only be classifiable as an emotional disconnect so extreme it has to be the result of a severe psychological disturbance. Yes, and 300 years ago it was likely "outside of social norms" to mourn the death of a slave.

Does it count if it’s not classifiable as “writing.” If people paint a cave and we understand they were talking about hunting aurochses with spears, then we know there were some people here that hunted aurochses with spear.

It's so outside of social norms as to only be classifiable as an emotional disconnect so extreme it has to be the result of a severe psychological disturbance.

It almost sounds like you're implying that people are either happy, or have one of n classifiable psychological disorders. The reality is that the disorders are statistical classifications that fit an infinite number of shades of the human condition.

So astronomical objects are classifiable under a magnetic AC/DC onotology? Wow. Seems like dualism dies hard.

The reason spam and log data and experimental data is classifiable using tools like this is that it is, by it's very nature, relatively predictable. If every spam were written fresh by a different person, and selling a completely different product, it would be impossible to filter it.

Why is anything classifiable as "wokism" automatically morally and intellectually bankrupt junk? That sounds an awful lot like simply dismissing a broad category of opinions that may contain a reasonably moral/intellectual subset, much like the thing that wokism is being accused of right now.

Perhaps it means believing each person is complete, unique, and un-classifiable? The We-Are-All-Special-Snowflakes belief.

This is a neutral thing - Low Empathy and even some features classifiable under the DSM may be explanations for why you struggle to listen that people accept, but it won't make them feel better necessarily unless you make an effort to still work past it. There may be a limit you have to such interactions, but if you "give up" with your limitations, it's usually interpreted as giving up on the person also.

My experiences on this suggest that any company that both produces something classifiable as PHI and large enough to have dedicated IT / Legal staff have fairly draconian policies that include "every attachment that is mailed to a mail server that is not ours is stripped". When individuals work around these policies, there tends to be some level of legal shielding for the larger business entity when it is investigated.

> Why is anything classifiable as "wokism" automatically morally and intellectually bankrupt junk? Because any one with minimum education in history can recognize wokism as the new cultural revolution being adapted for americans.

A quick quote from the referenced work: """ The pragmatic and practical approach to the main body of this work largely omits reference to those visions or beliefs classifiable as spiritual or mystical; not because these are not a normal part of human experience, but because they are arrived at as a result of long contemplation or intense involvement with the mysteries that eternally surround us. We may “dream" understanding, but it is something we cannot demand, define, or teach to others; it is for each of us to develop.

It seems reasonably likely to be true that the origin of the bias against 'quiet nice people' comes out of gender roles, but that which is sanely classifiable as structural sexism at an institutional and cultural level by the time it manifests at the ground level is hurting everybody holding those personality traits and is therefore best dealt with as it is. Or: Patriarchy theory is a useful analysis tool but I'm damned if I'm going to try and teach it to everybody if I can get results at least as effective much more quickly by making them realise they're being an ******* to nice people.