Profoundness used in a sentence

Profoundness in a sentence as a noun

I don't get the profoundness here. I mean, if you're one of those stereotypical hollywood jocks from the 50s that's never read a book in his life until the age of 60...

Surface profoundness is similar in those statements, so I don't think that dividing them by "makes sense" axis is too wrong.

The profoundness you feel is again just a linguistic illusion. It's similar to the question: "What does it mean to be American?"

I think there's a profoundness in there, somewhere. Such a definition also solves the virus conundrum!

How much of that profoundness is within our own heads because we know someone made it. We might imagine their intent, working back from the final representation to imagine what they might have felt creating it.

This is fluff posing as profoundness with irrelevant nuggets of topicality mixed in for flavor.

I'm sorry if this seems unsubstantiated and unsatisfactory, but I'm afraid that you just do not yet understand the profoundness of the problem 'derrida' refers to. Your proposed way of attacking the problem is too naive.

The profoundness arises when someone tries to justify the situation. I use the word ethics and morals as one would use it in common english parlance about discussions of such matters, I am not asking for a philosophical definition of said terms.

Of course each person experiences these things in different ways, but despite such differences, extremely deep profoundness is an extremely common takeaway. A simpler explanation, I would say that it kind of "shocks me into reality".

After first taking a crack at learning about this stuff decades ago, I still have trouble retaining it to the degree that I can succinctly explain its profoundness. This article does a great job at doing just that, and reigniting the sense of wonder and amazement at Einstein's achievements!

Sorry, I don't mean for this to come across as playing down your post; you're right that "profoundness" is completely subjective and there's no use in me saying "it's not that profound", for that I apologize. I enjoyed your post quite a bit, especially how far you went in order to get concrete results that back up the theory.

“Put another way, high persuasive bullshitters appear to interpret/mistake superficial profoundness as a signal of actual profoundness,” the team explains. Interesting way of breaking down the categories.

Fortunately, we can slowly explore this profoundness as a background task, with the occasional punctuated intensive investigation as life demands, while going about our daily lives.

And after reading it you realize the author is ignoring everything that happened before them, but if they did put their own experience in historical context the profoundness of their insights would disappear.

If this proves anything it is the profoundness of the "grass is greener on the other site" effect. Also, I don't think casting a plethora of political, social and ecological phenomena onto some kind of hypothetical binary switch is gonna provide any valuable insight.

I notice that a lot of people make citations to the first category, but when a question is asked about a specific paper, they need to make a clean breast of it and admit that they only skimmed through the paper and did not read it with a certain amount of profoundness.

The so-called profoundness-receptivity metric was actually a measurement of ********-receptivity of non-******** statements.

> Despite ********-receptivity and profoundness-receptivity being positively correlated with each other, logistic regression analyses showed that profoundness-receptivity had a positive association whereas ********-receptivity had a negative association with both types of prosocial behavior. Not surprising.