However, recent studies have demonstrated that alternative forms of active SWI show distinctly different characteristics, to the degree that the term "active SWI" may be misleading without additional qualification.
It is misleading to speak without qualification of Mill's Utilitarianism.
Although Hisamatsu, Nishitani, Ueda and others do explicitly philosophize from the standpoint of Zen, and although Takeuchi, Hase, and others do so from the standpoint of Shin Buddhism, it would be misleading to simply and without qualification characterize either Nishida's or Tanabe's multifaceted philosophies as "Eastern" or "Buddhist".
In particular, without careful and meaningful qualifications, it may be misleading to assume, a priori, that the modal overlap parameters are equal to zero.
The British Psychoanalytical Society, headquarters of classical Freudian analysis, responded with a statement accusing college members of "misleading the public about their training and qualifications".
Nonetheless, there remains a residue of validity in the common association of Heidegger and Jaspers, and, although it requires qualification, this association is not in every respect misleading.
Lets start with Ed Balls, minister for children and self-promotion, intimate of Damian McBride, who is accused of misleading parliament by the hapless former chief executive of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, Ken Boston.
It's slightly misleading.
Were they deliberately misleading?
