Is this for real?? Think Again.

One thing that plagues the ATS community, is gullibility. I am no exception, sometimes I believe things just because I WANT to believe something. But that's not logical or advisable. And I plan to do something about it.

According to Wikipedia:

Gullibility is a failure of social intelligence in which a person is easily tricked or manipulated into an ill-advised course of action. It is closely related to credulity, which is the tendency to believe unlikely propositions that are unsupported by evidence.

So how can we make ourselves a little less vulnerable to manipulation and tricks?

Well I am signed up to take a free course from Duke University professors Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and Ram Neta. Think Again: How to Reason and Argue

About the Course
Reasoning is important. This course will teach you how to do it well. You will learn some simple but vital rules to follow in thinking about any topic at all and some common and tempting mistakes to avoid in reasoning. We will discuss how to identify, analyze, and evaluate arguments by other people (including politicians, used car salesmen, and teachers) and how to construct arguments of your own in order to help you decide what to believe or what to do. These skills will be useful in dealing with whatever matters most to you.

Think Again: How to Reason and Argue

This is being provided for free by the organization Coursera. They were recently in ATS news, because the State of Minnesota had temporarily banned all forms of free online education. Here is a link to the ATS thread. And good news if your in Minnesota, they reversed their decision on this.

So my fellow ATS'ers, I invite you to join me in sharpening your logic and reasoning skills. And at the very least it will help make you all better, stronger, internet trolls.

-What is the coolest thing I'll learn if I take this class?
Nasty names (equivocator!) to call people who try to fool you with bad arguments.

So what do you think ATS: Ignorance is bliss? Or are we going to deny it?

edit: Early on, Ignorance is already taking the lead. Most people would rather not learn about proper logic and reasoning. I wish I could say I was surprised.

How to reason and argue? Is that REALLY an academic course?

Cmon man, we're not THAT gullible.

reply to post by spleenika

becoming more rational ? ats is also entertainment and pastime.

Originally posted by doesntmakesense
How to reason and argue? Is that REALLY an academic course?

Cmon man, we're not THAT gullible.

edit on 27-10-2012 by doesntmakesense because: (no reason given)

Touché, doesntmakesense, touché.

Everything does not exist to me until it is proven.

In that order..

How apt for this 'silly season'. I've offered this before on ATS but it was a while back and it does seem particularly fitting here:

What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.

~ Bertrand Russell

I think this was true once, but these days people have no real identity, or direction.. they're all humping each other stupid at 12, posing as hookers on webcams at 15, no sense of future..

A gross generalisation obviously, but it does reflect a lot of what I see around the world today.. imagine taking the 14 year old grandmother of one of today's 14 year olds and putting them in the same bedroom for a day... the 14 year old grandmother would need counselling for the rest of her life.. Which would probably result in her children being unstable and having a daughter who at 14 would meet, and drive insane, her 14 year old grandmother, on purpose.

Almost sounds like an episode of continuum.. lol

Originally posted by spleenika

-What is the coolest thing I'll learn if I take this class?
Nasty names (equivocator!) to call people who try to fool you with bad arguments.

]

edit on 10/27/2012 by spleenika because: (no reason given)

And this is how to reason intelligently??

i can think for myself thank you i dont need assistance from you or anyone else.

reply to post by JAK


That quote expresses perfectly the essence of my post. Thanks for adding that in here JAK.

It's a lot easier to stay ignorant. It is nice, safe, and warm there. But I would rather my world come crashing down around me in the name of truth, then be a victim of falsehood.

And I know what you mean about the younger ones Winofiend. (Fantastic avatar by the way!) My generation was accused of being spoiled by modern convenience, and things have gotten even easier for the newest crops of human kind. I'm just happy there are stellar examples of hard work and intellect to be found among them. They are not all rotten to the core...it just seems like it from the point of view of the internet.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by spleenika

-What is the coolest thing I'll learn if I take this class?
Nasty names (equivocator!) to call people who try to fool you with bad arguments.

]

edit on 10/27/2012 by spleenika because: (no reason given)

And this is how to reason intelligently??

If you want the "how", you would have to actually take the course now wouldn't you.

What you have quoted, is what you would call an attempt at topical humor by a university professor.

reply to post by spleenika


What i have quoted is what you quoted.
This is apparently the coolest thing to learn on this course.

Name calling is no way to win an argument. Name calling is the way to lose face and make a fool of yourself, in my humble opinion..

Are you willing to lose an argument? What will you lose if you do?
And what do you win if you win?

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
What i have quoted is what you quoted.

Yes what you quoted was included in my original post, I was not denying that. At the time I thought referring to the portion you quoted would be sufficient to explain the portion of my post I was referring too. Apparently it was not sufficient.

Let me see if I can be more clear for you.

What you read in my original post, and then quoted in your post, was an attempt at topical humor by a university professor. If you have not experienced the attempts at humor of college professors, then you may not be familiar with how poor their humor can be sometimes.

Further, that is not the actual content of the course. If you want to know the content of the actual course, and not just jokes about it, I recommend reading the Course Syllabus

If you actually took the time to actually read the source link my entire OP was focused on, you would have an understanding of what is actually taught in the course, and understand that the "Nasty Names" thing is meant to be humor in regards to a topic that involves argument, reasoning, and logic.

reply to post by spleenika

What you read in my original post, and then quoted in your post, was an attempt at topical humor by a university professor. If you have not experienced the attempts at humor of college professors, then you may not be familiar with how poor their humor can be sometimes.

Yes college professors mostly suck at jokes and humour.

I have been through higher learning institutions and i can tell you right now a person doesnt need to go to them to learn anything; that they wouldnt be able to learn outside of it.

reply to post by spleenika


I read the link.

At the bottom of the page there is this:
FAQ
•Will I get a certificate after completing this class?
Yes. Students who successfully complete the class will receive a certificate signed by the instructor.

•What resources will I need for this class?
Only a working computer and internet connection.

•What is the coolest thing I'll learn if I take this class?
Nasty names (equivocator!) to call people who try to fool you with bad arguments.

I didn't see where it said it was a joke by a university proffessor.

You felt the need to post the quote and did not say it was a joke.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by spleenika

 

I didn't see where it said it was a joke by a university proffessor.

You felt the need to post the quote and did not say it was a joke.

Yes I could tell it was an attempt at humor, because I have a sense of humor. I'm afraid I can't help you further with that.

reply to post by spleenika


You can 'tell' that it is a joke.
Maybe the course is as well.

try different humour itnowagain hasnt been to university...

reply to post by AthlonSavage


Really???
Do you know Itisnowagain?