Critical thinking

Originally posted by masqua

is it so hard to remain composed when one discovers the shortcomings in their own critical thought ?

You say TD is not composed.

right here, and who is being quoted or spoken to ?

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Critical thinking, folks. Let's use it...

twice in a row I might add, this is when the topic was actually derailed because I was quoting Andy and beginning a somewhat quite logical debate.

but here we have TD only trying to discredit as one could see from his last post dismissing the whole topic as being off topic from him throwing it off topic.

whats that sound like to you ?

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Reducing the word myth as a term used to dismiss another persons assertion does neither the argument being made when using the word in that context, nor mythology, any justice at all.

I believe I have used the word in proper context despite your additional interpretations. In line with your interpretations, in this case the story being relayed also happens to be a falsehood (like many myths). I'm sorry it didn't deal with your overinflated definition of "myth" involving tales of heros, etc. Perhaps in the future you can relay your point without using your overinflated definitions of a word as a selling point, nor your admonition of those who properly utilize such terminology.

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
I am left-handed, but in no way does that mean I am a leftist or orientated in that way politically or by way of thinking.

It would be a specious argument indeed, unless of course, the neurological science associated with left/right brain activity is a determining factor IF the left-handedness is from birth.

if we read the opening from the OP and then we watch the video... about 3/4 of the way through it derails itself, I stepped in to comment about it, being that the beginning of the video starts with a fisher of men analogy

Actually, in the beginning of the video, it is NOT the 'Fisher of Men' analogy, but rather the old saw about catching a fish for a man compared to teaching a man how to fish for himself.

The 'God Debate' is built, as I'd previously stated, upon non-empirical truth-claims (faith or belief) or justifying reasons' such as "God exists because I say He does, neener, neener". Say it loud and often enough and, perhaps those who are NOT critical thinkers may take it to heart

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


Link to the post, please, for the sake of clarity.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

I believe I have used the word in proper context despite your additional interpretations. In line with your interpretations, in this case the story being relayed also happens to be a falsehood (like many myths). I'm sorry it didn't deal with your overinflated definition of "myth" involving tales of heros, etc. Perhaps in the future you can relay your point without using your overinflated definitions of a word as a selling point, nor your admonition of those who properly utilize such terminology.

What you believe in this regard does not demonstrate any critical thought. You are entitled to your beliefs, but you have failed to demonstrate any critical thought in this thread, while you pretend to be a proponent of it.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

What you believe in this regard does not demonstrate any critical thought. You are entitled to your beliefs, but you have failed to demonstrate any critical thought in this thread, while you pretend to be a proponent of it.

So you claim.

At least I can use a word in compliance with its proper definition, despite your objections to the contrary.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

So you claim. At least I can use a word in compliance with its proper definition, despite your objects to the contrary.

I, of course, did far more than make just a claim. As would be expected of a critical thinker, I offered evidence to support my argument. Now as a critical thinker, it is incumbent upon you to discern whether or not the evidence I provided is valid or not, but in order to make such a determination you would have to first take the time to actually read what I provided in the links instead of just simply react to a post.

Are you sure you used the word "objects" correctly in your above sentence?

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
see God is not allowed in schools in America

That is a huge myth. Children can bring their religious texts to read at lunch time. Children can pray at any given time. What is not allowed is school-sponsored prayers such as teachers leading a class in prayer.

Critical thinking, folks. Let's use it...

there is now however since 9/11, a moment of silence observed just before the pledge is done every morning (in my sister kids school and many others since I've researched it)

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
I, of course, did far more than make just a claim. As would be expected of a critical thinker, I offered evidence to support my argument. Now as a critical thinker, it is incumbent upon you to discern whether or not the evidence I provided is valid or not, but in order to make such a determination you would have to first take the time to actually read what I provided in the links instead of just simply react to a post.

Are you sure you used the word "objects" correctly in your above sentence?

No, I made a typo. Whoopsie!

As you may recall, I provided a definition and link to a definition of "myth" and demonstrated my proper use of the word. If you choose to look to other over-inflators of the definition, so be it. But don't criticize my use of the proper definition of a single word as some sort of error of critical thinking skills. Perhaps your failure to consult the dictionary indicates your own deficiency in critical thinking. You never know...

reply to post by masqua

The 'God Debate' is built, as I'd previously stated, upon non-empirical truth-claims (faith or belief) or justifying reasons' such as "God exists because I say He does, neener, neener". Say it loud and often enough and, perhaps those who are NOT critical thinkers may take it to heart

Of course, in order to have a "God Debate" there has to be a party on the other side just as willing to make non-empirical truth-claims (faith or belief) or justifying reasons' such as "God does not exist because I say He does not, neener, neener". Reification is a fallacy regardless which side of the issue one is on.

Your post at the top of this page asks:

right here, and who is being quoted or spoken to ?

The actual post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

In it you can see that I am quoting YOU and that my actual answer to the statement YOU made was, in full:

What I 'get' out of the above is another personal statement directed at TD in which an undefined accusation is laid. You say TD is not composed. What makes you say that specifically? Critical thinking requires the study of normative principles rather than description. Normative principles are standards for assessment or 'guides. Desciptions only describe or represent.


I'll even show you the post where you said it:

is it so hard to remain composed when one discovers the shortcomings in their own critical thought ?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Facts, C.A... they are wonderful. I'm surprised you're having problems remembering your own statements made just today.

Originally posted by masqua
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

 

Link to the post, please, for the sake of clarity.

it is on page 1 of this topic... 5th and 6th response to the OP.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

As you may recall, I provided a definition and link to a definition of "myth" and demonstrated my proper use of the word. If you choose to look to other over-inflators of the definition, so be it. But don't criticize my use of the proper definition of a single word as some sort of error of critical thinking skills. Perhaps your failure to consult the dictionary indicates your own deficiency in critical thinking, You never know...

As you may recall, you used the word myth to dismiss Cosmic Artifact's lamentations of myths not being allowed in school. This merited critical examination, in a thread that laments the lack of critical thought among people today, and ironically, you demanded people think critically, but when you are confronted with it you huff and puff and get emotional poutily claiming that the critical analysis of a word is an "over-inflator of a definition.

Critical thought requires far more than a dictionary to reach a valid conclusion.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


I'm sorry but I just have to but in here and say to you sir.. I have seen many of your posts. It's steeped in bias AGAINST anything that requires faith. It's a wonder you believe in oxygen? Do you in fact? I mean really bro from one musician to the other, the video in this post incriminates you the OP'er and others like of being guilty of the very thing your trying to say most others are guilty of. You are not capable of critical thinking because of your predetermined world view. It's sad no I mean it really is a very sad and depressing thing to see when I myself have had experiences and many others that without a doubt point to reality being very different than what science wants us to believe. I could start with electrons and show you how everything in the universe has to give up a piece of itself to gain anything. There is nothing that can escape that law. Would you like to think how that relates to current religions? It's obvious is it not?

You have no idea how boxed in your are only someone looking in can see it. You see I was the same way but the other direction I had to become free of religous programming and learn everything all over again. Now I have balance. Something most of us lack. I hope your offended just to get your thinking out side of your box. But really I don't mean it like it sounds I love folks and all that I just get kinda ercked sometimes by the lack of critical thiking on the "naysayers" part.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Of course, in order to have a "God Debate" there has to be a party on the other side just as willing to make non-empirical truth-claims (faith or belief) or justifying reasons' such as "God does not exist because I say He does not, neener, neener". Reification is a fallacy regardless which side of the issue one is on.

Exactly.

And this is why the debate does not stand. There is no logic nor empirical facts. Only faith and belief. It does not matter which side of the fence one falls or if one sits upon it.

A Thread dedicated to critical thinking is derailed by faith and belief.

Go figure.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
you huff and puff and get emotional poutily claiming that the critical analysis of a word is an "over-inflator of a definition.

No, I actually produced the proper definition of the word "myth" when you decided to make your entire point off of your misinterpretation of it. My correction of your misinterpretation is hardly "huffing and puffing". Your reaction to such correction is.

Originally posted by firegoggles
You are not capable of critical thinking because of your predetermined world view. It's sad no I mean it really is a very sad and depressing thing to see when I myself have had experiences and many others that without a doubt point to reality being very different than what science wants us to believe.

Oh, I see. Your subjective experiences refute objective reality?
Prove it, don't just claim it.

reply to post by masqua


my original question was (do they show these type of videos in UK schools?)

the topic took a sharp turn after my first post here... it was nothing about the constitution or the pledge... I never even knew some of the posters I have interacted with even hung out in this section, as I have been reading through it I have not seen alot of the faces I am used to seeing from the religion and theology section.

I come here to this section for different conversation for a change that's all...

reply to post by jlv70


Great OP, links, writing. Thank you.

...Also, have you ever noticed that when you hang with people who don't think critically, you tend to pick up their bad habits? Meaning vigilance required!

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

No, I actually produced the proper definition of the word "myth" when you decided to make your entire point off of your misinterpretation of it. My correction of your misinterpretation is hardly "huffing and puffing". Your reaction to such correction is.

I have not misinterpreted anything, nor am I relying on reification. This is your particular bailiwick.