This article "hit the nail on the head". I truly believe we are in a war of Good vs Evil, and the Left are not on the right side. May God have mercy on them.
The big picture that the left doesn't want you to notice is that none of their little steps are goals. They are just that, steps in a never-ending undermining of society. For example, when Californians accepted their reasonable demand for civil unions, they said "It gives us everything we wanted! Thank you!" Next year, they demanded to change the definition of the word "marriage." When Californicans passed a California Constitutional Amendment, the California Supreme Court (all leftists) said "That's Unconstitutional!"
Your critical thinking might analyze one of their steps and agree it's reasonable, but keep in mind that there is an inevitable next step, and you probably don't know what that will be. Maybe they also don't yet know because they're waiting for another "George Floyd" crisis not to go to waste.
VS: A true critical thinker when anal.yzing such issues, would also step back to see things in a broader perspective. In other words a good critical thinker can — and will — do quality micro and macro analyses.
I would suggest that critical thinking begins with mathematics, rather than science. Words are subject to misinterpretation; numbers are nonsubjective. Values underlie the direction of scientific inquiry. Experiments are rarely constructed without an outcome bias; they tend to be constructed to support or to eliminate a specific outcome. On that basis, science can mislead the unwary. Geometry and trigonometry have no agendas to satisfy. Algebra is clearly provable in real life simulation. Arithmetic is clarity itself. Without a solid foundation of pure logic, the minefield of semantics and value systems becomes almost impossible to navigate successfully. Skills are necessary to interpret assertions and hypotheses critically, but those skills can best be honed in an atmosphere of neutral, numeric reasoning.
Stephen: As a person who has a degree in Mathematics I say that it certainly has its benefits. That said, Critical Thinking is about dealing with and resolving the issues you say can happen Science — as they do.
Well said! I would add that it is essential for one' critical thinking skills to include distinguishing a "complex" physical system from a "non-complex" physical system, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties, each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" exhibits no such properties. This skill is critical because it reults in the existence of a solution to the so-called "problem of induction," where the problem is of how, in a logically permissible way, to select the set of inferences that will be made by a model of a physical system from a larger set of possibilities under incomplete information. Circa 1975, this problem was solved by the late Ronald Arlie Christensen, then a PhD candidate in the theoretical physics program of the University of California, Berkeley. After Christensen solved this prroblem, this solution was widely ignored, resulting in in the enactment of public policies into law of public policies that are directly contrary to the interests of human beings.
It seems to me that debate should be brought back and emphasized. All students should take a debate class and have to debate each other. Do schools still have debate teams? They also need to study propaganda and design their own propaganda campaigns.
Yes!!! Debate classes, beginning in grade school and advancing through senior year high school, with competitions between debate teams from different schools. Big scholarship prize. Get students thinking again. That would only work if there was objectivity in our educational system, which doesn't exist now. In the meantime, think skeptically and question everything.
If you don't have a debate "club" such as the Oxford Union, or debate classes, rehearse imagined debates mentally. "What would be my reply to ...?" Teach your kids to do it too.
David: Debates are a good way to hone Critical Thinking skills. For example, one half of the class says "we need more wind energy in our state" while the other says the opposite.
the biggest fear of people on the left is that individuals will do what they know is right instead of following the algorithmic artificial intelligence of their brains telling them to do what they know is wrong. you always know what's right for you to do. no 'critical thinking' required
you can call it whatever you want: going with the truth instead of the Lie, following the voice of god instead of the voice of the devil, being in rather than out of the 道, doing what you know is right instead of what you know is wrong. it doesnt matter how you say it cuz it is what it is, and you always know the truth
RBX: In a simple world that may be right, but that does not reflect the reality of today's complex technical matters. People do not simpy know what is right about technical issues. For example, citizens do not inherently know whether they should get a COVID shot.
i dont agree that people dont know, or that it helps to be technically informed. the most technically informed people in the world are trying to steer others in the wrong direction. this was true with covid. it's true with the homosexual gender-denial movement. it's true with climate-psychosis movement , and on and on. the least technically informed do know what to do. technical information isnt information, doesnt tell you anything, doesnt solve any problems. knowing the truth you were born with does
RBX: Sorry I don't buy that thinking. Yes some partiues are trying to steer citizens who are not critical thinkers. The least technically informed do NOT know what to do.
behold, the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil. and what is good phaedrus, and what is beautiful, do we need anyone to tell us these things?
from the oldest book of the old testament to plato, from jesus christ to laozi to donald trump on his good days, every man guided by mind has understood that the truth is always known and cannot be learned, taught or overthrown
what you are saying is what the world socialists want everyone to believe, that you need experts to tell you what to do. because you supposedly dont know. it's part of a mass-hysterical rebellion against mind, and a worship of the mundial, the finite, the measurable, the atheistic, the materialistic, the secular, or, as william blake put it, vast brass instruments to measure the immense, or, as i would put it, a hatred of reality
you believe it's a rational idea that you can (and must) learn the truth, that you dont already know. how is it that people who know dont know, will know to rely on one expert versus another? how will these ignorant individuals know which expert is right and which is wrong when the individual lacks the technical understanding to know the truth? how will the non-expert judge the expert when the judge lacks the technical understanding that should form the basis of the expert's opinion? how does 'critical thinking' solve the problem of not-knowing the truth?
RBX: You are distorting what I said, and perverting reality. According to your thinking there is no reason to even go to school, as we all "know " what is right in every circumstance. Again I politely say baloney.
that's correct, i am saying we all know what is right in every single circumstance at all times and there is no way for you to un-know or not-know
there is nothing wrong in itself with going to school if you are called to go to school. if that is not your calling then going to school is simply doing what you know is wrong and worse than a waste of time
the usual justification for herding children into schools, the one advanced by thomas jefferson, was to ultimately help form a more perfect social. i would say that is a morally outrageous ground for exacting from every child half his waking hours from mid-infancy to adulthood in indoctrination centers "learning" what various grown-up experts have decided he should learn
the effect, regardless of the content of the 'education,' is to condition children to obey the religion of the social. your time is not your own, so fall in line and go with the program, or be progressively disciplined into compliance
most people think that's ok as long as children are taught the right things instead of the wrong things. are the right things to learn going to be determined by experts? or can you decide what's right and wrong to learn without being an expert?
what you've said here, in essence, is you need experts to tell you what you do. and you need school to know what's right, at least in some circumstances. if that is a distortion of what you are saying, please explain how it is a distortion and i will gladly correct my characterization
when experts told everyone they needed covid shots, the people who believed it were overwhelmingly the educated, and the more educated they were, the more they generally believed it. the people who never believed it tended to be those less educated, with little to zero technical knowledge, people who maybe didn't know what a virus was but knew there was no emergency and that the shots were a scam
and don't blame it on woke schools. anthony fauci and many who pushed the hysteria was educated in schools before they were woke, when science standards were strong, when schools didn't try to normalize homosexuality or push a lot of abnormal social concepts
and you see how it worked. it didn't. the educated elite who were educated under exactly the science standards you believe in were the vanguard of the covid crusade against the individual
americans got vaccinated mostly because they believed they didnt know what to do and better safe than sorry. that's what they learned in school, that you don't know what to do in every circumstance, that's why you go to school, and now educated expert specialists are telling them what to do, and they follow their education instead of what they know is right
you are the only expert on what is right for you to do in every single circumstance. you're either going to do that, or do what you know is wrong
Forgive for beating again my drum against the climate alarmists but non-critical thinking is how they have caused our social orders to spend literally trillions of dollars to address an existential problem which essentially does not exist. The first IPCC report in the 1990's was totally flawed when the powers that be changed the data set so the outcome from the computer models would project various environmental disasters from "global warming". When the warming failed to occur despite steadily increasing CO2 levels, the alarmists then changed the name of the bogeyman to climate change. The influence of increased CO2 levels on atmospheric temperatures is miniscule at best and its increase is indeed a positive for plant life.
Isn’t the real problem that the evil experts claim to be using critical thinking to justify their false conclusions? So, critical thinking becomes the enemy of critical thinking. To me, that is the real goal of the evil experts. They turn logic on it’s head.
These are very bad people with super bad motivation. They do not have our best interest at heart even though that is what they claim using their reverse critical thinking!
Great 'Critical Thinking' The government wants SHEEPLE, NOT THINKERS. We watched Oppenheimer last night. The government used his brilliance to build the Atomic bomb and then DESTROYED HIM. His goals didn't suit the warmongers of Truman's Administration. Those who dare think outside their box, have to be destroyed. Covid is another example. They don't want the truth known. It leads much further back, to the Clintons Blood Prison Scandal. And maybe back further. It is more than about Fauci and his HIV SCANDAL. Dr. Fauci and the NIH’s History in Experimenting on Foster Children and Using Aborted Fetal Tissue to Develop an HIV Vaccine (VIDEO) https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fauci-nih-funding-fetal-tissue-studies. I was reading about it well before MTG even mentioned it. The original Dr. Fauci and the NIH’s History in Experimenting on Foster Children and Using Aborted Fetal Tissue to Develop an HIV Vaccine
John…one of your best. Thank you for highlighting the Franklin Standards. Although it doesn’t seem to have courses on critical thinking, it does hit hard the benefits of the Scientific Method and to encourage curiosity…both of which are big steps in the right direction. They also give advice on pedagogy…which is really needed. I love your point that critical thinking has to be taught and not just “inferred “ in the curriculum. Great job…Don Runkle
Don: Thank you. Courses on Critical Thinking are not required. Instead it should be taught as a part of the annual Science curriculum, just as things like energy are covered.
Government has determined that "governing" misinformation and disinformation is easiest if government is the source of the misinformation and disinformation. Critical thinking might identify the misinformation and disinformation, interfere with its "governance" and reduce its effectiveness. That is clearly not acceptable.
This article "hit the nail on the head". I truly believe we are in a war of Good vs Evil, and the Left are not on the right side. May God have mercy on them.
Steve: TY. We are on the same page...
The big picture that the left doesn't want you to notice is that none of their little steps are goals. They are just that, steps in a never-ending undermining of society. For example, when Californians accepted their reasonable demand for civil unions, they said "It gives us everything we wanted! Thank you!" Next year, they demanded to change the definition of the word "marriage." When Californicans passed a California Constitutional Amendment, the California Supreme Court (all leftists) said "That's Unconstitutional!"
Your critical thinking might analyze one of their steps and agree it's reasonable, but keep in mind that there is an inevitable next step, and you probably don't know what that will be. Maybe they also don't yet know because they're waiting for another "George Floyd" crisis not to go to waste.
"Slowly at first, then suddenly."
-- the earnest communist Ernest Hemmingway
VS: A true critical thinker when anal.yzing such issues, would also step back to see things in a broader perspective. In other words a good critical thinker can — and will — do quality micro and macro analyses.
I would suggest that critical thinking begins with mathematics, rather than science. Words are subject to misinterpretation; numbers are nonsubjective. Values underlie the direction of scientific inquiry. Experiments are rarely constructed without an outcome bias; they tend to be constructed to support or to eliminate a specific outcome. On that basis, science can mislead the unwary. Geometry and trigonometry have no agendas to satisfy. Algebra is clearly provable in real life simulation. Arithmetic is clarity itself. Without a solid foundation of pure logic, the minefield of semantics and value systems becomes almost impossible to navigate successfully. Skills are necessary to interpret assertions and hypotheses critically, but those skills can best be honed in an atmosphere of neutral, numeric reasoning.
Stephen: As a person who has a degree in Mathematics I say that it certainly has its benefits. That said, Critical Thinking is about dealing with and resolving the issues you say can happen Science — as they do.
You asked for Critical Thinking. Trapped in an Illegal Alien Invasion Time Loop
https://gailhonadle.substack.com/p/trapped-in-an-illegal-alien-invasion.
Your Sub is in the comments.
TY!
It is always good to remind people to think for themselves. I enjoy your posts, they expand my own thinking.
Well said! I would add that it is essential for one' critical thinking skills to include distinguishing a "complex" physical system from a "non-complex" physical system, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties, each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" exhibits no such properties. This skill is critical because it reults in the existence of a solution to the so-called "problem of induction," where the problem is of how, in a logically permissible way, to select the set of inferences that will be made by a model of a physical system from a larger set of possibilities under incomplete information. Circa 1975, this problem was solved by the late Ronald Arlie Christensen, then a PhD candidate in the theoretical physics program of the University of California, Berkeley. After Christensen solved this prroblem, this solution was widely ignored, resulting in in the enactment of public policies into law of public policies that are directly contrary to the interests of human beings.
It seems to me that debate should be brought back and emphasized. All students should take a debate class and have to debate each other. Do schools still have debate teams? They also need to study propaganda and design their own propaganda campaigns.
Yes!!! Debate classes, beginning in grade school and advancing through senior year high school, with competitions between debate teams from different schools. Big scholarship prize. Get students thinking again. That would only work if there was objectivity in our educational system, which doesn't exist now. In the meantime, think skeptically and question everything.
If you don't have a debate "club" such as the Oxford Union, or debate classes, rehearse imagined debates mentally. "What would be my reply to ...?" Teach your kids to do it too.
David: Debates are a good way to hone Critical Thinking skills. For example, one half of the class says "we need more wind energy in our state" while the other says the opposite.
the biggest fear of people on the left is that individuals will do what they know is right instead of following the algorithmic artificial intelligence of their brains telling them to do what they know is wrong. you always know what's right for you to do. no 'critical thinking' required
you can call it whatever you want: going with the truth instead of the Lie, following the voice of god instead of the voice of the devil, being in rather than out of the 道, doing what you know is right instead of what you know is wrong. it doesnt matter how you say it cuz it is what it is, and you always know the truth
RBX: In a simple world that may be right, but that does not reflect the reality of today's complex technical matters. People do not simpy know what is right about technical issues. For example, citizens do not inherently know whether they should get a COVID shot.
i dont agree that people dont know, or that it helps to be technically informed. the most technically informed people in the world are trying to steer others in the wrong direction. this was true with covid. it's true with the homosexual gender-denial movement. it's true with climate-psychosis movement , and on and on. the least technically informed do know what to do. technical information isnt information, doesnt tell you anything, doesnt solve any problems. knowing the truth you were born with does
there are no important complex technical matters
RBX: Sorry I don't buy that thinking. Yes some partiues are trying to steer citizens who are not critical thinkers. The least technically informed do NOT know what to do.
behold, the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil. and what is good phaedrus, and what is beautiful, do we need anyone to tell us these things?
from the oldest book of the old testament to plato, from jesus christ to laozi to donald trump on his good days, every man guided by mind has understood that the truth is always known and cannot be learned, taught or overthrown
what you are saying is what the world socialists want everyone to believe, that you need experts to tell you what to do. because you supposedly dont know. it's part of a mass-hysterical rebellion against mind, and a worship of the mundial, the finite, the measurable, the atheistic, the materialistic, the secular, or, as william blake put it, vast brass instruments to measure the immense, or, as i would put it, a hatred of reality
you believe it's a rational idea that you can (and must) learn the truth, that you dont already know. how is it that people who know dont know, will know to rely on one expert versus another? how will these ignorant individuals know which expert is right and which is wrong when the individual lacks the technical understanding to know the truth? how will the non-expert judge the expert when the judge lacks the technical understanding that should form the basis of the expert's opinion? how does 'critical thinking' solve the problem of not-knowing the truth?
RBX: You are distorting what I said, and perverting reality. According to your thinking there is no reason to even go to school, as we all "know " what is right in every circumstance. Again I politely say baloney.
that's correct, i am saying we all know what is right in every single circumstance at all times and there is no way for you to un-know or not-know
there is nothing wrong in itself with going to school if you are called to go to school. if that is not your calling then going to school is simply doing what you know is wrong and worse than a waste of time
the usual justification for herding children into schools, the one advanced by thomas jefferson, was to ultimately help form a more perfect social. i would say that is a morally outrageous ground for exacting from every child half his waking hours from mid-infancy to adulthood in indoctrination centers "learning" what various grown-up experts have decided he should learn
the effect, regardless of the content of the 'education,' is to condition children to obey the religion of the social. your time is not your own, so fall in line and go with the program, or be progressively disciplined into compliance
most people think that's ok as long as children are taught the right things instead of the wrong things. are the right things to learn going to be determined by experts? or can you decide what's right and wrong to learn without being an expert?
what you've said here, in essence, is you need experts to tell you what you do. and you need school to know what's right, at least in some circumstances. if that is a distortion of what you are saying, please explain how it is a distortion and i will gladly correct my characterization
when experts told everyone they needed covid shots, the people who believed it were overwhelmingly the educated, and the more educated they were, the more they generally believed it. the people who never believed it tended to be those less educated, with little to zero technical knowledge, people who maybe didn't know what a virus was but knew there was no emergency and that the shots were a scam
and don't blame it on woke schools. anthony fauci and many who pushed the hysteria was educated in schools before they were woke, when science standards were strong, when schools didn't try to normalize homosexuality or push a lot of abnormal social concepts
and you see how it worked. it didn't. the educated elite who were educated under exactly the science standards you believe in were the vanguard of the covid crusade against the individual
americans got vaccinated mostly because they believed they didnt know what to do and better safe than sorry. that's what they learned in school, that you don't know what to do in every circumstance, that's why you go to school, and now educated expert specialists are telling them what to do, and they follow their education instead of what they know is right
you are the only expert on what is right for you to do in every single circumstance. you're either going to do that, or do what you know is wrong
Forgive for beating again my drum against the climate alarmists but non-critical thinking is how they have caused our social orders to spend literally trillions of dollars to address an existential problem which essentially does not exist. The first IPCC report in the 1990's was totally flawed when the powers that be changed the data set so the outcome from the computer models would project various environmental disasters from "global warming". When the warming failed to occur despite steadily increasing CO2 levels, the alarmists then changed the name of the bogeyman to climate change. The influence of increased CO2 levels on atmospheric temperatures is miniscule at best and its increase is indeed a positive for plant life.
Ken: The lack of critical thinking has cause us enormous problems from climate to COVID.
Isn’t the real problem that the evil experts claim to be using critical thinking to justify their false conclusions? So, critical thinking becomes the enemy of critical thinking. To me, that is the real goal of the evil experts. They turn logic on it’s head.
These are very bad people with super bad motivation. They do not have our best interest at heart even though that is what they claim using their reverse critical thinking!
Jim: Yes there are people who lie about many things. Critical Thinkers should be able to see through their deception.
Great 'Critical Thinking' The government wants SHEEPLE, NOT THINKERS. We watched Oppenheimer last night. The government used his brilliance to build the Atomic bomb and then DESTROYED HIM. His goals didn't suit the warmongers of Truman's Administration. Those who dare think outside their box, have to be destroyed. Covid is another example. They don't want the truth known. It leads much further back, to the Clintons Blood Prison Scandal. And maybe back further. It is more than about Fauci and his HIV SCANDAL. Dr. Fauci and the NIH’s History in Experimenting on Foster Children and Using Aborted Fetal Tissue to Develop an HIV Vaccine (VIDEO) https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fauci-nih-funding-fetal-tissue-studies. I was reading about it well before MTG even mentioned it. The original Dr. Fauci and the NIH’s History in Experimenting on Foster Children and Using Aborted Fetal Tissue to Develop an HIV Vaccine
https://truthcomestolight.com/dr-fauci-and-the-nihs-history-in-experimenting-on-foster-children-and-using-aborted-fetal-tissue-to-develop-an-hiv-vaccine/?print=print
Russell Brand interviews Fauci whistleblower on Big Pharma corruption, family ties: ‘Meet the Faucis’
https://www.foxnews.com/media/russel-brand-interviews-fauci-whistleblower-big-pharma-corruption-family-ties-meet-faucis
Who Will Speak for The Children? Fauci Also Experimented on the Homeless Children of New York
https://t2conline.com/who-will-speak-for-the-children-fauci-also-experimented-on-the-homeless-children-of-new-york/. There were 3 states, Tennessee turned them down.
'NIAID cannot be trusted': Fauci's agency planned to make monkeypox more deadly, says congressional report
https://www.theblaze.com/news/faucis-agency-planned-to-make-monkeypox-more-deadly-says-congressional-report?xrs=RebelMouse_fb&ts=1718305743&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1K7MXcef_xhMYUH-nxOTw7c6PAUTDF9hR3udUiqkGuw7E27bkBHCDJfpw_aem_ZmFrZWR1bW15MTZieXRlcw
John…one of your best. Thank you for highlighting the Franklin Standards. Although it doesn’t seem to have courses on critical thinking, it does hit hard the benefits of the Scientific Method and to encourage curiosity…both of which are big steps in the right direction. They also give advice on pedagogy…which is really needed. I love your point that critical thinking has to be taught and not just “inferred “ in the curriculum. Great job…Don Runkle
Don: Thank you. Courses on Critical Thinking are not required. Instead it should be taught as a part of the annual Science curriculum, just as things like energy are covered.
The West’s War on Critical Thinking
https://edwin797.substack.com/p/the-wests-war-on-critical-thinking
Abigail: TY for that link. It was an interesting read...
Government has determined that "governing" misinformation and disinformation is easiest if government is the source of the misinformation and disinformation. Critical thinking might identify the misinformation and disinformation, interfere with its "governance" and reduce its effectiveness. That is clearly not acceptable.
Ed: Yes, those who wish to control citizens, do NOT want them to be Critical Thinkers.
Excellent, one of you best. In today's edition.
Rich: TY for your kind words of support.