Thank you for sharing. That’s a well-written article, and unfortunately, it’s not an isolated case. Back during the Obama era, I was invited to join a panel of energy CEOs. One of the other panelists (I’ll leave out his name) was the head of a large coal-based utility, yet he was pushing hard for carbon credit trading. It seemed odd to me, given his background. So, I did some critical thinking.
It didn’t take long to figure out that his coal fleet was aging—over 80% of his generators had been in operation since before World War II. Then it clicked: he was angling for tradable carbon credits based on reductions that were going to happen anyway, as those plants were already nearing the end of their lifespan. He was cashing in while he still could.
The point is, corruption takes many forms, and it’s not confined to just one corner of the energy industry—or any industry, for that matter. That’s why John Droz started this substack: to encourage critical thinking and help expose the corruption and misinformation that’s all around us.
Excellent piece. I'm currently navigating a situation where critical thinking is crucial for a decision. Both belief and knowledge are useful, one does not negate the other. They are complementary.
I agree. Both belief and knowledge are useful. If I liken the belief side to the mind (or intellect, such as critical thinking) and the belief side (or faith) more to the heart, when these two faculties are aligned we make better decisions. If a decision is made only from the heart, based on emotion, troubles ensue. If based only on the mind, the magic and joy are at risk. It might even trample feelings and other sensibilities. To that end, I write this poem:
When the heart and the mind are fully aligned,
You surely will not go astray.
When you study it out, thus removing the doubt,
Like a compass, they’ll show you the way.
The key, it would seem, is to work as a team:
Have the heart and the mind work as one.
The mind thinks things through, while the heart feels what’s true.
“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). When we look at the word “substance,” it can also mean things like “ground” (or “grounded”), “assurance,” or “confidence.” So, in this context, faith—especially faith in Christ, which is the first principle of the gospel— acts like a solid foundation for our actions. We become grounded, or settled, in faith. It gives substance in the uncertainties of life.
The “evidence” part feels almost like a legal term, suggesting we need to prove or test something. This fits with the idea that we start with faith or belief, and then we can use critical thinking to seek out or test the evidence. In Hebrews 11, we see examples of people who acted on faith even when they didn’t have clear proof of what was promised to them. It shows that having faith doesn’t mean we shouldn’t ask questions or look for evidence.
It’s also worth mentioning that the evidence of faith isn’t always something you can measure scientifically. Sometimes it’s found in our personal experiences or how we’ve changed through our beliefs. That’s another aspect of critical thinking—reflecting on our experiences can deepen our understanding, and build the “substance” part of the faith equation.
In the end, having belief or faith doesn’t mean shutting off our curiosity. It’s okay to question and explore while still holding on to our core beliefs. This balance of faith and critical thinking (in pursuit of knowledge) can lead us to a richer understanding of what we believe and why we act.
You’re right. I would only bet my life based on knowledge (or something very close to it). I might walk on a bridge based on knowledge that it won’t collapse at mid span. But even that requires a degree of faith, wouldn’t you agree?
We all have beliefs, and the real question is how certain we are about them. Faith cannot exist without the possibility of doubt. The key is to embrace that uncertainty rather than getting stuck in a never-ending search for perfect knowledge. I want to be careful not to let uncertainty paralyze me.
I believe that faith—whether in a religious sense or otherwise—is really about the level of certainty that I have in a particular belief. For example, I’m confident that if I walk off a cliff, gravity will take over. That’s not a belief. I can be 100% certain about that fact.
When it comes to other beliefs, it’s a matter of how much we’re willing to stake on them. If you’re entirely certain about something, you’d bet your life on it. If you’re not willing to do that, it means there’s some doubt involved. So, the real question about belief is: What level of doubt can I accept? What are the stakes? What are the benefits? Can critical thinking bridge the gap?
Hopefully that is food for thought. Thanks for commenting.
ON ANOTHER SUBJECT: I was asked to share this editorial statewide (NYS). It demonstrates the absolute corruption of the Green movement and the politicians who drive it. Please consider linking it or expounding on it: https://www.observertoday.com/opinion/commentary/2024/09/states-green-scheme-puts-us-in-a-box/?fbclid=IwY2xjawFg9DNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHXA7eu0L92lbZYRwO38zudYFgT0317LgWaqjvGHGh77ifeCDZ99gQ7Gk5Q_aem_ABRqBiYBzAyvquSeKzmTkQ
Thank you for sharing. That’s a well-written article, and unfortunately, it’s not an isolated case. Back during the Obama era, I was invited to join a panel of energy CEOs. One of the other panelists (I’ll leave out his name) was the head of a large coal-based utility, yet he was pushing hard for carbon credit trading. It seemed odd to me, given his background. So, I did some critical thinking.
It didn’t take long to figure out that his coal fleet was aging—over 80% of his generators had been in operation since before World War II. Then it clicked: he was angling for tradable carbon credits based on reductions that were going to happen anyway, as those plants were already nearing the end of their lifespan. He was cashing in while he still could.
The point is, corruption takes many forms, and it’s not confined to just one corner of the energy industry—or any industry, for that matter. That’s why John Droz started this substack: to encourage critical thinking and help expose the corruption and misinformation that’s all around us.
Excellent piece. I'm currently navigating a situation where critical thinking is crucial for a decision. Both belief and knowledge are useful, one does not negate the other. They are complementary.
I agree. Both belief and knowledge are useful. If I liken the belief side to the mind (or intellect, such as critical thinking) and the belief side (or faith) more to the heart, when these two faculties are aligned we make better decisions. If a decision is made only from the heart, based on emotion, troubles ensue. If based only on the mind, the magic and joy are at risk. It might even trample feelings and other sensibilities. To that end, I write this poem:
When the heart and the mind are fully aligned,
You surely will not go astray.
When you study it out, thus removing the doubt,
Like a compass, they’ll show you the way.
The key, it would seem, is to work as a team:
Have the heart and the mind work as one.
The mind thinks things through, while the heart feels what’s true.
And together, they get the job done.
Where does this fit into the conversation of believe vs knowledge? Hebrews 11:1
“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). When we look at the word “substance,” it can also mean things like “ground” (or “grounded”), “assurance,” or “confidence.” So, in this context, faith—especially faith in Christ, which is the first principle of the gospel— acts like a solid foundation for our actions. We become grounded, or settled, in faith. It gives substance in the uncertainties of life.
The “evidence” part feels almost like a legal term, suggesting we need to prove or test something. This fits with the idea that we start with faith or belief, and then we can use critical thinking to seek out or test the evidence. In Hebrews 11, we see examples of people who acted on faith even when they didn’t have clear proof of what was promised to them. It shows that having faith doesn’t mean we shouldn’t ask questions or look for evidence.
It’s also worth mentioning that the evidence of faith isn’t always something you can measure scientifically. Sometimes it’s found in our personal experiences or how we’ve changed through our beliefs. That’s another aspect of critical thinking—reflecting on our experiences can deepen our understanding, and build the “substance” part of the faith equation.
In the end, having belief or faith doesn’t mean shutting off our curiosity. It’s okay to question and explore while still holding on to our core beliefs. This balance of faith and critical thinking (in pursuit of knowledge) can lead us to a richer understanding of what we believe and why we act.
We all have beliefs. The question is how certain are we of those beliefs?
I would posit that FAITH (religious or otherwise) is the level of certainty you have in a particular belief.
I am certain that gravity will take over if I walk off a cliff.
If you are 100% certain, you will bet your life on your belief. Anything else means you are not quite certain.
So the question about belief is this: Will you bet your life?
You’re right. I would only bet my life based on knowledge (or something very close to it). I might walk on a bridge based on knowledge that it won’t collapse at mid span. But even that requires a degree of faith, wouldn’t you agree?
We all have beliefs, and the real question is how certain we are about them. Faith cannot exist without the possibility of doubt. The key is to embrace that uncertainty rather than getting stuck in a never-ending search for perfect knowledge. I want to be careful not to let uncertainty paralyze me.
I believe that faith—whether in a religious sense or otherwise—is really about the level of certainty that I have in a particular belief. For example, I’m confident that if I walk off a cliff, gravity will take over. That’s not a belief. I can be 100% certain about that fact.
When it comes to other beliefs, it’s a matter of how much we’re willing to stake on them. If you’re entirely certain about something, you’d bet your life on it. If you’re not willing to do that, it means there’s some doubt involved. So, the real question about belief is: What level of doubt can I accept? What are the stakes? What are the benefits? Can critical thinking bridge the gap?
Hopefully that is food for thought. Thanks for commenting.