The Myth of Critical Thinking

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Magical Realist, Feb 22, 2017.

  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,452
    You overestimate your own importance to me. I don't hate you, Magical Realist. In many ways, you're like a child. I don't claim to know what led you into the wholehearted embrace of everything woo, but I understand that it means the world to you now and that you feel angry towards me because you perceive me as an enemy trying to tear down your cherished beliefs. Putting all that aside, my concern as a moderator here is to promote discussion, as opposed to the mindless reproduction of other people's work.

    Consider yourself lucky I didn't hand you more warning points. The opening post to that thread was just one more mindless cut-and-paste of text from elsewhere, with no discussion or analysis from you (as usual). Then, a bit later in the thread, came three or four spammed youtube videos from you about Bigfoot.

    You have nothing new to say about Bigfoot, quite obviously. That thread could only be you giving the pot a stir to amuse yourself. Well, you had your fun. Enough is enough.

    I have been a participant in this thread since near the start. I had not looked at the lastest posts to it for about 2 weeks, and I was simply catching up some old threads today.

    If you regard my honest enquiries as "nickpicks", that is your prerogative. I note that you have no substantive response, as usual, and so we move on. I really expected no better from you. I'm not surprised.

    No. It's been quite relaxed, and I've been chilling out after a busy time. Thank you for your concern, however.

    You already decided not to do that when you posted your reply, didn't you?

    Funny. Yours is the second post I've seen today from a person who has taken the time specifically to write that they don't want to write anything. Maybe you'd all be more convincing if you started practising what you preach.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,819
    Uncritical thinking: I like it!

    Critical thinking: I like it! Is it true?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231

    Uncritical thinking = no idea

    Critical thinking: I like it! Is it true?

    I'd like to critic it first before answering

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,819
    That's critical thinking, mate.
     
  8. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,648
    Anil Seth calls it "uncontrolled hallucinations"
    Conversely Seth calls that "controlled hallucinations"
     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  9. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,819
    I have a non-aggression pact with my hallucinations. I used the same wording the Germans used with Russia in 1939.
     
    Dywyddyr likes this.
  10. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    And whether you want to really find out , " Is it true ? " .

    There is only a myth to critical thinking , if the thinking of the critical , is not sound , critically speaking .
     
    Write4U likes this.
  11. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,648
    Well, that's why we have rigorous scientific verification processes. Proofs and falsifications.
     
  12. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    which are proved to be false and therefore corrupt .

    Ideally the verification would be truth , but it is not .

    Peer review papers are corrupt , subjective , and the papers are vague and reviews of the papers can be falsified .

    quote from Nexus( July-August 2018 ) , page 19 , Dr. Marcia Angell , Harvard Medical School , former Editor-in-Chief at the New England Journal of Medicine ,

    " It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published ......I take no pleasure in this conclusion .....reached slowly and reluctantly ...."
     
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,648
    First, due to the curtailing of government grant money for objective research, most scientific papers, especially in medicine, are published by the scientists employed by the company sponsoring the research for commercial purposes.

    But that critical analysis by a scientist is already part of the self-regulatory system of science.

    Can't say those things against religion, which is obviously and demonstrably corrupted.
    You get excommunicated by the Inquisition (catholic)
    or killed by Fatwah (Islam).
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2018
  14. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    how so ?

    and how has it lead to to a more open and objective peer review process ? to your mind ?
     
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,648
    Hopefully, other scientists will listen to this "peer" review and try to be more diligent and objective when writing specific "peer" reviews.
    The penalty for misrepresentation in the commercial world affords law-suits for malpractice.

    And in the case of public funding of science, this may show a need to reinstate several grants for important but non-commercial science.
     
  16. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    the Journals in any part of this planet don't give a shit . they clearly don't have any idea what is going on .

    For example ; an e-mail address to confirm the papers authenticity is reverted to the author , himself . That is shocking , and the worst part is that the , Journals don't verify the author , nor the peers .

    It's about the dough joe . It is about funding , careers towing the line
     

Share This Page