|
|
Post by freonbale on Jun 4, 2023 20:47:14 GMT
Critical Thinking means looking at an entire problem, not just pieces of it, factoring in all the data, not just the ones that are easy to gather or seem obvious, and approaching analysis with the most precision possible before coming to any conclusions or judgements. It means not factoring in anecdotal information, opinion, or emotion. It means doing everything possible to learn the truth through accurate data gathering and rigorous experimentation, regardless of what that truth is. It means trying to DISPROVE your own theory, as a means of testing its rigor. The 'scientific approach' has no meaning, not sure where you heard it. Do you mean the Scientific Method? That is very well defined. It is iterating through the cycle of hypothesis-->experimentation-->conclusion, repeatedly, until enough data is gathered to either accept the hypothesis as a theory, or reject it in favor of a new hypothesis. Your conclusion that people tend to slide toward confirmation bias, etc, if they do not adhere to your view that 'similarity and dissimilarity' is a basis of Critical Thinking is oversimplistic, and I would consider, mistaken. Freon Critical thinking certainly requires isolating factors. The criterion of "similarity and dissimilarity" comes from the methodological study of history. I applies. If you "factor in all the data," then how do determine what matters? The reality is that it is impossible to factor in all the data. You can only factor in as much as you can handle, and at some point you have to scale the data on some kind of hierarchy of importance. And it seems to me that simplistically labeling or characterizing Trump's term as "fascist" is picking and choosing what data you want. Isolating factors? That is meaningless 'sciency' talk to make you sound credible. Causing the opposite effect. I can only speak for myself, when I say that you are talking out of your ass on this subject. It does not sound to me like you have any idea what critical thinking is. I think your last statement is the most accurate, however. You say, 'it seems to (you),' blah blah blah. Critical thinkers don't base their conclusions on what things SEEM to be. We are curious, and we want to KNOW. 'Seems' is not rigorous enough to convince us. Critical thinkers make a guess, test the guess, and either confirm or deny the guess. You have not do that. You have made a guess, found some evidence you think supports it, and you are done, case closed. That is the opposite of critical thinking. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 4, 2023 22:59:03 GMT
Critical thinking certainly requires isolating factors. The criterion of "similarity and dissimilarity" comes from the methodological study of history. I applies. If you "factor in all the data," then how do determine what matters? The reality is that it is impossible to factor in all the data. You can only factor in as much as you can handle, and at some point you have to scale the data on some kind of hierarchy of importance. And it seems to me that simplistically labeling or characterizing Trump's term as "fascist" is picking and choosing what data you want. Isolating factors? That is meaningless 'sciency' talk to make you sound credible. Causing the opposite effect. I can only speak for myself, when I say that you are talking out of your ass on this subject. It does not sound to me like you have any idea what critical thinking is. I think your last statement is the most accurate, however. You say, 'it seems to (you),' blah blah blah. Critical thinkers don't base their conclusions on what things SEEM to be. We are curious, and we want to KNOW. 'Seems' is not rigorous enough to convince us. Critical thinkers make a guess, test the guess, and either confirm or deny the guess. You have not do that. You have made a guess, found some evidence you think supports it, and you are done, case closed. That is the opposite of critical thinking. Freon Yeah…”isolating factors.” Scientific experiments are not designed to discover “five things at a time,” or else it would be impossible to discover relevant correlation and causation. That’s why, you know…things like “double blind studies,” so results aren’t “infected by” factors other than what is being studied. “Seems” might not be rigorous enough for you, but I’m afraid you haven’t collected enough data on this to derive an adequately scientific conclusion about what I might mean by “seems.” So you’re guessing. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 5, 2023 1:52:16 GMT
I agree with Freon.
Trump was in many ways a fascist. As are many of his supporters.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jun 5, 2023 2:03:03 GMT
Isolating factors? That is meaningless 'sciency' talk to make you sound credible. Causing the opposite effect. I can only speak for myself, when I say that you are talking out of your ass on this subject. It does not sound to me like you have any idea what critical thinking is. I think your last statement is the most accurate, however. You say, 'it seems to (you),' blah blah blah. Critical thinkers don't base their conclusions on what things SEEM to be. We are curious, and we want to KNOW. 'Seems' is not rigorous enough to convince us. Critical thinkers make a guess, test the guess, and either confirm or deny the guess. You have not do that. You have made a guess, found some evidence you think supports it, and you are done, case closed. That is the opposite of critical thinking. Freon Yeah…”isolating factors.” Scientific experiments are not designed to discover “five things at a time,” or else it would be impossible to discover relevant correlation and causation. That’s why, you know…things like “double blind studies,” so results aren’t “infected by” factors other than what is being studied. “Seems” might not be rigorous enough for you, but I’m afraid you haven’t collected enough data on this to derive an adequately scientific conclusion about what I might mean by “seems.” So you’re guessing. If you don't agree with me about what Fascism is. Fine. If you do not agree with me that Donald satisfied almost all those conditions. Fine. But please, don't try bullshitting me that you have ANY expertise in understanding science, the scientific method, or critical thinking. You have demonstrated multiple times in the last few posts, that you are clueless on those subjects. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 5, 2023 2:23:54 GMT
Yeah…”isolating factors.” Scientific experiments are not designed to discover “five things at a time,” or else it would be impossible to discover relevant correlation and causation. That’s why, you know…things like “double blind studies,” so results aren’t “infected by” factors other than what is being studied. “Seems” might not be rigorous enough for you, but I’m afraid you haven’t collected enough data on this to derive an adequately scientific conclusion about what I might mean by “seems.” So you’re guessing. If you don't agree with me about what Fascism is. Fine. If you do not agree with me that Donald satisfied almost all those conditions. Fine. But please, don't try bullshitting me that you have ANY expertise in understanding science, the scientific method, or critical thinking. You have demonstrated multiple times in the last few posts, that you are clueless on those subjects. Freon I disagree with one minor point on the definition of fascism you introduced. I don't agree that Donald satisfied almost all those conditions... in contrast to his predecessor or successor. As for your perspective on my critical thinking, you don't have enough data points yet to make a scientific judgment on that. Especially if you think that scientific experiments don't have to isolate influences and factors...like maybe you think scientists just "blow things up and see what happens," or whatever. I'm saying the equivalent of the following: www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-methodI mean...that's just for a science fair. I'm sure in your "career as a scientist," you would introduce multiple factors just to see what happens... |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jun 5, 2023 3:02:30 GMT
If you don't agree with me about what Fascism is. Fine. If you do not agree with me that Donald satisfied almost all those conditions. Fine. But please, don't try bullshitting me that you have ANY expertise in understanding science, the scientific method, or critical thinking. You have demonstrated multiple times in the last few posts, that you are clueless on those subjects. Freon I disagree with one minor point on the definition of fascism you introduced. I don't agree that Donald satisfied almost all those conditions... in contrast to his predecessor or successor. As for your perspective on my critical thinking, you don't have enough data points yet to make a scientific judgment on that. Especially if you think that scientific experiments don't have to isolate influences and factors...like maybe you think scientists just "blow things up and see what happens," or whatever. I'm saying the equivalent of the following: www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-methodI mean...that's just for a science fair. I'm sure in your "career as a scientist," you would introduce multiple factors just to see what happens... We're done. It might as well be me citing web sites about Christianity. At least I know where my expertise lies, and would not make a fool of myself, as you are doing. Freon |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 5, 2023 3:08:17 GMT
I disagree with one minor point on the definition of fascism you introduced. I don't agree that Donald satisfied almost all those conditions... in contrast to his predecessor or successor. As for your perspective on my critical thinking, you don't have enough data points yet to make a scientific judgment on that. Especially if you think that scientific experiments don't have to isolate influences and factors...like maybe you think scientists just "blow things up and see what happens," or whatever. I'm saying the equivalent of the following: www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-methodI mean...that's just for a science fair. I'm sure in your "career as a scientist," you would introduce multiple factors just to see what happens... We're done. It might as well be me citing web sites about Christianity. At least I know where my expertise lies, and would not make a fool of myself, as you are doing. Freon
Good decision. Sometimes arguing with a person like "Mercy For All" is a total waste of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jun 5, 2023 3:10:12 GMT
We're done. It might as well be me citing web sites about Christianity. At least I know where my expertise lies, and would not make a fool of myself, as you are doing. Freon
Good decision. Sometimes arguing with a person like "Mercy For All" is a total waste of time.
It's a pity, but at least right at this moment, there is no point in continuing. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 5, 2023 14:02:32 GMT
I disagree with one minor point on the definition of fascism you introduced. I don't agree that Donald satisfied almost all those conditions... in contrast to his predecessor or successor. As for your perspective on my critical thinking, you don't have enough data points yet to make a scientific judgment on that. Especially if you think that scientific experiments don't have to isolate influences and factors...like maybe you think scientists just "blow things up and see what happens," or whatever. I'm saying the equivalent of the following: www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-methodI mean...that's just for a science fair. I'm sure in your "career as a scientist," you would introduce multiple factors just to see what happens... We're done. It might as well be me citing web sites about Christianity. At least I know where my expertise lies, and would not make a fool of myself, as you are doing. Freon So...just to be clear, you are asserting that scientific experiments deal with more than one factor at a time? |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 5, 2023 18:19:00 GMT
Here's What Fascism Looks Like:
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 5, 2023 18:59:25 GMT
Here's What Fascism Looks Like:
Apparently. Do you mean "fascism" as "really bad, and what I hate"? Or do you mean a specific (and accurate) definition of "fascism"? |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 5, 2023 19:58:57 GMT
Here's What Fascism Looks Like:
Apparently. Do you mean "fascism" as "really bad, and what I hate"? Or do you mean a specific (and accurate) definition of "fascism"?
Well, what do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Jun 5, 2023 20:36:53 GMT
Here is what Fascism looks like!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 5, 2023 21:18:43 GMT
Apparently. Do you mean "fascism" as "really bad, and what I hate"? Or do you mean a specific (and accurate) definition of "fascism"?
Well, what do you think?
I think there's an overlap. There's an overlap between Trump's sole term in office and "strictly defined fascism," but there's also an overlap between Trump's term in office and, say, Biden's term (so far) and Obama's terms. So I'm not sure it's helpful to say "Trump is a fascist" and it's also not helpful to say "Trump is exactly like Obama" or "Trump is completely like Obama." |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 5, 2023 22:44:02 GMT
Well, you do seem to avoid the point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 5, 2023 23:25:27 GMT
Well, you do seem to avoid the point. What point? I do avoid the point that "Trump is a fascist" because it's imprecise, misleading, and divisive. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2023 23:28:39 GMT
Well, you do seem to avoid the point. What point? I do avoid the point that "Trump is a fascist" because it's imprecise, misleading, and divisive. What political notion isn't?
You should avoid talking altogether then. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 6, 2023 0:24:15 GMT
Well, you do seem to avoid the point. What point? I do avoid the point that "Trump is a fascist" because it's imprecise, misleading, and divisive.
Well, if you are unable to see Trump's fascism, that's your problem, not mine, nor most Dems.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jun 6, 2023 0:45:23 GMT
What point? I do avoid the point that "Trump is a fascist" because it's imprecise, misleading, and divisive.
Well, if you are unable to see Trump's fascism, that's your problem, not mine, nor most Dems.
I see something, that's for sure. The question is..."is what I see, fascism"? That's the thing. You are insisting on something but not drawing a connection between the actions and the definition of fascism. So..."fascism" then gets reduced to something like "what I don't like." |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 6, 2023 1:07:26 GMT
To repeat:
Here's what fascism looks like:
What, pray tell, don't you get?
|
|
