WHEN people leave a cult...MAN landed on the moon? Or critical thinking......

by The Rebel 54 Replies latest jw friends

  • cappytan

    I think a better way of putting it would be "you need to improve your critical thinking skills."

    I would venture to say that the fact that someone was able to leave the cult means they have at least SOME measure of critical thinking skills.

  • Viviane
    It means they may have some critical thinking skills, not necessarily that they do.
  • StarTrekAngel

    You still didn't accept my apology.

    I just can't wrapt my head around this last thing you said. it means they may have some thinking skills? but they don't? Sorry, excuse my stupidity.

    I don't think I can make it any more clear for you. You accused me of having "pretend knowledge" in another thread and then you went silent. You seem to get conveniently "bored" or "busy". I am busy too. I don't start arguments I know I won't have time to finish. I have a job too.

    Anyway, to answer more in line with Cappytan's perspective. I think I had the critical thinking skills to see this cult for what it was all along. What I lacked was the information that needed processing. Namely history of the cult and past fiascos. Critical thinking is not the cake mix, is the mixer. If yo came to me and told me I did not have critical thinking skills I would have taken offense, because in my limited knowledge of the situation I was under the understanding that I was fine. The other half of the debate (the cult) also managed to convinced that I indeed had critical thinking skills and that is why I was in the cult. When the other information required came up, then I was quickly able to see the light. In other words, I was ignorant, not incapable of reasoning based on facts. I don't min d people calling me ignorant. I know I ignore many things.

  • Viviane

    If you've an issue with whether or not I accepted an apology from you on another thread, bring it up there. Don't threadjack here. I've no idea to which apology you refer.

    I've no idea why parsing "may have some skills" is compatible with l"acking" is a problem for you.

    I've no idea why you are under the impression that I have a responsibility to post when you think I should.

    I cannot help which portions of reality you choose to take offense at.

  • StarTrekAngel

    It means they may have some critical thinking skills, not necessarily that they do.

    It seem like you stated that you can have some critical thinking but not all of it. Not sure I understand that under the definition of critical thinking. Bolds mine.

    statement by Michael Scriven & Richard Paul, presented at the 8th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform, Summer 1987.

    Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness.

    As you can see, critical thinking has more in common with a computer CPU than it does with the amount of knowledge that you hold. In database terms we name this "garbage in-garbage out". A computer is not any better than the information it holds. If you provide the right information it can process it and give a good outcome but you can not fault the CPU if the information isn't there. This is why you will get a bad response if you generalize 'lack of critical thinking' under something that could be defined as 'ignorance'. You are pretty much telling someone that they don't have a brain.

    That not responding in such cases rests credibility to your views. Is a matter of honor, wether you are right or wrong. But that is fine, you don't have to. You owe the answer, not to me, but to your ideals.

  • Viviane

    My god, it's like you just got training wheels.

    Critical thinking is not like computing in anyway. And "garbage in/garbage out" is in no way specific c to databases, be it it oracle, SQL, MySQL, db2, Informix, terradata, exchange or something else.

    You're trying to make a point when you don't even understand the concepts. I don't think you even understand the argument beyond "Viviane did something once that hurt my feelings".

  • GrreatTeacher

    Wait, I honestly don't understand the OP.

    Is snoring, spitting and farting a good thing or a bad thing?

    And are they evidence or lack of evidence for critical thinking on behalf of the snorer, spitter or farter?!?

    ...because I'm pretty sure I snore every night...

  • OrphanCrow
    cappytan: I would venture to say that the fact that someone was able to leave the cult means they have at least SOME measure of critical thinking skills.

    Not neccessarily.

    The 'fact' that someone was able to leave the cult is not always evidence of rational thought. Most people are attached to the cult because of an emotional attachment, not a rational attachment.

    Leaving the cult is often an emotional choice and has little to do with the concept of critical thinking.

    Critical thinking skills do not (and should not) require an emotional involvement.

  • StarTrekAngel

    Your last post that offers nothing. If I am wrong about the comparison with a CPU, then please enlighten me.

    I never said that "garbage in-out" it was "specific" to databases. You are adding words, something you accused others of doing. I said "we name this" in the industry. There are other terms adopted in the IT world that come from other areas or industries as well. But you offer no contrary explanation. Only offer to point that I am wrong, nothing more. If you think this has anything to do with my feelings, then apologize and carry on with your explanation. I am going to, in the other hand, proceed to tell you why I keep on and hopefully you would see that this has nothing to do with my feelings. Hopefully you would realize that I am pointing to something that does not hurts me personally but it hurts the very purpose of forums such as this one.

    I once posted a thread that you did not agree with it. Me having a second hand english, typed something that was not necessarily accurate. I tried to explain that but you did not accept it. I apologized. You somehow are able to keep track of other long discussions but you somehow lost this thread of mine at the apology acceptance step. Fine. No problem there anymore. I messed up unintentionally but such was not a good reason for you.

    The next encounter with you, you enter a thread with the question "Am I needed here?". Now please correct me if I am wrong but if we just consider the question, it seems to me that you feel you have some qualifications to enter a thread as a self proclaimed moderator. I still gave you the benefit of the doubt. I am relatively new to the forum and I am not aware if someone has been appointed as such (Sorry JW term). When I say I gave you the benefit of the doubt, it doesn't mean that somehow I am here to delivery justice by means of judging your entry strategy. I mean to say that you stood out in the crowd by means of what you said, but as you can see, I did not respond as if I felt attacked personally or my feelings were hurt. I did ask you at some point, on your own thread, if you meant to act as a moderator and since the thread was about "evidence of claims" you asked me what the evidence suggested you did and I said I was asking what your intentions were, not what it looked like. You never responded.

    Ultimately, in another thread, you went in and read into an explanation of mine as if someone had called to judge me. When I clarified my explanation, you never returned. Are my feelings hurt? definitely not. You don't define me and I can drop this thing right here and now. The problem is that such actions of yours do not allow the conversation to continue. You come in here and demand answers from everyone but you can excuse your lack of answers on boredom. Excuse me but I find such attitude disruptive to the nature of forums like this one, where we are supposed to be able to discuss matters from our own understanding, based on our own experiences and hopefully educate each other, not at your standards but at the pace and reasoning that we are capable. I see threads that make no sense to me. I skip them if they are not of my interest, I can not contribute anything meaningful or ask for someone to please inform me further.

    So as you can see. I got nothing personal to hurt for. You don't hurt me if you don't agree with me. You do bother me if each and every time I open a thread or I post an answer in a thread that you did not start, I have to write with the idea that you will eventually come, not to share information for the benefit of everyone or correct something based on facts, but to pick apart my statements and that of others as if you were called for that very purpose. Express your opinion on the matter, state your facts and let the crowd read and reason on their own.

  • truthseeker100

    Orphan Crow: Leaving the cult is often an emotional choice and has little to do with the concept of critical thinking.

    Critical thinking skills do not (and should not) require an emotional involvement.

    I couldn't agree more, the farther one can remove emotion from thinking the more critical the thought process becomes.

    Vivianne makes a good point also about not being offended by criticisms of ones lack of critical thinking.

    As humans we are all prone to occasional emotions and pride affecting our thought processes.

Share this