• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,786
44,894
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,255.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
This is addressed at a strawman. I have never argued that sometimes it is better to be ignorant about something than to have knowledge about that something.

I have said that knowledge can be beneficial and can also be detrimental.

Apparently, I did not address a strawman. You maintain that not all knowledge is beneficial. If knowledge were detrimental, then there would be some cases where ignorance would be preferable. I am not guilty of the strawman fallacy. I am accurately representing your argument.

Thinking critically is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition to avoiding lies and half-truths.

Well, at least we'll set her up for success. If she has no critical thinking skills, then she does not even have the necessary tools, as you admit.


Well, we better get her some critical thinking skills so she would be able to answer any unsound or fallacious arguments this atheist professor might use.

Surely you are aware that not everyone who has the capacity to internalize the best practices that critical thinking has to offer actually does so.

I am constantly reminded of it on this website.
 
Reactions: Archaeopteryx
Upvote 0

Bethany311

Active Member
Aug 20, 2016
25
11
A state
✟22,837.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private

I would like to learn as I mentioned, how to use critical thinking and utilize real evidence rather than belief systems I have been accustomed to, in order to find truth, whatever truth may be. I have observed inconsistencies in the way I come to conclusions, and I'd like to know more about using thinking skills in order to come to conclusions based on something evidently real, rather than just assumptions and beliefs. The gain I hope to achieve is primarily to know truth... not something relative, something everyone else believes or says I should believe... but something based on hard facts and reality.
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

Why is Bethany a troll?
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,786
44,894
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,255.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
The video below is a comparative presentation between the different approaches of two leading atheists--

This focus on atheism is quite bizarre.

Bethany asks for help in thinking better.
Some people offer help in thinking better.
Other people offer dire warnings about atheism.
Many centuries' worth of Christian philosophers, who worked hard at thinking better, are spinning in their graves.
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

Precisely why I posted it appears some feel threatened.

Someone is saying that want to critically think and if the critical thinking doesn't involve agreeing with certain people, there must be something wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Chesterton

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding
Site Supporter
May 24, 2008
26,197
21,423
Flatland
✟1,080,324.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single

Yes. You mention wanting real evidence and hard facts, which is what I also asked for in a previous post. Before you utilize critical thinking about reality, you need hard facts and evidence to think about.
 
Upvote 0

ToddNotTodd

Iconoclast
Feb 17, 2004
7,787
3,884
✟274,996.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Again, this assumption that a Christian asking questions is most likely a troll is just bizarre.
Over my years here I've seen several Christians deconvert. So it's definitely not a given that "Christians" who want to learn critical thinking must be trolls.

But since I've heard several preachers (in person, on the radio and on TV) mention that Christians should run, not walk, from "secular" knowledge like science and Philosophy, I understand the fear that Christians may have.
 
Upvote 0

Bethany311

Active Member
Aug 20, 2016
25
11
A state
✟22,837.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Also, don't forget to check out a full list of cognitive biases. Once you have an idea of the ways we can easily fool ourselves, you can spot these problems in how you and other people reason and argue.

I really appreciate this link. I had heard of cognitive biases before briefly, but had no idea there were so many specific biases! FrumiousBandersnatch, if you wouldn't mind and have the time, could you give me some real-life examples of a few of these? Maybe a few you have dealt with recently and personally? I realize the definitions are pretty self-explanatory, but it would be nice to have some examples if possible...

In fact, I'd like to broaden this discussion and ask anyone interested...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Recalculating!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,572
11,470
Space Mountain!
✟1,354,787.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I would like to learn as I mentioned, how to use critical thinking and utilize real evidence rather than belief systems I have been accustomed to, in order to find truth, whatever truth may be.
That is very commendable, Bethany. But, what you're going to find out is that the "use" of critical thinking and the utilization of "evidence" are endeavors that are subject to some level of relative consideration. A lot of the truth of a matter will depend on the way in which you approach a subject for investigation or on the theoretical framework in which you place the so-called evidence. Moreover, I have to mention that the nature of evidence isn't something that is so clear; the meaning of evidence itself isn't self-evident. And I say this not in opposition to you, but simply as a brother in Christ who is wanting to inform a sister.

I have observed inconsistencies in the way I come to conclusions, and I'd like to know more about using thinking skills in order to come to conclusions based on something evidently real, rather than just assumptions and beliefs.
I'm glad that you've become aware of inconsistencies in your thinking and that you want to come away honest about this situation. We all have to work on our cognitive inconsistencies, but in this regard, if we are going to apply the effort to be consistent to the truth of our faith, we'll find that not everything that we'd like to be enlightened about will necessarily open up it's hidden truth to our inquiring minds. I just say this as a cautionary measure.

The gain I hope to achieve is primarily to know truth... not something relative, something everyone else believes or says I should believe... but something based on hard facts and reality.
That is an excellent virtue to long for, Bethany. We should all want to know the truth as far as it is possible to know. However, let me bring your attention to the fact that there is a difference in meaning between the term "relative" (as in "relativity") and the similar term "relativism." One is not the other, and it would probably be a good thing if you learn the difference and their respective applications to the idea(s) of Truth.

Another thing is that "hard facts" do not by necessity equate to "reality." These are not synonyms. Nor is there simply one mode or theoretical definition of Truth. Here's a link to the on-line Stanford Encyclopedia article on the diversity of conceptual approaches to this thing that many people seem to clamor for:


I'd recommend the following professional journal article by Catherine Elgin as a beginning, related illustration of my insistence of the things I've stated above:


Now, where would YOU like for us to begin? (I'd suggest further studies on Epistemology as a practical starting point, but you may feel differently.)

2PhiloVoid
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

What do you think, best equates with reality?
 
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
16,685
6,334
✟369,578.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single

Welcome to the club!


I want to speak with people on both ends of the spectrum, from those who view evidences, to those who operate primarily on belief.

You're in luck! I'm both! Not at the same time though. For 20 years, I've held my Christian beliefs to be free of errors. Then in recent times, I've held jobs that required lots and lots of critical thinking. Slowly, it changed my views of religion and I began to see many inconsistencies, contradictions in the things I've been taught as a Christian for 20 years.

Where is a good place to start?

I would strongly advice you to learn critical thinking skills, deductive reasoning, logic, take jobs in data analysis, investigative analysis, statistical analysis, data forecasting, even in IT/scientific research....Jobs that will require quite a lot of critical thinking, pattern and correlations analysis.

Once these skills become 2nd nature to you (after a considerable time to be honest). Are you familiar with the fictional "Sherlock Holmes" ? Then come back and analyse Christianity and make your own conclusions for yourself.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,082.00
Faith
Atheist
Explanations of critical thinking, logic, skepticism, etc., are not like works by a particular author or authors, they are explanations of methodologies, tools for effective thinking.

By analogy, if they referred to putting up shelves, they'd be warning about safety and technique - ensure there are no pipes or cables where you want to put your supports, mind your thumb when hammering, use an RCD when drilling, ensure the ladder is stable, make sure the shelves are level and strong enough for what you want to put on them, etc. The shelf material, colour, height, fixings, and style are up to the indvidual, but effective methods and techniques apply to any and all.

IOW, they're not telling you what to think - that's up to the individual, they're giving you useful techniques for specific contexts.

Of course; if Bethany finds it hard going, or can't get on with some material, or doesn't understand something, she should drop it, or ask for explanations, or seek alternative sources. This applies to recommendations for anything.

You have teeth and can eat meat and that is great, but to think that because you can eat it, that a person without teeth can eat it just as well is itself an instance of fallacious reasoning.
So it's a good thing no-one suggested that.

I would be far more interested in actually getting to know more about Bethany and what exactly has caused her to all of a sudden want to come to a philosophy forum and ask people the questions she has asked.
So ask her.

I hope the piece you referenced does indeed aspire to do what you say. I would be inclined to recommend it myself if it does not contain a caricature of what "belief" is, for example.
I gave a whole bunch or references, all by acknowledged experts in their fields - which piece did you have in mind?

When concepts like 'belief' are discussed in such material, if the semantics are particularly relevant (i.e. more than simply colloquial), the particular usage will be defined in advance. For example, in contemporary philosophy, unless otherwise qualified, it's usually taken to be 'the attitude we have, roughly, whenever we take something to be the case or regard it as true'. Depending on the context, it may be explicitly qualified. In theological discussions, it may be different. It's up to the reader to decide whether they agree with how such a term is applied in general discussion, but when learning how to think critically, argue, and analyse effectively, they only need to understand what it means in that context.

As Wittgenstein observed, meaning is a function of usage; in philosophical discussion, the terms should be defined in advance, where necessary. Once defined, they provide a standard for the context. I'm sorry you've had such bad experiences with references - are you sure it wasn't that the definitions used were different from the ones you were accustomed to? Words like faith, belief, knowledge, information, etc., have different meanings in different contexts, and they're not always made clear.
 
Reactions: quatona
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,082.00
Faith
Atheist
OK, I'll have a go...

Incidentally, I know you said you didn't want book recommendations, but I think there's a book that's a 'must read' for learning about critical thinking and cognitive biases, because it provides a background explanation for them, and also gives a bunch of examples you can try for yourself. The book is 'Thinking, Fast and Slow' by Daniel Kahneman, and is about the two systems of thinking we use - System 1, the fast, automatic, effortless, intuitive, involuntary system, and System 2, the deliberative, slow, effortful, conscious, logical, stepwise thinking. System 1 will instantly tell you what 3x2 is, but it takes System 2 to work out 17x24. It's System 2 that you need to use to spot cognitive biases.

For examples of biases, buying a car is instructive. Your 'positive outcome bias' and 'overconfidence effect' may lead you to think you'll be able to get a great car for a low, low price. The salesman will probably use the 'anchoring effect', where, by mentioning a higher sum (it doesn't even have to be directly related to cars, but usually is) before discussing the price for the car you want, he primes you to see even an excessive price as more reasonable than it is (shops do this with pricing, and also reverse it, by raising the price of a single item to make the 2-for-1 seem like good value). He might use the 'Forer effect' (or 'Barnum effect') to persuade you that a particular car is an ideal match for your needs, by listing a bunch of features as particularly suitable to you, when they're features almost everyone would want (this is also used by astrologers & psychics to make you feel they know all about you). On the test drive, 'expectation bias' and 'selective perception bias' may make you feel the car is better than your old one, even if it isn't.

The salesman will make you think you got the better of him in assessing the car and haggling the price, by giving you the 'illusion of control' and knowing that the 'overconfidence effect' means you probably think you know more about cars and haggling than you actually do, and the 'Dunning-Kruger effect' means your ignorance of cars & haggling prevents you realising this. Using 'hyperbolic discounting' he'll knock a chunk off the price, or throw in rubber mats and mud flaps, in return for signing you up to a 'bargain' service contract that'll cost you more in the long term.

Once you've paid more than you should for a car that isn't ideal for you, 'post-purchase rationalization' bias will help you feel it was a bargain, 'rosy retrospection' bias will suggest you were well in control of the purchase process (when you were actually a sweating, nervous wreck), and 'hindsight bias' will tell you that you were right to think you could get a great car for a low price. When you take your new car out on the road, your brain primed with the image of your new pride and joy, and you may find yourself suddenly seeing far more instances of that model than you expected, as if a significant proportion of the public bought that model at the same time you did. This is the 'frequency illusion'. When you tell your friends about it later, the 'Lake Wobegon effect' will encourage you to boast about outwitting the salesman. And so-on; you get the idea.

Over all of these, and contributing to many of them, 'confirmation bias', the unconscious tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions, casts its deceptive shadow...

You may think that I recently bought a dud car - I didn't, all that happened a long time ago, and contributed greatly to my eventually realising that, as a student, I knew a lot less about the world than I thought
 
Reactions: Bethany311
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,786
44,894
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,255.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Over all of these, and contributing to many of them, 'confirmation bias', the unconscious tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions, casts its deceptive shadow...

Lovely work. And yes, confirmation bias is one of the big ones. Once an idea or belief gets into your head, we tend to ignore information that disagrees with it, and latch onto information that agrees with it. We all suffer from this. I find myself doing it. I get in some heated debate, and google something to get more ammunition, and I find myself clicking on the websites that seem to agree with me, rather than the ones that challenge my ideas. But once you start to become aware of it, you can at least try to overcome it.
 
Reactions: Bethany311
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,082.00
Faith
Atheist
Also, learning to program (writing computer code) is a skill that can be learn in spare time and encourages logic skills, analytical care, error spotting, edge cases, reductio-ad-absurdum, structuring a coherent argument, etc. Having said that, it does need a spark of interest in computing...

Once these skills become 2nd nature to you (after a considerable time to be honest). Are you familiar with the fictional "Sherlock Holmes" ? Then come back and analyse Christianity and make your own conclusions for yourself.
They are also useful life skills that are applicable beyond the analysis of religious belief systems.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,143
✟349,082.00
Faith
Atheist
Lovely work.
Thank you
We all suffer from this. I find myself doing it. I get in some heated debate, and google something to get more ammunition, and I find myself clicking on the websites that seem to agree with me, rather than the ones that challenge my ideas.
Yes, me too; the main problem is one often only realises it retrospectively, but even then it can be very difficult to be even-handed and fair with information that contradicts your ideas.
But once you start to become aware of it, you can at least try to overcome it.
Absolutely - awareness is key to reducing the impact of biases, because it allows you to make adjustments and corrections, even if they come after the fact, and it primes you to recognise likely problem situations in future.
 
Reactions: Bethany311
Upvote 0