|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What Does Critical Thinking Mean To You? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
RAZD writes:
Worldview beliefs don't always apply. If you come to a fork in the road you have to make a choice. The bridge might be out on one road but with no evidence one way or the other, the default position is that the bridge is okay.
The default position is your worldview beliefs: that will be the basis for any decision without clear answers, and it will not be critical thinking so much as blind reaction.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Catholic Scientist writes:
You can be as critical as you like. Critical thinking is not a magic wand that applies to every situation.
ringo writes:
you're not being critical of your thoughts. In such cases,
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
You can be as critical as you like. Critical thinking is not a magic wand that applies to every situation. Yes, of course. There's plenty of decisions I make that don't involve critical thinking. The question here is, when are you employing it and when are you not. You're not employing it when you are not being critical of your thoughts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
I was responding to the question, "Is it really critical to make such a decision when no evidence points either way?" My point is that in some situations, critical thinking only takes you so far and then your default position, critically, is that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
The question here is, when are you employing it and when are you not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I don't think making a decision in the absence of evidence is thinking critically at all.
If you don't have the means to be critical of you thoughts, then there's no reason to try to still make it out as being critical thinking. It just isn't, its no biggie.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
I think if you've considered all of the available evidence and looked into ways of obtaining more evidence, then there's no way to distinguish that methodology from critical thinking.
I don't think making a decision in the absence of evidence is thinking critically at all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I think if you've considered all of the available evidence and looked into ways of obtaining more evidence, then there's no way to distinguish that methodology from critical thinking. If there's evidence available then it ain't an absence of evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
It is if all the available evidence is none.
If there's evidence available then it ain't an absence of evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Catholic Scientist writes:
It is if all the available evidence is none. If there's evidence available then it ain't an absence of evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Take two possibilities, unicorns and hippos. You look for evidence for both. You find evidence for hippos and no evidence for unicorns. You conclude that hippos exist, based on the evidence. You conclude that unicorns don't exist, based on the evidence. How is one process critical thinking and the other not?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Take two possibilities, unicorns and hippos. You look for evidence for both. You find evidence for hippos and no evidence for unicorns. You conclude that hippos exist, based on the evidence. You conclude that unicorns don't exist, based on the evidence. How is one process critical thinking and the other not? Being critical of your thoughts would make you realize that being unable to find evidence for unicorns shouldn't make you conclude that they don't exist and that you should reserve your judgement until you can find actual evidence of absence. Like, every corner of the planet was observed to contain no unicorns, so therefore they must not be here. Not, welp, I took a glance and didn't see any so they must not exist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
Again, my original point was that sometimes you have to make a decision now based on the evidence you have now. ... you should reserve your judgement until you can find actual evidence of absence. The critical thinking process is the same even if you don't have the leisure to carry it through as far as you might like. It should always be an ongoing process. There is no point at which it magically becomes "critical thinking".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18354 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Personally, I see ringos "judgement" as being more of a choice. My theory is that you (ringo) have chosen to accept "no monsters" as your default position due to the fact that you regard religious theistic thinking as more delusional than atheistic critical thought.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Again, my original point was that sometimes you have to make a decision now based on the evidence you have now. Can you give me an example? Why not just not decide?
The critical thinking process is the same even if you don't have the leisure to carry it through as far as you might like. It should always be an ongoing process. There is no point at which it magically becomes "critical thinking". I think I get what you're saying, in that you can still be being critical of your thoughts even why making decision based on insufficient evidence, but I still think that if you're not waiting until you have sufficient evidence, for whatever reason that you have to decide, then you're not really thinking critically. You can't, you don't have the time to. You have to decide.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Worldview beliefs don't always apply. If you come to a fork in the road you have to make a choice. ... If it is a choice, then your worldview affects the choice you make; your experiences, your knowledge your beliefs, all go to what choices you make.
... The bridge might be out on one road but with no evidence one way or the other, the default position is that the bridge is okay. Or your default position might be to take the one less traveled by, in which case you might expect the bridge to be in need of repair ... ... which depends on your purpose in going down the road in the first place. And that too depends on your worldview. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024