you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Velocity 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

How many of y'all have actually read the scientific publications?

I do. I research the pros and cons, then come to a "more" truthful conclusion. The one thing I learned is that Snopes and other "fact checkers" are absolute garbage.

[–]Kyto113 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Garbage because you disagree with them? They're not perfect, but they tend to do a pretty darn good job of utilizing facts. If your reason for disagreeing with the fact checkers is the kind of sources that are posted on this site, you're not executing critical thinking properly.

"Critical thinking" according to this site:

Fact checkers utilizing evidence to back up positions

"Mainstream media bias, liberal agenda"

Random screencap of graphic without attribution or context

"This proves my point entirely!"

[–]bobbobbybob 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (5 children)

but they tend to do a pretty darn good job of utilizing facts.

We get it, you are a fanboy. good on YOU! bonus social points.

critical thinkers according to me:

A deep understanding of the language and systems described by said language, backed up by interesting peer reviewed publications that show failures in mainstream understandings (or in some cases, complete misrepresentation)

[–]Kyto113 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Lol, disagreeing with mainstream understanding is part of your definition of critical thinking...

So in your world one cannot accept the mainstream story while being rational... Sounds unbiased

[–]ReeferMadness 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It just happens that blindly agreeing with the mainstream and coming to the same conclusion is indistinguishable. However, a sheep always agrees with the mainstream while a critical thinker will eventually disagree. Ergo the way to identify a free thinker is when they disagree with the mainstream.

Is there anything important on which you disagree with the mainstream?

[–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

looking for the failed assumptions and data errors in the current status quo is critical thinking, and to dismiss it as 'bias' shows you know fuck all about anything.

Your failed logic is also pretty poor showing. To conclude as you did "in your world one cannot accept the mainstream story while being rational" is a wild extrapolation based on nothing but the shit that resides in your ego.

If a mainstream idea holds up to scrutiny (say, a spherical earth shape and an orbit around the sun), then yay, go mainstream.

[–]Kyto113 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Looking for the failed assumptions and data errors in all beliefs is critical thinking

Critical thinking isn't just about challenging the official story. It's about subjecting all beliefs and information to critical analysis. And what you see on this site and read it, is people are more than willing to accept crap sources for things they want to believe while having exacting standards for things they don't believe.

Your failed logic is also pretty poor showing. To conclude as you did "in your world one cannot accept the mainstream story while being rational" is a wild extrapolation based on nothing but the shit that resides in your ego.

It's a direct result of your improper definition. If you altered your definition as I did above, then you have a pretty good one. As you stated it, your definition is incomplete and leads to this result.

[–]bobbobbybob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

now you show a doubling down of your failure to think critically. You made an error, but work to pretend you didn't, rather than accept truth and grow.