Negative Thinking is NOT Critical Thinking

[coberst]

Negative Thinking is NOT Critical Thinking

Negative thinking often displays itself in ad hominem attacks. Often a forum has one or more individuals who have grown to think of themselves as the local ‘shaman’; these individuals try all kinds of ways to reject others who they fear will take away some of their ‘power’, so they use all forms of negative attacks to reject that new person.

I have seen instances of individuals who are very anti-intellectual devise means for rejecting any form of ideas that appear to be intellectual.

Ideologues are always fighting against other ideologues and they use every means to reject non-conforming ideas. I see that especially in anti-theism ideologues. I had one instance of an individual rejecting the works of Becker because Becker uses the word "faith", such a word was like the appearance of a snake under the bed.

We are indoctrinated in our ideologies and we are constantly fighting either for ours or against another, this leads to various techniques to throw off any invading new ideas. Also I am convinced that our schools and colleges have made people unconsciously fearful of any serious concepts that have not been introduced to them by a teacher. Self-learning is unconsciously an alien concept.

[Eclogite]

Originally Posted by coberst

Negative Thinking is NOT Critical Thinking

Certainly true. However, some critical thinking is necessarily negative. If critical thinking is being to applied to an idea that is poorly formulated then the resultant analysis will be largely (and centrally) negative. Although it may appear at first to be a contradiction, in these circumstances the negative will be positive, since it is negation of an error, falsehood, or weakness.

Originally Posted by coberst

Negative thinking often displays itself in ad hominem attacks.

Again, certainly true, but those ad hominem attacks, in some cases, represent a last ditch effort on the part of the poster to generate a relevant, attentive, response. Now the attack is generally doomed to failure (though I have seen exceptions), but I think it is understandable. The instances I am thinking of are different from the chronic attacker who seeks out something to disagree with, but are rather those where the poster feels all reasonable, logical attempts to dicuss, reach agreement, or even agree to disagree, have failed.

Originally Posted by coberst

Often a forum has one or more individuals who have grown to think of themselves as the local ‘shaman’; these individuals try all kinds of ways to reject others who they fear will take away some of their ‘power’, so they use all forms of negative attacks to reject that new person.

My critical thinking tells me you might feel you have been the subject of such attacks. Am I correct?

Originally Posted by coberst

Ideologues are always fighting against other ideologues and they use every means to reject non-conforming ideas. I see that especially in anti-theism ideologues.

I find Dawkins to be an example of a scientist who on some matters is even more dogmatic than many of the religious believers he condemns. Is that the sort of thing you are talking about?

Originally Posted by coberst

Also I am convinced that our schools and colleges have made people unconsciously fearful of any serious concepts that have not been introduced to them by a teacher.

We have had this discussion before. Based upon my experience within the educational system of the UK, as a pupil, as a parent of schoolchildren, as a school governer, and most recently as the father of a schoolteacher, this is not the case. I am prepared to accept that it may be the case in some schools in some countries. It would be nice if you could accept that your view of how schools function is not universally applicable.

Originally Posted by coberst

Self-learning is unconsciously an alien concept.

Self learning is an inherent characteristic of humans, primates, and many other higher animals. A little reading of research literature and a healthy does of critical thinking should lead you to the same conclusion.

[coberst]

Eclogite

I have posted on many different forums in the last 5 years and I run into constant behavior patterns that I tend to categorize. My remarks about the existence of a “shaman” like attitude by some forum members is a result of many experiences that I have tried to analyze and the only answer that seems suitable is this guess.

There are often hecklers that behave in standard form. These that I classify as shamans might be just hecklers. Hecklers are a constant irritant that can be handled best only by ignoring them. I live in the mountains and often go hiking in the summer and have learned to ignore the gnats in much the same way.

I am not that very familiar with Dawkins’ attitudes but I do often run into anti-theists who really only hurt their cause because they behave in as irrational a manner as those religious ideologues they berate.

Yes, you are correct that my negative views on educational systems in America are not shared by many. But this is the cross that a Critical Thinker must learn to bear.

Many people think that self-learning skills are something that they were born with or can pick up via social osmosis but I accept such views as another cross that I must bear.

[Thunderbird]

What it is to me is a sense of discovery driven by curiosity. I was having dream this morning that I had a large and beautiful alligator in the swimming pool as a pet. My thought was why do I have this alligator as a pet when it could kill me. So I decided to get rid of it and shuddered at my stupidity in trusting it as a companion in the first place. It has no interest in developing a relationship with me, its nature is merely to eat and to protect its self.
When I began wake up I started to imagine the evolution of curiosity on in life, I could see it develop in mammals as a survival mechanism, and how we keep pets that are natural explores. Then as I woke I could then see it in degrees in my fellow man. I have always been astounded by the lack of intellectual curiosity in people that have out dated ideals that are based only in fear of the unknown.

I am happy to report that I do understand that the symbolic meaning of the “alligator in my swimming pool.” As I sipped my morning coffee I realized the real alligator in the swimming pool has gone back to Alaska. I feel much safer now.

[coberst]

Originally Posted by Thunderbird

I am happy to report that I do understand that the symbolic meaning of the “alligator in my swimming pool.” As I sipped my morning coffee I realized the real alligator in the swimming pool has gone back to Alaska. I feel much safer now.

Well Sarah is perhaps the best dressed alligator in Alaska. I suspect she and Ted are the only alligators in Alaska.

[Eclogite]

Originally Posted by coberst

Yes, you are correct that my negative views on educational systems in America are not shared by many. But this is the cross that a Critical Thinker must learn to bear.
Many people think that self-learning skills are something that they were born with or can pick up via social osmosis but I accept such views as another cross that I must bear.

These crosses; as an observer there is a hint of self indulgence about them. Perhaps I am mistaken. (It happened once before in 1977.) You don't seem to be entertaining the possibility that you may be mistaken. If other critical thinkers can reach opinions that are the opposite of yours, does it automatically follow that they are wrong and you are right. Do you consider it possible that your view is mistaken? You state your position very clearly and imply (not state, so it may be my misinterpretation) that your view is the correct one because you have arrived at it by critical thinking and self learning, while those who hold opposing views are following indoctrinated thought processes and opinions. This is probably an artifact of your posting style rather than an actual intent. But I would appreciate it if you could clarify your position on this issue?

[coberst]

Originally Posted by Eclogite

These crosses; as an observer there is a hint of self indulgence about them. Perhaps I am mistaken. (It happened once before in 1977.) You don't seem to be entertaining the possibility that you may be mistaken. If other critical thinkers can reach opinions that are the opposite of yours, does it automatically follow that they are wrong and you are right. Do you consider it possible that your view is mistaken? You state your position very clearly and imply (not state, so it may be my misinterpretation) that your view is the correct one because you have arrived at it by critical thinking and self learning, while those who hold opposing views are following indoctrinated thought processes and opinions. This is probably an artifact of your posting style rather than an actual intent. But I would appreciate it if you could clarify your position on this issue?

I heed the words filling the books of many Critical Thinkers. In fact, many ideas that I hold dear are the words of these great thinkers.

It is my opinion that learning is best done at the knee of the best thinkers that history has to offer us.

We can see only what we are prepared to see and by standing on the shoulders of these giants one can see further and faster than any other means I have heard of. The goal of every word I post is to convince readers to go to the books of these giants and thus to become self-actualizing self-learners.

[Eclogite]

Thank you for your detailed answer, but it does not address the question I asked. May I repeat it? I shall try to be cleare.r. Do you agree that you may well be mistaken that a) the US educational system is as deficient as you think it is; and b) that the ability to self learn is not inherent in people?

[coberst]

Originally Posted by Eclogite

Thank you for your detailed answer, but it does not address the question I asked. May I repeat it? I shall try to be cleare.r. Do you agree that you may well be mistaken that a) the US educational system is as deficient as you think it is; and b) that the ability to self learn is not inherent in people?

a)It is possible b)Yes, people can learn but anything sophisticated must be worked for.

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

a) the US educational system is as deficient as you think it is; and b) that the ability to self learn is not inherent in people?

The educational system here is still very much based on the old system of memorize and rehash. A flawed system where the student simply spits out results based almost exclusively on memorizing and repeating what he/she has been fed which is based largely on the instructors creed of "because that's how it is in the textbook and answer key", rather than the instructor feeding into the equation the mechanics and reasons (how and why) of the problem...IMHO a highly deficient manor of developing "freethinking" individuals capable of properly rationalizing a problem outside of the parameters learned via this technique.