|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
“Don’t let your babies grow up to be cowboys.” Willie Nelson
I imagine myself as a member of a small group of riders trying desperately to turn the stampeding herd before that herd reaches the cliffs. The herd is humanity. My fellow riders are the few who, like me, think they have been enlightened and wish to stop an impending catastrophe. The skeptical reader is, of course, correct that the riders may be idiots and that the herd is just seeking better pastures. The consoling thought for the riders is that if they, the riders, are wrong it is of little consequence because they are so few; while the herd, if wrong, will probably destroy them self. The riders, like me, think that there is a fundamental issue, that if resolved, will reposition the herd into a more perceptive and reasonable mode and thus the herd will live happily ever after. The fundamental issue that concerns the riders is that the herd makes very poor decisions. For this reason the riders think that if the herd became Critical Thinkers and self-learners matters would improve. See “Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking” http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Educ/EducHare.htm A rider from a past generation spoke about these matters in: The Decline of Western Democracy by Walter Lippmann “There has developed in this century a functional derangement of the relationship between the mass of the people and the government. The people have acquired power which they are incapable of exercising and the governments they elect have lost powers which they must recover if they are to govern …” http://www.theatlantic.com/ideastour...-excerpt.mhtml For copyright reasons, the full text of this article is not available on The Atlantic's site. However, another site provides some interesting Lippmann insights. http://www.memorablequotations.com/lippmann.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
Character is an important component for an ideal intellectual. I would say that an ideal intellectual would have the same kind of character as does an ideal journalist.
One significant advantage engineering, physics and much of the natural sciences has is that they speak in mathematical terms. The individuals often speak in formulas or mathematical verbiage that is clear and concise and understandable by all the members. The use of every day words like habit can be confusing because of a lack of clarity. One might also think of attitude as a proper way to describe what I call habit. What is character? Character is the network of habits that permeate all the intentional acts of an individual. I am not using the word habit in the way we often do, as a technical ability existing apart from our wishes. These habits are an intimate and fundamental part of our selves. They are representations of our will. They rule our will, working in a coordinated way they dominate our way of acting. These habits are the results of repeated, intelligently controlled, actions. Habits also control the formation of ideas as well as physical actions. We cannot perform a correct action or a correct idea without having already formed correct habits. “Reason pure of all influence from prior habit is a fiction.” “The medium of habit filters all material that reaches our perception and thought.” “Immediate, seemingly instinctive, feeling of the direction and end of various lines of behavior is in reality the feeling of habits working below direct consciousness.” “Habit means special sensitiveness or accessibility to certain classes of stimuli, standing predilections and aversions, rather than bare recurrence of specific acts. It means will.” Because each job requires a different type of character a journalist would make a lousy military officer and vice versa. What might be the ideal character traits of these two professions? It seems that the military officer should be smart, well trained, obedient and brave. The journalist should be smart, well trained, critical and intellectually honest. The journalist must have well-developed intellectual character traits and be skillful in critical thinking. The military officer should be trained to act according to a distinct program in critical circumstances. The role of the journalist in wartime has evolved dramatically in the last 50 years. During WWII the journalist acted as cheerleader and propagandist. During the Vietnam War the journalist often played the role of critical analyst. While one can see some positive reasons for the cheerleader and propagandist I will assume that overall this is not a proper role for the journalist in a democracy. The ideal journalist must always be a critical analyst and communicate honestly to the reader the results of her investigation. Since most people unconsciously seek opinion fortification rather than truth they become very agitated when they find news which does not fortify their opinion. Thus, most people have low opinions of journalists. Nevertheless, it is no doubt the ideal journalist who presents the facts fairly, accurately and in a balanced manner. The ability ‘to connect the dots’ in each situation is of primary importance for the ideal journalist. Knowledge is important but understanding and critical thinking is more important. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
__________________
He who angers you conquers you. ~Elizabeth Kenny |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
__________________
He who angers you conquers you. ~Elizabeth Kenny |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
FFR Player
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
shock me shock me
|
Guys. Contribution is welcome in CT. If you have nothing to contribute, back off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Banned
|
Contributions can easily be one sentence long. They said something that hadn't been said in the thread before, there is no reason why their comments shouldn't be welcome. They're not trolling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
sunshine and rainbows
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 1,987
|
I don't think that you want is possible. I'll try to explain it, but I'm not doing a good job of it. The heard as you call it, will never be able to live happily ever after, even if everyone were to be critical thinkers. Firstly, people aren't always good. Critical thinkers can critically think themselves into a way of power which helps them, while not helping others. They can critically think that since they don't have to live the pathetic existence that they're putting on someone else, they shouldn't have to worry about anyone else than themselves and their friends.
As well, we are all human still, and a very essence of humanity is to follow other people. To talk to others, want their acceptance, their approval, their love. People will change their views to fit what other people think so that they aren't alone, abandoned. Why do mobs happen? Because people get caught up in a moment, a moment where everyone is almost magically feeling that same surge, that hugeness of being a part of something emotional, and which may be shared with thousands of other people. To take away this part of humanity would leave us as something less than human. Critical thinking doesn't have to take this away, but I don't think making everyone a critical thinker will amazingly solve the world's problems either. Also, what on earth is trolling? And also, I agree with stretch (whoa). The first 3 replies follow the EXACT example of what a poor CT reply is. Last edited by Cavernio; 09-22-2006 at 08:02 PM.. Reason: more to say |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
My personal definition fits most closly to this one: 2. trolling Trolling is the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet, generally on message boards. When done in a moderated internet community, this can result in banning. When done to uptight people such as fundies, this can result in hilarity. Not posting a reply with any thought put into it whatsoever = trolling, in my books. They didn't respond to a damn thing that coberst said, other than basically saying "Go away." No reasons as to what specifically they disagree with, no explainations as to their own opinion of him being wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
The media is faulty by it's very nature. It is not possible to give a story without some sort of spin on it as told by whichever reporter is telling it, even if for no other reason than the fact that journalist decided that whatever subject he/she is reporting on is worth writing about. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
sunshine and rainbows
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 1,987
|
I agree laharl.
And I think the gist of what I was trying to say previously is that to perfect the world in the way that cobherst wants to would necessarily involve taking out a part of human nature which I wouldn't want to see go. (funny that this idea of mine came up again, I had it in another discussion I had in RL not too long ago) |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|