My wife took a Critical Thinking course at college. Changed her life, and as a result, my life and our kids'. Blows me away that only 90 people per year at that institution took that course. Meanwhile, back in the public school system, we have examiners mistaking their own opinions as fact. [1]
Calling bullshit
91–100 of 287 posts
Re: Calling bullshit
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now politicians claim to have never done things they are on film doing, and people believe them. "I never had sexual relations with that woman". "Read my lips: there will be no more taxes". "It depends on what the definition of is is". "I will close down Guantanamo Bay".
>"I never had sexual relations with that woman". And he was impeached for that, which is exactly the point.
No that is not the point. The point is that politicians lie and always have lied also historically.
Re: Calling bullshit
#93From the "patron saint of reason and common sense" I can recommend Carl Sagan's "Baloney Detection Kit" from superb The Demon-Haunted World : https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-k...
The whole book is essential reading. Sagan mostly picks easy targets (supernatural claims), but the process is enlightening. For example he lays out the general uselessness of witness testimony and memory, which has extremely broad implications.
Re: Calling bullshit
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"I never had sexual relations with that woman". And he was impeached for that, which is exactly the point.
No that is not the point. The point is that politicians lie and always have lied also historically.
Yes they always lied, but they used to be punished if they were caught. The fact that it's easier to catch them now shouldn't change that.
Re: Calling bullshit
#95Admirable, but misguided. Fact-based argument has never been effective. The Greeks knew this. We keep forgetting it at our own peril. We know how to think critically; most of us simply choose not to. The audience who would see this kind of course/site are likely people who pretty much already have their head screwed on the right way. It would be much better to train them in effective rhetoric so they can counter the…
I think you're close, but still misguided. The issue isn't so much critical thinking (though that is a part of it) but a mismatch in baseline assumptions. Right makes might versus Might makes right, belief in the golden rule (duoaywhtduy or he who has the gold, makes the rules), the glass is half empty versus half full, etc. Unless you share the answers to these assumptions, you can't have a common dialogue.
I mean, you can argue facts all day long but if someone believes that having a bigger gun makes them right -- what's the point? You really think Kim Jong-un is going to listen to reason when he has nukes?
Re: Calling bullshit
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
No that is not the point. The point is that politicians lie and always have lied also historically.
Yes they always lied, but they used to be punished if they were caught. The fact that it's easier to catch them now shouldn't change that.
No they didn't use to get punished anymore than they do today and I would urge you to find any base for that claim.
Nothing's changed.
Re: Calling bullshit
#97Yes. Yes. Yes. This is exactly what public education systems should be teaching. I'd almost say that next to basic literacy and mathematics, this is the most valuable subject to teach. It lays the groundwork for so much else.
Bullshit.
Re: Calling bullshit
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "post-truth" doesn't mean people have decided to disregard truth, it means that factual truth is no longer a relevant factor in in the effectiveness of political arguments for many people. It mostly means: "Some people can't accept Trump got elected, so when e.g. criticism of him being sexist/rapist etc because of some comments back in the day is discarded, they call it a post-truth world. At the same time, it's no…
Well said. I would add that journalistic ethics have reached a new low. Astoundingly new low. On the other hand, I was not alive in the 1890s during the era of "yellow journalism" where everyone with a printing press was turning out nothing but bullshit on an hourly basis and hawking it to unsuspecting rubes. Turns out there is good money in just making up crap and printing it.
I remain unconvinced that journalism has reached a new low, rather than our ability to detect its shoddiness has reached a new high.
The only two things I could identify as uniquely a problem today that weren't problems in the past are A: the money is coming out of journalism faster than it can adapt to it and B: the incredibly immediate pressures to be first and get the most clicks. The latter being a thing that has always been present to some degree, since journalists have always made money by attracting eyeballs in one form or another, but the immediacy of the pressure today I'd say is a quantitative change that becomes a qualitative change by sheer size.
But I'm still unconvinced this is a new low, rather than one that we're detecting. Journalism has some nasty stuff in its history. It certainly hasn't reached a new low if you step outside of the United States. The press still hasn't quite reached Pravda lows, but I will conceded it is currently engaged in a full burn towards it.
Re: Calling bullshit
#99The idiots of the world fight ferociously to spread their "100 percent correct" views, while the smart (HackerNews) remain relatively silent in fear against the masses of idiots flooding all mediums. Carl Bergstrom and Jevin West had the courage to scream loudly back, speaking smarts to stupid. Better marketing for good ideas! Bravo!
Marketing opinion. This page: http://callingbullshit.org/case_studies.html should be made homepage content, for it is their most compelling and clear value statement and takes little space. It took me too long to find naturally, and I didn't feel fulfilled on the bullshit pitch till I did. If you don't want to move it, perhaps call them examples instead of case studies, if you want to reach a general audience.
Serendipity. These professors made a course/website "bullshit" the title. Which I think's funny because I just uploaded a youtube video in a tophat/leopard print about how smart people should be more aggressive spreading their ideas.
Re: Calling bullshit
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
> >Now politicians claim to have never done things they are on film doing, and people believe them. > "I never had sexual relations with that woman". Wait, there's a sex tape of Bill Clinton? In all seriousness, quotes are all good, but you would benefit from saying what it is you hope to achieve by them.
I think the point is that facts (whether on TV or not) didn't use to matter more than they do today.
So you are claiming that no one cared about the Clinton scandal in the 90s?
Because no one sure didn't seem to care about the numerous Trump ones.