The Main Barriers to Critical Thinking

Karakorum

Well-known member
Regarding biases we don't observe in anyone again systemic causation is our best shot. We can sometimes figure out something must exist like dark matter or dark energy or black holes because something is missing, not because we have observed it. Now, I don't know if any of those three things actually exist.

Scientists keep going back and forth with all of them and pointing out problems if they do exist, so maybe they don't exist but SOMETHING does some of the things that dark matter, dark energy and black holes are supposed to do, even if those three things don't actually exist.

So, for example economics used to have the idea that people are rational actors. People observed human beings and found that we don't conform to models that are us as unbiased pure rational actors. So psychologists looked at people and saw the biases and behavior that has created behavioural economics.

The book Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman details this as do many, many others.

So, we can find biases that are difficult to observe because biases exert influence. The influence, like the gravity of a black hold or the expansion of some things and the tendency to stay together of other things can show that something, or maybe several things seems to do some of the things that dark matter and energy are supposed to do.

So, if biases are influential they leave a trail of breadcrumbs to follow and if they exert no influence then they might be inconsequential and leave no trail.
That is a good point. Perhaps as we build better and better computers they might point us in the correct direction. What I mean is that data analysis programs will start to show some correlations between pieces of data that we have previously never imagined to have any connection.
 

Pseudonym

Well-known member
I have written on critical thinking
This is a positive friendly critique. Critical thinking is asking questions and more to the point learning how to ask pertinent questions. Is the direction of your post/thread for cult recovery? Daily life? Education? Philosophy? Polite conversation? How and why is critical thinking germane to say cult recovery for example?

Which scientology cult specifics can you cite as real life examples using critical thinking questioning hubbard's indoctrinating methodologies? The reason I ask is an applicable demonstration can go a lot further rather than several paragraphs regurgitating what others have written as well as encouraging others to join in a conversation.

Your posts are incredibly verbose. It's like reading a warranty manual for a new washing machine. Dry and sterile. There's no depth, no human touch and feelings. Just think a certain way and all is well. People are more than different modes of thinking and fallacies. Ask people questions instead being the Answer Guy. If you are feeding answers then you're not encouraging critical thinking and questioning morality and examining emotionally the impact of having been in a cult. Something to think about, pun intended.
 

Mockingbird

Well-known member
This is a positive friendly critique. Critical thinking is asking questions and more to the point learning how to ask pertinent questions. Is the direction of your post/thread for cult recovery? Daily life? Education? Philosophy? Polite conversation? How and why is critical thinking germane to say cult recovery for example?

Which scientology cult specifics can you cite as real life examples using critical thinking questioning hubbard's indoctrinating methodologies? The reason I ask is an applicable demonstration can go a lot further rather than several paragraphs regurgitating what others have written as well as encouraging others to join in a conversation.

Your posts are incredibly verbose. It's like reading a warranty manual for a new washing machine. Dry and sterile. There's no depth, no human touch and feelings. Just think a certain way and all is well. People are more than different modes of thinking and fallacies. Ask people questions instead being the Answer Guy. If you are feeding answers then you're not encouraging critical thinking and questioning morality and examining emotionally the impact of having been in a cult. Something to think about, pun intended.
Critical thinking is important to cult recovery because cult indoctrination routinely constricts critical and independent thinking and the capacity atrophies in cult members.

Additionally, if critical thinking was applied well to the initial stages of indoctrination when adults are recruited many people would escape the cult in the early stages.

Many people who have left cults have remarked that critical thinking skills would have kept them out of the cult and gaining them is a way to try to spot the next cult coming.

This post overall is a sort of response to two things. People ask why no one teaches critical thinking if it is so valuable and they also reject it as a subject when it is introduced because they know they are good critical thinkers already, and so it remains everybody else's problem.

The problem with teaching it is first finding someone who understands and teaches it well, then finding someone who understands that they can benefit from learning it themselves. Then they have to give it a lot of time and effort.

If you want to know how critical thinking skills can help people to avoid cults I have written a few long posts on that already.

Here is one.


Critical thinking can also help you to spot bad thinking in yourself and others in general.

Here is a post on that.

 

Pseudonym

Well-known member
Critical thinking is important to cult recovery because cult indoctrination routinely constricts critical and independent thinking and the capacity atrophies in cult members.

Additionally, if critical thinking was applied well to the initial stages of indoctrination when adults are recruited many people would escape the cult in the early stages.

Many people who have left cults have remarked that critical thinking skills would have kept them out of the cult and gaining them is a way to try to spot the next cult coming.

This post overall is a sort of response to two things. People ask why no one teaches critical thinking if it is so valuable and they also reject it as a subject when it is introduced because they know they are good critical thinkers already, and so it remains everybody else's problem.

The problem with teaching it is first finding someone who understands and teaches it well, then finding someone who understands that they can benefit from learning it themselves. Then they have to give it a lot of time and effort.

If you want to know how critical thinking skills can help people to avoid cults I have written a few long posts on that already.

Here is one.


Critical thinking can also help you to spot bad thinking in yourself and others in general.

Here is a post on that.

You didn't answer any of my questions. Why is that? Saying critical thinking is important doesn't do much if you don't briefly explain the concept for those people that can benefit from using it. It's like saying you attach electronic components to a motherboard using a soldering iron. How do you use a soldering iron? Silence. Get my point?

For the sake of conversation and concise brevity here's a definition.

Definition of critical thinking | Dictionary.com
Critical thinking; noun: disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence: The questions are intended to develop your critical thinking.

Would you agree the above definition is what you're trying to explain? Do you think critical thinking is all there is to cult recovery?
 

Mockingbird

Well-known member
You didn't answer any of my questions. Why is that? Saying critical thinking is important doesn't do much if you don't briefly explain the concept for those people that can benefit from using it. It's like saying you attach electronic components to a motherboard using a soldering iron. How do you use a soldering iron? Silence. Get my point?

For the sake of conversation and concise brevity here's a definition.

Definition of critical thinking | Dictionary.com
Critical thinking; noun: disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence: The questions are intended to develop your critical thinking.

Would you agree the above definition is what you're trying to explain? Do you think critical thinking is all there is to cult recovery?
Hmm. Well, we may simply see things differently, such is life.
 

Mockingbird

Well-known member
Wehttp://mbnest.blogspot.com/2018/05/cornerstones-of-critical-thinking-1-8.html
Why don't you answer my questions? The basic premise of critical thinking is posing questions which I notice you avoid answering.
We have a difference of opinion on several issues including whether or not I have answered any of your questions, what can you do ?
 

Pseudonym

Well-known member
Wehttp://mbnest.blogspot.com/2018/05/cornerstones-of-critical-thinking-1-8.html

We have a difference of opinion on several issues including whether or not I have answered any of your questions, what can you do ?
What can I do? Come to the conclusion you don't understand the subject matter you're posting about because if you did you'd answer my questions and we'd have an interesting discussion too. What if a scientologist having doubts about scientology came here asking you in good faith about critical thinking? Would you pull the same avoidance schlock with that person you're pulling on me? If you're unwilling to answer peoples questions about cult recovery simply minus the linked 10,000 word blog posts you expect people to read then you might want to try a different subject.
 
Last edited:

Mockingbird

Well-known member
What can I do? Come to the conclusion you don't understand the subject matter you're posting about because if you did you'd answer my questions and we'd have an interesting discussion too. What if a scientologist having doubts about scientology came here asking you in good faith about critical thinking? Would you pull the same avoidance schlock with that person you're pulling on me? If you're unwilling to answer peoples questions about cult recovery simply minus the linked 10,000 word blog posts you expect people to read then you might want to try a different subject.
Na, you see I have gone a long way down this road.

If you post an article or book and someone insists that you speak to them the way they want about the issues they want or you are wrong, ignorant, etc. the best thing to do is let them go.

The experience of a lot of people who came before me and dealt with criticism and demands has served me well.

Stephen King dealt with this a lot. I am not claiming to be his peer in terms of writing in any way. I am saying that he has showed that if you write something and the audience demands the right to insult you, insult your work and then to set the rules for how they behave and the rules for how you engage with them don't waste your time.

Let's assume that I consider your earlier comments to contain both an insult and a demand that they not be considered insulting, and further a demand that I engage you to your satisfaction by rules you define or you will add further insults, which you already have.

if someone CHOOSES to not engage with you in the way you want it doesn't prove they are ignorant or don't understand critical thinking or anything else.

See, just as you can convince yourself of something and say it so too can someone else disagree.

You are free to present insults, demands and conditions and people are free to reject them.

If you can write better posts on critical thinking knock yourself out, show me how it is done. If you don't like my posts you are under no obligation to read them.

If I am not your muse feel free to find another.

“When I am Weaker Than You, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am Stronger than you, I take away your Freedom Because that is according to my principles.”

― Frank Herbert
 
Last edited:

Riddick

I clap to no man
What got you involved in Dianetics and or scientology? I believe you said you were a staff member.
 

Mockingbird

Well-known member
What got you involved in Dianetics and or scientology? I believe you said you were a staff member.
I have written a lot about my past already.

Here is a post on it. Most of the people from the original ESMB already know the whole story.

 

Mockingbird

Well-known member
Here is a video from critical thinking expert Richard Paul.

I saw this video and realized it contained the answer to WHY and HOW Scientology fails as a science and why Scientologists, no matter how much Scientology they learn or memorize utterly fail to understand what it would take for Scientology to be a science or true or what it would take to evaluate Scientology as a legitimate subject and why it just doesn't for in any rational reality based framework and never will.

If I had known, understood and applied the information in this one video consistently, competently and without fail to Scientology when I encountered it, I would have realized Scientology ticks ALL the boxes for a fraud, closed system, pseudoscience, and non-reality based system. If I got that I would have realized it is as genuine as leprechauns, unicorns, dragons and smurfs as portrayed in mythology. In other words it isn't valid at all.

I highly recommended this to any Scientologist, ex Scientologist, Scientology watcher and student of critical thinking. It is simply superb.

I also wrote a blog post on the video.


And a blog post on critical thinking in general.

Cornerstones of Critical Thinking


Prove: Why Intellectual Standards ? Why Teach For Them ?


From CriticalThinkingOrg published on April 23, 2015


 

Pseudonym

Well-known member
Na, you see I have gone a long way down this road.

If you post an article or book and someone insists that you speak to them the way they want about the issues they want or you are wrong, ignorant, etc. the best thing to do is let them go.

The experience of a lot of people who came before me and dealt with criticism and demands has served me well.

Stephen King dealt with this a lot. I am not claiming to be his peer in terms of writing in any way. I am saying that he has showed that if you write something and the audience demands the right to insult you, insult your work and then to set the rules for how they behave and the rules for how you engage with them don't waste your time.

Let's assume that I consider your earlier comments to contain both an insult and a demand that they not be considered insulting, and further a demand that I engage you to your satisfaction by rules you define or you will add further insults, which you already have.

if someone CHOOSES to not engage with you in the way you want it doesn't prove they are ignorant or don't understand critical thinking or anything else.

See, just as you can convince yourself of something and say it so too can someone else disagree.

You are free to present insults, demands and conditions and people are free to reject them.

If you can write better posts on critical thinking knock yourself out, show me how it is done. If you don't like my posts you are under no obligation to read them.

If I am not your muse feel free to find another.

“When I am Weaker Than You, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am Stronger than you, I take away your Freedom Because that is according to my principles.”

― Frank Herbert
Your post still doesn't answer any of my previous inquiries and doesn't make much sense anyway.:toodlepip:
 

Karakorum

Well-known member
Maybe I can offer some arbitration. Because I think there is an issue with communication here.

Here are the original questions:
This is a positive friendly critique. Critical thinking is asking questions and more to the point learning how to ask pertinent questions. Is the direction of your post/thread for cult recovery? Daily life? Education? Philosophy? Polite conversation? How and why is critical thinking germane to say cult recovery for example?

Which scientology cult specifics can you cite as real life examples using critical thinking questioning hubbard's indoctrinating methodologies?
And the reply:
Critical thinking is important to cult recovery because cult indoctrination routinely constricts critical and independent thinking and the capacity atrophies in cult members.

Additionally, if critical thinking was applied well to the initial stages of indoctrination when adults are recruited many people would escape the cult in the early stages.

Many people who have left cults have remarked that critical thinking skills would have kept them out of the cult and gaining them is a way to try to spot the next cult coming.

This post overall is a sort of response to two things. People ask why no one teaches critical thinking if it is so valuable and they also reject it as a subject when it is introduced because they know they are good critical thinkers already, and so it remains everybody else's problem.

The problem with teaching it is first finding someone who understands and teaches it well, then finding someone who understands that they can benefit from learning it themselves. Then they have to give it a lot of time and effort.

If you want to know how critical thinking skills can help people to avoid cults I have written a few long posts on that already.

Here is one.


Critical thinking can also help you to spot bad thinking in yourself and others in general.

Here is a post on that.

If I understand the reply properly, the answer to Pseudonym's questions can be summarized as follows:
"Is the direction of your post/thread for cult recovery? Daily life? Education? Philosophy? Polite conversation?"
- Primarily cult recovery and subsequent post-cult life as well as cult-avoidance.

"How and why is critical thinking germane to say cult recovery for example?"
- That is in the blog links.
 
  • For you
Reactions: M&M

Mockingbird

Well-known member
Maybe I can offer some arbitration. Because I think there is an issue with communication here.

Here are the original questions:


And the reply:


If I understand the reply properly, the answer to Pseudonym's questions can be summarized as follows:
"Is the direction of your post/thread for cult recovery? Daily life? Education? Philosophy? Polite conversation?"
- Primarily cult recovery and subsequent post-cult life as well as cult-avoidance.

"How and why is critical thinking germane to say cult recovery for example?"
- That is in the blog links.
In my experience if you let someone insult you and pretend they are not insulting you THEN set the rules of a conversation as "answer my questions as I demand or you don't understand something", you are setting yourself up for a bad time.


Your best move in such a game is to not play. I used to engage Leon at the old ESMB, not to commit a tech degrade of the earlier edition of ESMB, but I would try to discuss things and Leon would require that I try to debate in good faith and avoid using logical fallacies and try to remove them from my arguments if they were pointed out but he insisted on being allowed to use them in his arguments as he claimed to believe in a different system. He would hop from fallacy to fallacy and when they were pointed out just say that people had used ad hominem attacks on him in the past. But that is irrelevant to the current situation.

This is not to pick on Leon but to point out the most obvious example. I found that once you let someone else debate and set aside the standards for them they never adopt them so they get to use fallacies willy nilly. You might as well be talking to a Scientologist and not point out any contradictions or fallacies in Scientology at that point.

Dealing with someone who is justified in their own mind in using fallacies such as ad hominem attacks and then you yourself being limited from using them in turn is having a battle of wits with you following rules and the other person getting a "I know I am better than you, so insulting you and ignoring my failure to argue in good faith is okay" exception for the other person. It's an exercise in masochism and gets you into an intellectual gutter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M&M

Pseudonym

Well-known member
In my experience if you let someone insult you and pretend they are not insulting you THEN set the rules of a conversation as "answer my questions as I demand or you don't understand something", you are setting yourself up for a bad time.


Your best move in such a game is to not play. I used to engage Leon at the old ESMB, not to commit a tech degrade of the earlier edition of ESMB, but I would try to discuss things and Leon would require that I try to debate in good faith and avoid using logical fallacies and try to remove them from my arguments if they were pointed out but he insisted on being allowed to use them in his arguments as he claimed to believe in a different system. He would hop from fallacy to fallacy and when they were pointed out just say that people had used ad hominem attacks on him in the past. But that is irrelevant to the current situation.

This is not to pick on Leon but to point out the most obvious example. I found that once you let someone else debate and set aside the standards for them they never adopt them so they get to use fallacies willy nilly. You might as well be talking to a Scientologist and not point out any contradictions or fallacies in Scientology at that point.

Dealing with someone who is justified in their own mind in using fallacies such as ad hominem attacks and then you yourself being limited from using them in turn is having a battle of wits with you following rules and the other person getting a "I know I am better than you, so insulting you and ignoring my failure to argue in good faith is okay" exception for the other person. It's an exercise in masochism and gets you into an intellectual gutter.
You're barking up the wrong tree. Instead of talking with me you talk about me immediately after I leave the thread with a completely invented psychological profile which is strange since you don't know me and I doubt blogging equates to a degree in psychology. I have addressed my posts at your posts, not at you personally however you don't seem capable of that instead concocting a peculiar post about abnormal illogical cult thinking aimed at me. Get a grip, that's some bombastic weirdness you're posting over nothing but a critique and a few harmless topic questions.
 
Last edited:
Top