I tried to discuss the notion that PERHAPS critical thinking requires one to progress to points of decision based on listing all elements that the universe will allow, then in making said decision, realizing that it will be Boolean in nature. A decision either "is or isn't".
This can be said as "One must decide Yes Or No" on that question.
What is a question? For this discussion, let us say that it is a matter that the UNIVERSE allows and that we must decide between ONLY THE ANSWERS THAT THE UNIVERSE allows.
One can use a million questions, but let's use the one already used by me in the "Miracle" thread.
"Is the world better off, more specifically, is Iraq better off without Saddam in charge of its government?"
Is this a legal question? Well, it might be. How many answers does the Universe allow? Yes, No, Maybe. Are there others that I am missing?
Linear thought. What is it? Well, one makes a list of all the "Pro and Con" ideas and consequences of those ideas. At least that is what I was taught. How can one "decide" if one doesn't examine the issues that will result from the "decision".
So, On the minus side of "removing" saddam.
1 - It will require war and both innocent and guilty people will be killed.
2 - It will weaken the rule of international law as set up by the UN as it is currently constituted.
3 - It will give terrorists a cause, and the Iraqi people will suffer. As will those charged with fighting the war.
4 - The world already views the US as an imperial power. This will make it worse.
5 - And one goes on for a period of time, making a list of these negatives.
On the plus side of removing Saddam...
1 - He has killed about 1.3 million of his own people since he came to power. That is what? About 50 to 60 thousand per year? Verify this. It seems right. So if the war kills 120,000 people, we are at a net gain in two years without him in charge.
2 - Saudi Arabia is the chief sponsor of terror. If we remove Saddam, right next door, they may crack down on the Wahabe movement.
3 - The Iraqi people will have at least a chance of forming their own government.
4 - It buys a buffer to give the Islamofacists time to hang themselves because their true brutality isn't recognized yet. When people see what they do -- what they are really like, some will reconsider supporting terror.
And on down the list. Then comes that terrible moment when we must "decide" or "Not Decide".
If one decides "maybe" then they really have avoided the decision. The logic is that the purpose is to Decide. Not put it off to await the outcome. This is what almost every person does. "Maybe". This is safe and allows one to take all sides forever. A miracle. "We are better off without saddam, but the cost was too great". So a definite "maybe".
If one decides "yes or no" then they are in accord with what the Universe gave us. Saddam "was" removed. In another universe, maybe he "Was Not" removed. Those are the only two options that are real. "Maybe" is an opionion about history, that isn't really the point of the Miracle thread nor of this one.
Is critical thought required in the world? If one remains on "maybe" on all issues, are they ever going to make a "decision"? I'll say that they never do, and never will. It is too difficult. After all is said and done, "Deciding" is the end result of critical thought. All that effort leading up to the decision is for naught if one avoids the final act.
Decide. Yes or No. Then one can at least say that they attempted to think it through.
If one arrives at "No" on the question posed, they must now ask another question. I know what it is, but will leave it to this debate.
If one arrives at "Yes" on the question posed, they must now ask many questions. I only know a few, but will leave it to this debate.
If one arrives at "maybe" then they really don't have a right to express an opionion. Too bad that so many do.
One small caveat ...
One has to "Decide" before the event. Deciding "After" the fact is just taking a side. "Taking a side on history" is not an action of "decision brought on by critical thinking."
Hindsight makes everyone a chittering chimp.
Deciding makes us rational beings.
Another old saying I just made up.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI'm unclear what you want to debate here. Could you clarify? Ask a question that I can take a position on.
I tried to discuss the notion that PERHAPS critical thinking requires one to progress to points of decision based on listing all elements that the universe will allow, then in making said decision, realizing that it will be Boolean in nature. A decision either "is or isn't".
This can be said as "One must decide Yes Or No" on that question.
Wh ...[text shortened]... "maybe" then they really don't have a right to express an opionion. Too bad that so many do.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungNo.
I'm unclear what you want to debate here. Could you clarify? Ask a question that I can take a position on.
The fact that you want to take a position tells me you will never be able to respond here. Nor should you. This thread is about 'critical thinking'.
I don't really know how to clarify the choice between what the universe offers in each and every "choice" we must make. YES, NO, MAYBE
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI don't really know how to clarify the choice between what the universe offers in each and every "choice" we must make. YES, NO, MAYBE
No.
The fact that you want to take a position tells me you will never be able to respond here. Nor should you. This thread is about 'critical thinking'.
I don't really know how to clarify the choice between what the universe ...[text shortened]... s in each and every "choice" we must make. [b]YES, NO, MAYBE[/b]
It sounds like you're making a statement that these three choices are the only choices we can make for any situation or question. This is wrong. For example:
Q: What is the color in the visible spectrum with the shortest wavelength?
A: Violet
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYou really can't divide the objective from the subjective? Sorry. As I said, you will probably not want to participate in this thread. Sorry.
[b]I don't really know how to clarify the choice between what the universe offers in each and every "choice" we must make. YES, NO, MAYBE
It sounds like you're making a statement that these three choices are the only choic ...[text shortened]... he visible spectrum with the shortest wavelength?
A: Violet[/i][/b]
To complete a thought... Didn't you notice that we are dealing with a "very particular question" in this thread? If you wish to add a debate about objective determinism, do it in another thread. Use the question offered. Please.
To complete a thought... Didn't you notice that we are dealing with a "very particular question" in this thread? If you wish to add a debate about objective determinism, do it in another thread. Use the question offered. Please.[/b]Didn't you notice that we are dealing with a "very particular question" in this thread?
Nope. I asked you to clarify, and you said no. These are the questions in your initial post:
What is a question?
Is the world better off, more specifically, is Iraq better off without Saddam in charge of its government?
Is this a legal question?
How many answers does the Universe allow? Yes, No, Maybe. Are there others that I am missing?
Linear thought. What is it?
Is critical thought required in the world?
If one remains on "maybe" on all issues, are they ever going to make a "decision"?
You also made a lot of statements that poorly attempted to communicate something.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungSorry. Complex questions require a certain ambiguity. None of our minds handle information in the same way. It is a problem the world over.
[b]Didn't you notice that we are dealing with a "very particular question" in this thread?
Nope. I asked you to clarify, and you said no. These are the questions in your initial post:
What is a question?
Is the world better off, more specifically, is Iraq better off without Saddam in charge of its government?
Is this a legal questio ...[text shortened]... sion"?
You also made a lot of statements that poorly attempted to communicate something.[/b]
If I apologize for being stupid, will that make it better?
I just had a Dorrie moment.
Maybe a "Chess" site isn't the best place to discuss "linear thought". By definition, good chess players are good at the opposite kind of thought and if they do think in straight lines, usually have a rating of about 450.
Oh well. I probably have screwed up again. Sigh.
<edit> What is a Dorrie moment?
See Woody Allen's "Stardust Memories"
Sandy: Why is there so much human suffering?
Aliens: This is unanswerable.
Sandy: Is there a God?
Aliens: These are the wrong questions!
Sandy: Look, here's my point. If nothing lasts, why am I bothering to make films or do anything for that matter?
Aliens: We enjoy your films! Particularly the early, funny ones.
Sandy: But the human condition is so discouraging!
Aliens: There are some nice moments, too.