Thinking 101 - tell me what you think.
Posted on: July 13, 2008 - 2:45pm
Offline
Thinking 101 - tell me what you think.
Hey guys,
I have been working on a piece of persuasive speaking that I have tried out on a few fundies with pretty good success. I find that many people I tell this to at least stop to take a look at their irrational beliefs. So I decided to make a youtube video to post it on the web. You can find it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAlJ16nxCX4
Please note that this video is not a deep philosophical treatise, rather it is an attempt to get your average schmo to take a look at how they think about thinking, and to provide a little education and inspiration about the virtues of skeptical reasoning. Please tell me what you think!
- Login to post comments
OK well that didn't work. Here's the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAlJ16nxCX4
Good video. 5 starred and faved. I even left a comment.
Woot! thanks!
Very xlint and cool intro/outro song picks ..... Saving this in my favorites folder and e-mailing out. Keep us posted if you make any more vids. Thanks
[ .... not that it matters, but I thought you were a smart girl named Susan
]
Atheism Books.
Me likes. =^_^=
5 stars, favorited, commented, and subscribed.
A 36 second intro is a little long, but other than that here's my constructive critique.
Your Rush Limbaugh voice sounds like Keith Olberman's impression of Bill O'Reilly.
There are times when use of each method outlined is warranted, and I think that a lot of people have problems deciding when to use what more than what each method is.
Cynicism: Certainly useful for tuning out known bad sources of information where better information is known to be abundant from other sources, though consistent cynicism will lead to fallacier's fallacy (a source uses bad reasoning, therefore a bad conclusion is assumed regardless of the actual truth).
Credulity: Also useful in cases where it isn't terribly important how accurate the information given is. Testimonial statements given by civilian witnesses in court is often admitted without complaint, as long as the credibility of the witness in not in question - which would be the case if the testimony given by a professional witness conflicted with it.
Skepticism: The simile with being learning addicts doesn't necessarily lead to knowledge. For example, I can go through great lengths to learn that monkeys are descended from Martian ground moles and are the last surviving members of that planet and get my high from that mythology. However, this does not make it knowledge, where knowledge philosophically implies tested truth. It could be knowledge in an anthropological sense if there are people who actually believe such things.
I believe it's important to lead into a subject with the most accurate information possible so as to prevent confusion, since anytime you have to reiterate a point it leads to "but didn't you say such and such at a previous time?" Most people have a hard enough time figuring out what to eat for lunch, let alone understanding those of us who spend a lot of our time thinking deep thoughts.
All that aside, very good!
Thanks for the feedback! Obviously the video is not intended as a well thought out philosophical treetes, but rather a promotion of skeptical thinking for the un-initiated.
Yep. Good stuff, Susac.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism