FreThink - Latest Comments

Re: Our world may be a giant hologram

P0oP — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:40:59 -0000

or destroying a country for non-existant weapons.

Re: Anti-Intellectualism Is Destroying America

Matt — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:00:28 -0000

Thank you for writing this, I've been trying to make my friends understand that "elitist" is just another derogatory right-wing word for "intelligent." It really is tragic how, just like highschool, it's uncool to be smart. It's jealousy and stupidity rolled up into one big clusterfuck of dumb. Thank you for this post, I'll be sure to forward this to my friends.
-A fellow elite.

Re: Are we loathsome?

swingtrading3 — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:53:17 -0000

Insightful read. I have stumbled and twittered this for my friends. Others no doubt will like it like I did.

Re: Anti-Intellectualism Is Destroying America

slrman — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:00:31 -0000

The "Dumbing down of America" has been going on for some time. It is lead by the religious reich to whom thinking and intelligence spell doom. The media are eager helpers as anyone reading print media or watching TV can observe.

It's no wonder that countries like China and Japan are assuming leadership positions in technology and science. Goodbye, America. Hello Asia World.

Re: No Intelligence Required

1minion — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:12:08 -0000

No, I've heard the arguments for this mental double-standard before. Dumber people will do everything they're told and smart intelligent people might make the mistake of deliberating before following an order, trying to think it through instead of just reacting. Better to just act according to training without ever wondering if you ought to.

My cousin heard the same stuff about the Armed Forces when he joined up 20 years ago. They didn't want people smart enough to challenge the ideas of higher-ups. Questions can lead to dissension and division and might get in the way of the group working together as a team.

Re: No Intelligence Required

Tom — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:08:04 -0000

This makes me cringe. The police force requires people who can think quickly, on their feet. Smart people can generally do this. Good move New London.

Re: No Intelligence Required

D Ellis — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:57:32 -0000

They have a point in that its long been known by psychologists that people of high IQ tent to find repetitive and boring jobs far more difficult to endure than those of average IQ.

But it also seems rather shortsighted in that it eliminates at the outset people who could be fast-tracked for positions of greater leadership and responsibility.

Re: “Evolution is just a theory”

swingtrading2 — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 04:45:54 -0000

Interesting post. I have made a twitter post about this. Hope others find it as interesting as I did.

Re: Relativists must use relative logic

swingtrading2 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 02:31:44 -0000

Interesting post. I have made a twitter post about this. My friends will enjoy reading it also.

Re: On Thinking

toddistark — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:22:29 -0000

A related thought: perspectivism and black-and-white thinking are mindsets, not character traits, unless you have someone patently incapable of one or the other for some reason. There are situations where it makes more sense to think in black and white terms because it simplifies otherwise complex thinking and leads to fast decisive action. There are also plenty of situations where it makes more sense to step back and reflect on where the lines have been drawn. I think the real wisdom here is knowing when each mindset makes sense.

Re: On Thinking

toddistark — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 14:52:33 -0000

The question of how some people manage to communicate and others do not fascinates me. I agree roughly with the spirit of Lane Wallace's first quote article above that it does come down largely to certain skills and attitudes. Critical thinking is the wrong way to envision this initially however, in my experience. You have to think more in terms of perspective skills first, ways of actively working to understand the opposing viewpoint (which is far from easy and not a natural talent at all). Then you have the resources to engage critical thinking. If you start with critical thinking, all you do is find ways to ignore things you don't already understand or agree with.

If you want to learn, you have to learn skills like asking questions rather than making statements, and listening to the answers rather than preparing your response. In a complex issue, you have to be willing to accumulate some of the neccessary background to understand the opposing reasoning (reasoning is more than logic, it is also underlying conceptual models and tacit knowledge). Then you can understand the opposition and work toward a common solution. It's much easier to just assume that you are right and people who disagree are wrong, so that's what we do most of the time, and there are even entire philosophies based on refusing to engage other perspectives on principle.

Engaging different perspectives is not too far from the basic principle of charity that is part of the philosophical tradition. That's one of the reasons I think it is still useful to study basic philosophy.

Re: Anti-Intellectualism Is Destroying America

landothedead — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:00:19 -0000

How'd that work out btw?

Re: The world’s only immortal animal

john191 — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 01:47:24 -0000

Loved to read your blog. I would like to suggest you that traffic show most people read blogs on Mondays. So it should encourage bloggers to write new write ups over the weekend primarily.
regards
sears parts

Re: Racism, it’s not what you think

Matt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:59:29 -0000

I would argue that harboring action-less thoughts can still be a form of racism. And there can be identified racists and bigots that don't act.

Re: Swedish government - it’s illegal for schools to teach religious doctrine as if it were true.

CLUBPENGUINCHEATS — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:47:55 -0000

It's the parent's right to put their kids through a school that matches their belief. What is so wrong with someone thinking Jesus is real? Hell, might as well tell them Santa is totally made up before school just to make sure the lie doesn't continue.

Re: Swedish government - it’s illegal for schools to teach religious doctrine as if it were true.

CLUBPENGUINCHEATS — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:46:00 -0000

Re: On being open minded

CLUBPENGUINCHEATS — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:39:12 -0000

I have been trying to explain this way of thinking to my friends and have had them just not understand how I think. This is well written, gets to the point, and is very very true.

Re: Free Thought of the Day

CLUBPENGUINCHEATS — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:33:56 -0000

These same people have been bellyaching about the need for "change" in the way government does business, but when that kind of change comes knocking on the door, there seems to be no-one at home.

Re: Anti-Intellectualism Is Destroying America

Wed, 05 Aug 2009 20:14:13 -0000

remember please that half of us are below average.

Re: Swedish government - it’s illegal for schools to teach religious doctrine as if it were true.

jamie — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:03:47 -0000

On the other hand, NO young person should be taught religion as fact. It leaves no room for free thinking.

Re: Anti-Intellectualism Is Destroying America

Dale — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:08:34 -0000

How did that McCain Palin thing work out for you anyway?

Re: The Left’s Limbaugh

vjack — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:44:42 -0000

rAmen! Once in awhile, I find Olbermann's over-the-top antics worthwhile but most of the time I feel like I'm watching less real news and more commentary on Fox "News."

Re: The Left’s Limbaugh

The Vicar — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 02:17:48 -0000

I find TV personalities annoying, and here's my practical suggestion for dealing with the problem: if you don't like the guy, don't watch him. Turn the TV off. Go read a book, or bake cookies, or write a blog entry. Then he won't bother you a bit. Seriously, even when some media nitwit is in the headlines to the point where you can't avoid them, it makes them much less annoying if you just don't watch (or listen) to them.

As for Olbermann being some sort of mirror of Limbaugh: I don't watch either one so I can't say for sure, but judging by Limbaugh's history, I'd say it's not warranted until at least most of the following have happened:
1) Olbermann is busted for doing drugs, then buys his way out of prosecution
2) Olbermann defends preemptive war on right-wing countries
3) Olbermann starts making claims which prove to be false, is caught on them, and then repeats them anyway
4) Olbermann claims to be the equivalent of PBS
5) Olbermann gives direction to a national political party, and they not only largely take his direction but those who disagree in public end up having to apologize to him

For that matter, I don't think you can claim the left has a Limbaugh in this country, because the left and right are not mirrors. There's no real leftist political party these days -- there's the right-to-far-right Republicans, and the center-to-right Democrats, and between them they own (and are owned by) the media. Limbaugh himself has admitted in public that the idea of the "left-wing media" was a lie to rouse the right-wing rabble and to force media outlets to grant him (and his fellow-travelers) airtime, and it's not really fair to compare Olbermann, who is a lone dissenting voice, to Limbaugh in his echo chamber.

Re: Swedish government - it’s illegal for schools to teach religious doctrine as if it were true.

Patrick — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:32:22 -0000

Blackbird,

To function, logic must presuppose its own validity. There is no logical ground for that presupposition. And for "presuppose" in that first sentence, one may very well read "requires unsubstantiated faith in".

But, that aside, there is quite a lot of sound philosophical reasoning suggesting that our ordinary everyday perceptions are at least illusory in some important ways.

All in all, I think it's a good idea to encourage caution in teaching notions as though they are inviolable truths. But then we must take that principle to heart. Even logic is unsubstantiated in the essence of things, and to miss that by an inch is to miss it by a mile.

Re: Anti-Intellectualism Is Destroying America

Steph — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:28:11 -0000

Wow...for an article about the dangers of anti-intellectualism, that second statement was very un-intellectual and extremely uninformed. I think understanding that one is ignorant is far better than pretending that one knows things that he clearly knows nothing about.
In fact, followers of religious faiths are just like the rest of America: some are book smart, some aren't. Those who rise to the places of preachers and theological teachers, etc. (or even students who just want to further their education and understand their faith better), undergo rigorous work in college and seminary. Being one of those people, I know first-hand what kind of an education they actually get. Yes, we study our Bible. We revert to elementary school as we re-learn how to properly diagram sentences, read things in context, understand syllogisms...After all, it takes more than a pre-formed bias to know what the text actually says. We also study history. History through the eyes of the Church, and history through secular eyes. We study literature. Again, secular and sacred. Assuming one goes to a Bible-teaching institution, what is the point of teaching anything other than the Bible or spiritual things? Ah yes, because we live in the world. We need to be learning what the world is learning. We will get no where if we are lightyears behind the education of secular institutions. We will not get the same jobs, we will be looked down on for our ignorance, and we just won't be of any use. Admittedly, there are a select few in the faith (who unfortunately tend to be louder than the rest of us) who do reject any education. That is just irresponsible, and that is all that needs to be said. Again, what is taught in private schools/seminaries is the same as that which is taught in secular schools. We learn math, English, science, music, art, and so much more all through 1) the lens of Scripture and 2) the lens of our world.
So as for contestant #2's opinion on these matters, I would like to say again how disappointed I am at his assertions. "Religion is an obvious one, of course, since being intelligent and learning makes one less likely to accept arguments from authority, and to question unproven assertions." I would just like to know what Christian he talked to and got this bull from. No one I know, for sure. Sounds like a pre-conceived notion that he hasn't bothered to check the facts on to see that this mindset simply does not exist in today's Christian view.
As to the subject matter, I couldn't agree more. If there is anyone who has such anti-intellectual opinions, I hope that he/she is not in a place of power. Education brings us farther and helps us judge more clearly the path that should be taken. I enjoyed reading these differing opinions, but I just ask that you be a little more responsible before posting on things which you know not about.