sit down,shut up, and learn something.
(i haven't had the oppertunity to train pavlos yet..)
there is a need for theist and atheists to learn to be better critical thinkers..
with that in mind, i want to reply to Pavlos's thread that you two shut down.(hence the Shut Up..)
Harold: i dont know pavlos well enough to know her intentions..that being said, there is nothing in her OP that speaks theist/atheist..
the first mention of religiosity was by neverfly (a known instigator) about closet evangilist..
then you attacking the thread as anti-theist trolling..that is what set dyw(another instigator) and never off..
the only thing i see is that it was posted in religion and not nowhere else..but then again it is the religious forum that has the most need of critical thinking..
I want to respond to this as a theist also..
um..it helps to have links as a primer..From PAVLOSA Field Guide to Critical Thinking
I have noticed time and again that some members on this site and others, having no idea what evidence is, arguing over the burden of proof, not realizing why extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary proof, and make fallacy after fallacy, etc…
Critical thinking according to Wiki
tehe...see belowThis linked article below is a "MUST READ" for either those embarking on a journey of discovery and development, and for those who may be confused, and for those who don’t use there heads at all.
It will also act as a refresher for those who use there critical thinking skills regularly.
And to those of you who do, I wholly thank you, one and all.
important KEYWORD higlighted by me..Here are a couple of excerpts:
The six rules of evidential reasoning are my own distillation and simplification of the scientific method. To make it easier for students to remember these half-dozen guidelines, I've coined an acronym for them: Ignoring the vowels, the letters in the word ”FiLCHeRS” stand for the rules of Falsifiability, Logic, Comprehensiveness, Honesty, Replicability, and Sufficiency. Apply these six rules to the evidence offered for any claim, I tell my students, and no one will ever be able to sneak up on you and steal your belief. You'll be filch-proof.
(more about this quote later)
- Evidence must be classified either objective or subjective.The evidence offered in support of any claim must be adequate to establish the truth of that claim, with these stipulations:
- The burden of proof for any claim rests on the claimant
- Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence
- Evidence based upon authority and/or testimony is always inadequate for any paranormal claim
- the 'value' of such evidence must be evaluated according to perspective.(IOW dont compare apples to oranges)
filch?A Field Guide to Critical Thinking - CSI
It is about time now, for humanity to be capable of filching! And to learn how to be filch proof!
isnt that a bird?
back to this part..Falsifiability, Logic, Comprehensiveness, Honesty, Replicability, and Sufficiency.
Falsifiability,granted most theistic claims are falsifiable (able to reproduce them by other means)
Logic, there is a certain amount of logic in religion..problem is when it gets in the way of someone feeling bad, logic gets misplaced..
Comprehensiveness, um, don't we all have that problem?(comprehension)
Honesty, this is a double edged sword..honest to you or to oneself?..which the oneself part is what is needed for critical thinking..
Replicability, its not rocket science..its human nature..cant always replicate human behaviour..
Sufficiency, how does this apply to theist/atheist debates?