|
|
Post by Amaris on Dec 30, 2009 13:47:10 GMT
Video by QualiaSoup
|
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 3, 2010 1:32:42 GMT
The argument is flawed, do u have an adress to argue the point to the creator. It is only a slight flaw but important?
|
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 3, 2010 1:33:45 GMT
My argument is between logical and critical
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Jan 3, 2010 19:21:37 GMT
argue on here.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 5, 2010 15:38:06 GMT
Well basically doesn't logical thinking flow along a true path and is the rational and right way of thinking and isn't critical thinking sometimes bad for certain things as if you are critical of things you can still end up with the wrong answers.
The shortest path to a result is the logical folowing of logical steps and not to criticise as every difference. It takes on too many answers and too many paths when you are only working towards one.
Obviously as humans we follow a certain goal, but critical thinking has no flow except for to criticise all and not only the goal at hand therefore delaying the goals results dramatically, depending on what your doing etc.
|
|
catharine
Egg
BadCast Reporter
BAA BAAAAAAA
Posts: 225
|
Post by catharine on Jan 5, 2010 21:48:11 GMT
Hi Blackadder,
It seems to me you are equating critical thinking with criticism. The QualiaSoup video (you can find the channel on Youtube if you want to approach the author) talks about a number of processes that underpin critical thinking;
Analysing
Conceptualising
Defining
Examining
Inferring
Listening
Questioning
Reasoning
Synthesizing
In my view, the sum of these processes does not equal criticising - it is broader than that.
Further, through a process of critical thinking you may actually confirm a hypothesis; find it is valid - so its not just about an "indiscriminate rejection of ideas" as was mentioned in the video.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 5, 2010 22:06:45 GMT
Not my point. The point was if u want a number result from something the logical thing is to work towards that number. Critical thinking works everything out in all combinations delaying your speed of finding things out etc. It is necessary but sometimes un-helpful. But the video implies its undoubtable necessecity, which is the flawed point of theirs.
|
|
|
|
Post by morganp on Jan 5, 2010 22:29:44 GMT
Not my point. The point was if u want a number result from something the logical thing is to work towards that number. Critical thinking works everything out in all combinations delaying your speed of finding things out etc. It is necessary but sometimes un-helpful. But the video implies its undoubtable necessecity, which is the flawed point of theirs. Whaaat? can you simplify that please Blackadder into sentences that make slightly more sense? morganp |
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 5, 2010 22:38:23 GMT
Ok,
working out a NEW theory needs critical thinking and logical. Working out an already known equation does not need critical thinking and only logical as you have an equation to use and logically follow the right path. So most of life is equations mentally/emotionally or other and the small parts are critical/new theories/ but still necessary for growth including the logical growth of flow in equations inside new theories. and so on.
|
|
|
|
Post by morganp on Jan 5, 2010 22:58:48 GMT
I'm none the wiser  morganp |
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 5, 2010 23:07:34 GMT
LOGICAL FOLLOWS A PATH,
critical follows all surrounding paths wanted or un-wanted. So it slows down the results of no1 path as u figure out all others at the same time. In life or equations.
|
|
|
|
Post by morganp on Jan 5, 2010 23:12:29 GMT
I'm still confused.com  morganp |
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 5, 2010 23:13:28 GMT
nevermind  |
|
|
|
Post by Amaris on Jan 6, 2010 2:48:23 GMT
If you have a question about the video Blackadder I'm sure the creator of it will be glad to answer any concerns you might have.www.youtube.com/user/QualiaSoup
|
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 6, 2010 2:52:57 GMT
Yeah, I have to sign up and input loads of details before I can comment, not helpful when I don't want to sign up is it?
|
|
catharine
Egg
BadCast Reporter
BAA BAAAAAAA
Posts: 225
|
Post by catharine on Jan 6, 2010 4:08:03 GMT
Fairy nuff. Thanks for clarifying, as I understand it you're suggesting following logic is sufficient, and further, more efficient in some cases. In my view its about having a range of tools in your toolkit to draw on - not one hammer for all. So I agree its about using your judgement to select the appropriate approach.
Maybe I've missed the mark again as far as your point, but hey, don't say I didn't try ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Amaris on Jan 6, 2010 8:21:05 GMT
Yeah, I have to sign up and input loads of details before I can comment, not helpful when I don't want to sign up is it?  |
|
|
|
Post by lovelyyoungman on Jan 7, 2010 17:36:48 GMT
LOGICAL FOLLOWS A PATH, critical follows all surrounding paths wanted or un-wanted. So it slows down the results of no1 path as u figure out all others at the same time. In life or equations. Ok, I think what you're saying is that if you want to find the answer to a problem then you should use logic as it follows a clearly defined pathway and is therefore relatively quick and simple. You believe on the other hand, that the critical thinking process requires you to consider lots of irrelevant possibilities before coming to the correct answer. You are saying that in certain circumstances critical thinking is a useful tool but you believe that in other circumstances it can be slow and unecessarily complex. Am I correct in my interpretation? If so I have a couple of issues with what you're saying but I wouldn't like to challenge you on them before I know that that actually is what you're saying. |
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Jan 8, 2010 0:01:22 GMT
Thanks, I wasn't fighting for or against either way, and you are right, I was just pointing out the sometimes more important logical approach in a cold scientific way and nothing to do with human judgement as that can have flaws.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cassus on Jan 8, 2010 1:22:32 GMT
Well basically doesn't logical thinking flow along a true path No, it does not. All logical arguments depend on the assumptions you start out with. Choose one set of assumptions, and you get one conclusion. Choose different assumptions, and you get a different conclusion. When there are an infinite number of logical arguments - all of them equally valid (since they don't employ any known logical fallacies) - the only way for us to decide which conclusion is the best one is to use critical thinking. Your idea that critical thinking is inefficient, an inferior cousin to the simplicity of logic, is simply... errr, illogical. No. |
|
