background preloader

Critical Thinking

Facebook Twitter

The Odds Must Be Crazy. The Battle for Your Mind: Brainwashing Techniques Being Used On The Public By Dick Sutphen. Authoritarian followers Mind Control Subliminals By Dick Sutphen Summary of Contents The Birth of Conversion The Three Brain Phases How Revivalist Preachers Work Voice Roll Technique Six Conversion Techniques 1. keeping agreements 2.physical and mental fatigue 3. increase the tension 4. Uncertainty. 5. Jargon 6. No humor Stockholm SyndromeDecognition Process Step One is ALERTNESS REDUCTION Step Two is PROGRAMED CONFUSION Step Three is THOUGHT STOPPINGTrue Believers & Mass Movements Persuasion Techniques YES SET TRUISMS SUGGESTION Imbedded Commands INTERSPERSAL TECHNIQUE Visualisation SHOCK AND CONFUSIONSubliminal Programming Mass Misuse Vibrato Extra Low Frequencies The Neurophone Summary of Contents The Birth of Conversion/Brainwashing in Christian Revivalism in 1735.

I'm Dick Sutphen and this tape is a studio-recorded, expanded version of a talk I delivered at the World Congress of Professional Hypnotists Convention in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Birth of Conversion Charles J. Alright. Experiment Resources - A website about the Scientific Method, Research and Experiments. Sense about Science. Bad Science. RationalWiki. Critical Thinking On The Web. Top Ten Argument Mapping Tutorials. Six online tutorials in argument mapping, a core requirement for advanced critical thinking.The Skeptic's Dictionary - over 400 definitions and essays. The Fallacy Files by Gary Curtis. Best website on fallacies. Butterflies and Wheels. Excellent reading - news, articles, and much more. Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts by Peter Facione.

What is critical thinking? Nobody said it better than Francis Bacon, back in 1605: A shorter version is the art of being right. Or, more prosaically: critical thinking is the skillful application of a repertoire of validated general techniques for deciding the level of confidence you should have in a proposition in the light of the available evidence. More definitions... Program for Critical Thinking Program for better decision making Our umbrella site. Latest additions 6 Dec The Idea Emporium Zany. 21 May in Vendors Thinkshop New Zealand-based online store selling thinking skills resources of various kinds. Rational Skepticism Forum. Exploratree. FreeThoughtPedia. Center for Inquiry. Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science.

Robert L. Park, Ph.D The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is investing close to a million dollars in an obscure Russian scientist's antigravity machine, although it has failed every test and would violate the most fundamental laws of nature. The Patent and Trademark Office recently issued Patent 6,362,718 for a physically impossible motionless electromagnetic generator, which is supposed to snatch free energy from a vacuum. And major power companies have sunk tens of millions of dollars into a scheme to produce energy by putting hydrogen atoms into a state below their ground state, a feat equivalent to mounting an expedition to explore the region south of the South Pole.

There is, alas, no scientific claim so preposterous that a scientist cannot be found to vouch for it. Before 1993, court cases that hinged on the validity of scientific claims were usually decided simply by which expert witness the jury found more credible. Justice Stephen G. What are the warning signs? 1. The periodic table of irrational nonsense. A List Of Fallacious Arguments. What's The Harm? Logical Fallacies: The Fallacy Files. Top 20 Logical Fallacies. Introduction to Argument Structure of a Logical Argument Whether we are consciously aware of it or not, our arguments all follow a certain basic structure.

They begin with one or more premises, which are facts that the argument takes for granted as the starting point. Then a principle of logic is applied in order to come to a conclusion. This structure is often illustrated symbolically with the following example: Premise1: If A = B, Premise2: and B = C Logical connection: Then (apply principle of equivalence) Conclusion: A = C In order for an argument to be considered valid the logical form of the argument must work – must be valid. Also it is important to note that an argument may use wrong information, or faulty logic to reach a conclusion that happens to be true. Breaking down an argument into its components is a very useful exercise, for it enables us to examine both our own arguments and those of others and critically analyze them for validity.

Examine your Premises Ad hominem Straw Man. Logical Fallacies. List of common misconceptions. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This incomplete list is not intended to be exhaustive. This list corrects erroneous beliefs that are currently widely held about notable topics. Each misconception and the corresponding facts have been discussed in published literature. Note that each entry is formatted as a correction; the misconceptions themselves are implied rather than stated. Arts and culture Food and cooking Roll-style Western sushi. Searing meat does not "seal in" moisture, and in fact may actually cause meat to lose moisture. Legislation and crime Literature The Harry Potter books, though they have broken children's book publishing records, have not led to an increase in reading among children or adults, nor slowed the ongoing overall decline in book purchases by Americans, and children who did read the Harry Potter books were not more likely to go on to read more outside of the fantasy and mystery genres.[21][22][23][24] Music Religion Hebrew Bible Buddhism Christianity Islam Sports.

Informal fallacy. An informal fallacy is an argument whose stated premises fail to support its proposed conclusion.[1] The problem with an informal fallacy often stems from a flaw in reasoning that renders the conclusion unpersuasive. In contrast to a formal fallacy of deduction, the error is not merely a flaw in logic. Formal deductive fallacies and informal fallacies[edit] Formal fallacies of deductive reasoning fail to follow the rules of logic that guarantee a true conclusion follows given the truth of the premises.

This is said to render the argument invalid. Inductive fallacies are not formal in this sense. A is an XA is also a YTherefore, all Xs are also Ys While never a valid deduction, if such an inference can be made on statistical grounds, it may nonetheless be convincing. See also[edit] References[edit] Jump up ^ Kelly, D. (1994) The Art of Reasoning. Further reading[edit] Damer, T. External links[edit] Critical thinking. Critical thinking is a type of clear, reasoned thinking. According to Beyer (1995) Critical thinking means making clear, reasoned judgements.

While in the process of critical thinking, ideas should be reasoned and well thought out/judged.[1] The National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking defines critical thinking as the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.'[2] Etymology[edit] In the term critical thinking, the word critical, (Grk. κριτικός = kritikos = "critic") derives from the word critic, and identifies the intellectual capacity and the means "of judging", "of judgement", "for judging", and of being "able to discern".[3] Definitions[edit] According to the field of inquiry [weasel words], critical thinking is defined as: Skills[edit] In sum: