Oh boy. How many "critical thinkers" do you think are gonna show up on this post alone. And how long are their "completely objective and well-reasearched discutions" gonna stretch this time.
Individuals must accept fact or fiction on their own judgment and standards. Even if you could force fact and even if non objective or circumstantial fact exists- to force a way of thought is totalitarian.
The primary flaw in so many critical though arguments is that they are narrow. People get “tunnel vision”
And focus simply on the matter of discussion and forget there is more to consider.
It is true to say that you have made music or even composed a song if you figure out how to play a C note on a guitar or piano and play it 6 times.
It is not true to say you are a musician or a composer, and the quality of the song you created may be great to you- but other people might feel differently. No one is likely to consider you seriously as a musician or composer even if you know everything there is to know about the C note but can’t figure out how that relates to anything else. There is music people don’t like and then there is music so poor that most won’t call it music.
@fanousone- “critical thinker” in quotation marks. Usually- the quarters mean “so called” or imply sarcasm in writing. It’s pretty clear to me, but I have the benefits of being well versed in reading comprehension and I know I’m privileged in that way and English isn’t many peoples first language- so I don’t judge for not catching that distinction.
To explain further- what that is implying- by the quotation marks, is that the term “critical thinker” has been co-opted as political speak by certain people who are labeling themselves “critical thinkers” as a way to make people who oppose them seem like they haven’t thought about their views. Sort of like how “socialism” is used wrongly or “third world country” by people who caught it as a buzzword but don’t actually understand the meaning.
I hope that clears things up some?
.
We'll follow your lead on how to determine fact and fiction. I'm all ears....
The primary flaw in so many critical though arguments is that they are narrow. People get “tunnel vision”
And focus simply on the matter of discussion and forget there is more to consider.
It is true to say that you have made music or even composed a song if you figure out how to play a C note on a guitar or piano and play it 6 times.
It is not true to say you are a musician or a composer, and the quality of the song you created may be great to you- but other people might feel differently. No one is likely to consider you seriously as a musician or composer even if you know everything there is to know about the C note but can’t figure out how that relates to anything else. There is music people don’t like and then there is music so poor that most won’t call it music.
Are you actually using "critical thinker" as a slur? First my name, now this? Absolute gold.
To explain further- what that is implying- by the quotation marks, is that the term “critical thinker” has been co-opted as political speak by certain people who are labeling themselves “critical thinkers” as a way to make people who oppose them seem like they haven’t thought about their views. Sort of like how “socialism” is used wrongly or “third world country” by people who caught it as a buzzword but don’t actually understand the meaning.
I hope that clears things up some?