What Does Critical Thinking Mean To You?

I don't see how those things resemble my criticisms at all.

I do.How do you know that the airport will be in the same spot?How do you know that gasoline will keep its same flammability due a constancy of physical laws?If you just assume these things, are you failing to use critical thinking?

Both of those things have always happened. Neither of them have never happened. It takes about a half a second of critical thinking to realize that airports don't spontaneously move.

As a believer, I am aware, however, that evidence is not always available in an objective sense. Critical thinking means asking more and better questions, in my opinion. Critical Thinking may well lead to a conclusion, but in a philosophical sense, it is the engine that drives the search. If the search is ever expanding and infinitely endless, critical thinking is what drives the questioning process. Faith, on the other hand, anchors the soul in times where the answer or answers are unclear or absent.

You say that Critical Thinking may not lead to a conclusion and that Faith is the anchor when the answer's unclear. This says that you believe Faith is something we can arrive at having done a certain amount of Critical Thinking and come up empty-handed.I do not believe that any amount of Critical Thinking carried out successfully or unsuccessfully could bring me to my Faith in GOD. This doesn't mean that I cannot apply Critical Thinking to my Faith, but rather that Critical Thinking is not the engine driving me toward the Faith in any way.On one of your points I do agree with you: Critical Thinking is about philosophy, questioningthings of the mind; Faith is about the soul.

Unbelievers are aware of that too. The difference is that believers are often too critical of the evidence and not critical enough of their own conclusions.

Is evidence the only prerequisite for belief?

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Belief is appropriate when there is not sufficient evidence to form a conclusion. Critical thinking is used to decide if the evidence is sufficient.Belief is not a valid reason for disregarding evidence.

In most cases, yes.

Give us an example of "no".

Belief overrules evidence when you really, really believe.We have seen quite a few examples of this on these very threads.

You are quite the critical one, aren't you. I am a living example of "no".

There is no endless stream of "reallys" needed. Either you believe or you don't.

I said that belief is not a VALID reason for disregarding evidence.

so define "valid"....here better yet, I'll do it: To one man, evidence may be well grounded yet may not be justifiable,relevant, or meaningful. Neither be it appropriate to the end in view.

---

Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo

​

It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo

​

If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden. (Leo Tolstoy)