What Does Critical Thinking Mean To You?

This isn't about me and my abilities to think critically; there is no evidence for the existence of 'spirits' anywhere. Whenever 'spirits' have been objectively looked for, they've never been found - ever. All that is needed is a single piece of non-controvesial evidence to be presented for the entire scientific community to change its collective mind. But despite this, you are unable to point to a single properly organised test to show these spirits.James Randi will give you a million dollars if you can demonstrate a spirit to him, why not give it a go? Well yes, that's why they were in a mental hospital...... If it had been more prolonged or disturbing, it may very well have been, but I was simply demonstrating the power of the mind to change reality for individuals - in these poor people's case, permanently. show me the evidence and I will gladly change my mind. I'm not like you Faith, I accept evidence even if it goes against everything I think is true. But it has to be evidence, not anecdotes.

Amazing. You've been given plenty on this thread. There's plenty in many books, including the Bible. You just write them off because of prejudice, no NOT because of the evidence, plenty of which has been given already. That is the opposite of critical thinking.I have no control over the appearance of spirits so how could I promise Randi I could produce one?

Evidence is not anecdote. No-one has provided any evidence other than personal stories which sound exactly like well known physchological trauma. Evidence is something that can be independently tested, not simply stated on the internet as fact. And neither has anyone else despite thousands of years of claims. These events happen routinely at fundamentalist gathering but strangely are never able to be reproduced under any kind of objective observation. Funny that.

You will never get anything but personal stories about such phenomena. There is no way to test it, spirits have minds and wills, they don't behave like chemicals. So you dismiss stories and you confirm your bias. Enjoy.

Sometimes you do get things right. So we can't see them or test them and their effects look exactly like psychological trauma. Tell me Faith, what would an objective, critical thinking conclusion look like under these circumstances? I have no bias, I simply demand evidence before I accept extraordinary statements from people that behave as though they are deranged.Evidence Faith, evidence, go get some and all your troubles are over. It should be really easy, after all healers do it day in day out in churches apparently - they just never seem to do anything non-controversial like growing back a limb.

Well, it has been pointed out numerous times that religious writings often have stories that are inaccurate in them. Stories in books that make claims that are beyond what could be reasonable expected to be true should have independent verification about their truth factor. That does not exist for many of the stories in the collection of books known as 'the Bible'. As a matter of fact, if someone objectively looks at the evidence, many of those stories can be shown to be fables. Part of critical thinking is looking at the independent evidence and evaluating the plausibility of the stories given, rather than just accepting claims, hook , line and sinker.That is what you don't realize, what you will never realize, and what you don't want to realize.

You ignored the other half of my post:

quote:

---

If you could ever admit that the Bible might be wrong, your knee might not jerk so much.

---

You're the one who clearly exhibits the kneejerk certainty. You're absolutely certain that you're right about everything.

If there IS no evidence but stories, it's stupid to dismiss the stories, it's all you've got. Now if a spirit should happen to decide to give you a fright sometime, all you'll have is YOUR story and nobody will listen to YOU either.

Indeed, Treasure Island is the only evidence we have that Long John Silver ever existed. Otherwise, we'd think he was just an imaginary character.

Since we can never produce any sort of evidence to appease Randi or the scientific community, does it make sense to dismiss all anecdotal reports? In order to do so, we would have to question the sanity of the reporters...and I think that this is what disturbs Faith. She resents being labled delusional simply because of her reports of her experiences. Or shall we simply throw the lot of believers into a mental ward.... All that we know at this point is that the hypothesis is untestable and likely won't provide evidence that we can chew on. I can see your conclusion..but I would investigate further,personally. Of course, that's because I wont discard my belief. I suppose were I truly a critical thinker I would discard my belief in the name of finding an answer.Faiths assertion is that you wont discard your demand for evidence,which she feels is a belief unto itself. Comments?

Yup, that's your problem, there's no actual evidence. It's even more stupid to take much notice of them, because, as you say, stories are all you've got and when anyone actually attempts anything more objective, it's falls flat on its face. It's evidence of absence. Quite rightly - and if it persisted I'd be treated for a mental disorder.

Long John Silver existed in the imagination of the author. The author created him.Some believe that God imagined us...thus we were created.No way to test for that theory critically though...some claim to have communion with the Author, but can't go beyond subjective claims.Perhaps we are all better off trying to do our best every day, giving the street people our spare change, taking the neighbors garbage can back with your own so that they wont have to lift it, and visiting folks in prison. The demons usually cant bother us as much if we stay busy.

Meanwhile the spirits are laughing their heads off at your stubborn refusal to consider at all the only evidence there is. They've got you in their grip but you won't know it until it's too late.

What would be the difference (critically-thinking-wise) between imagining Long John Silver and imagining God?

Here are some of the other sources of "knowledge." Let me know which ones you prefer:

Magic, superstition, wishful thinking, old wives tales, folklore, what the stars foretell and what the neighbors think, omens, public opinion, astromancy, spells, Ouija boards, anecdotes, Da Vinci codes, tarot cards, sorcery, seances, reading entrails, sore bunions, black cats, divine revelation, table tipping, witch doctors, crystals and crystal balls, numerology, divination, faith healing, miracles, palm reading, the unguessable verdict of history, magic tea leaves, new age mumbo-jumbo, hoodoo, voodoo and all that other weird stuff.

Me, I'll stick to evidence.