What Does Critical Thinking Mean To You?

the definition of belief as a psychosis. The jury is still out. They are having lunch up the street.

Since paralyzed wakefulness involves the sub-conscious, the subjects underlying beliefs will factor large in how they respond to the paralysis. As a new believer, I would have immediately concluded that a demon had me in its grip. I also would have concluded that Jesus set me free. I still believe these things to be true, but I wont argue against critically allowing for other possibilities. (Praise Jesus!)

I believe that the earth is far older. My friends who are Pastors usually disagree with me...but since we cannot find consensus, we dont argue about it very much. They have faith stemming from the Bible (as taught literally) whereas my faith sprung from subjective experiences...I think.

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?

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.

Good question. God is more popular, it seems. Many people claim to talk to Him. Long John Silver is more concretely described and is in but one book. God is not only in 66 books Biblewise, but is also described differently by other religions.Taking it to a personal level, I seem to imagine God based on shared experience within a faith community. I also believe that this God whom I imagine...knowable through His son, Jesus, imagined me long before I was even born. Thus, my idea of God is tied directly through a complex and abstract belief, whereas Long John Silver is pretty cut and dried...he is a character in a book.In conclusion, I might say that God is a character in my book as observed by others, whereas I believe that I am a character in His
Good Book. (Whosoever) It is a sort of communion. One could say that we create each other. I believe that He created me first...obviously I could never prove that fact...at least so far.

I would choose the one whom I am most familiar with, based on the worldview that I grew up in. The subjective feeling that I have of Him being in me...communing with me...does not imply that He is who I see Him as. Had I grown up in India, I would likely have a different picture of who He should be, but again, my idea of who He is and of the reality of who He is are likely different. (Wow...this sounds like jars GOD, God, and god analogy! ) To add to this, I already did choose the one whom I am familiar with...thats when I noticed a major change in my life...in 1994. One could argue that confirmation bias and shared anecdotes with like minded believers reinforced the character of my belief. As I have said before, it is hard to totally throw my belief away in the name of critical thinking, but i'm doing the best that I can.

My short answer is no, but I'll have to think about this. Some choices are made based on the impact of the moment...what some would call the unction of the Spirit. If God is one, regardless of all of the other variations, I don't see it as necessary to intellectually know the other variations before making a choice. Too much critical thought prevents one from accepting anything. They simply don't choose.In my opinion, anyway.

not every decision can be examined critically before it is made. Some decisions only have an impact after they are made.You cant realize that you should have turned right unless you turn left and notice that the terrain is unfamiliar. Sitting at the fork in the road gives no insight into the terrain ahead.

We all can be evil at times. There is a difference between an innocent joke and words that scare people or destroy their faith. We must ask ourselves what our motives are and also whether or not we are being honorable to others.

This is where I agree with jar that behavior (good,rational,mature behavior) is the indication of being on the right road. Not everyone on the right road needs to be outwardly religious but the fact is that if my particular belief is right and that Jesus is in fact the way to know God, Nobody on the right road would deny Him, though some may choose to simply behave and do good without the religious professions and theatrics. You could well be a humanist atheist your entire life, but again, if my belief is correct, it would only make sense that you had a time of communion and acceptance with God some day. Is it ok to question various beliefs? Yes, of course. Is it ok to doubt them? Yes, if you are honest with yourself. Is it ok to deny or ignore them? Only if after examining all available evidence you honestly conclude that there is nothing to accept nor deny.

Personally, I see ringos "judgement" as being more of a choice. My theory is that you (ringo) have chosen to accept "no monsters" as your default position due to the fact that you regard religious theistic thinking as more delusional than atheistic critical thought.

To me, I agree with the second part, but prefer to accept the belief that I have embraced rather than dismiss it simply due to lack of physical evidence. There have been many instances in which I have witnessed people blessed and/or changed by God. Now, whether or not this process happened due to their own efforts or actions and they simply didn't realize it is unimportant to me...and in that sense I suppose that I am guilty of confirmation bias in regards to my beliefs..but oh well... to each his own, I suppose. Because at the end of the day, it all boils down to what we want to believe anyway. In my experience, the subjective evidence(perhaps perception is a better word) was good enough to sway me. Again, confirmation bias plays a part when a believer is persuaded to think as their church body/group thinks, however. That is one reason I like hanging out here at EvC. It does nobody any good to hang too heavily with likeminded people...and this goes for atheist/humanists and otherwise critical thinkers also. Having critical thinking skills as a philosophy of belief (based on evidence) is not a superior position to take...it is simply different.Again, at the end of the day I prefer to believe one way while others prefer other ways.If I have learned anything here at EvC it is that there is no such thing as a superior objective belief. Jesus may be the only way in my mind and heart, but it is up to Him (and not me) to convince anyone of that. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

your logic is quite good... i will admit that!

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.