What Does Critical Thinking Mean To You?

You're using some odd vocabulary there. Evidence is not objective or subjective. The way we look at evidence is objective or subjective.But evidence is evident; you don't get to pick and choose your evidence.There is no such thing as "evidence regarding belief". If you have evidence, you don't need belief.Once again, disregarding evidence is not a valid position to take, period. If you're disregarding evidence, the term is "willfully ignorant" or "intellectually dishonest".

I guess my head's just a little more resilient than yours.

It appears that Jon states that he has certain beliefs, irrational though they may be, and that they are likely not the absolute correct actuality given that the actuality is likely greater than human capability of comprehension.In other words, I believe X as I understand X yet the actual breadth and scope of X is likely beyond what I can understand...thus my answer(my belief) is incomplete at this time.

Stating that one's knowledge is incomplete is very different to stating that one believes that the beliefs they hold are wrong.The first almost goes without saying in all but the most pedantic of debate situations (which admittedly is the environment in which we are often in here) and the second is a recipe for cognitive dissonance on steroids.

You totally lost me there.How is admitting that you can say with a very high degree of certainty that your beliefs are wrong a recipe for cognitive dissonance on steroids?Isn't that why a reasonable person tests a map against reality and does not believe the bridge is there just because the map shows one?

There is a difference--at least in my mind--between being wrong and being incomplete.Take the belief in GOD, for example. I have a high degree of reasonable belief that GOD exists. I could well be wrong, but since I believe it, (and most certainly because I took a stand on belief versus perpetual uncertainty) my educated guess is over 50% certain that GOD exists.I have reasons. They are personal to me.Perhaps it is irrational of me to assign a percentage to such a question, I dont know.I am more likely leaning towards the idea that my perception, feeling, and logic is incomplete. As I am driving up the "road" the map shows a bridge, but I can only trust my senses,emotions, and feelings. Evidence is not needed because I have driven this road many times, the weather is nice thus there is no logical reason the bridge may be out. Would you not say that my absolute knowledge of whether the bridge is intact is incomplete, rather than "likely wrong"?

What you seem to be saying is that you would rather be wrong than incomplete. You "took a stand on belief versus perpetual uncertainty" as if taking any stand is better than none at all. To paraphrase what you sometimes say, "If you don't stand for a bad idea you're liable to fall for a good one."

In the case of the bridge the reasonable and thinking position is to assume the bridge is not there until you visually confirm that the bridge is there.When the topic turns to something that is nearly impossible to verify like the belief that there is a God then I would think the only reasonable position is to believe your concept of God is wrong.What evidence is available?Well there is the evidence that there have been many many concepts of gods and so far all that can be tested have been found to be false. Is there any possible reason to think your concept of god is any more accurate than any of the others?What about the concept of "Christ"? Again, the only sources for that are the Bible stories but even there there is no single pattern but rather many often mutually exclusive ones and evidence that the Jesus mythos evolved over time.You talk about trusting emotions and feelings but again the evidence is that those two things can and very often do override reality and truth and create falsehoods. Emotion and feelings should always be suspect.

Options:

1. Assume the bridge is there
2. Assume the bridge is not there
3. Conclude that "I don't know" until evidence observed that the bridge is there or not there

Options:

1. Assume god/s exist
2. Assume god/s do not exist
3. Conclude that "I don't know" until evidence observed that god/s exist or not.

From a logical\rational point of view you cannot blithely assume either existence or non-existence when you have insufficient for making such a conclusion.... what is wrong with saying "I don't know" ???Enjoy

Nothing.But what is wrong with believing anyway and admitting that your belief is irrational and likely wrong?

I believe the bridge is there but I acknowledge that my belief is likely wrong, so I don't try to cross it until I actually see it. How is that different from not believing the bridge is there until I see it?

You've obviously never tried crossing the Minnesota-South Dakota border.

There is nothing wrong with saying "I don't know" but that is irrelevant to the point I was making. "I don't know." is a great position in the absence of belief and is certainly a far more reasonable and logical position that saying "I believe" but I was discussing what can be said should someone take the position of belief.I that case it seems that the reasonable position is to assume that your belief(s) are almost certainly wrong.

As long as you recognize it is a belief\opinion and as long as it is not contradicted by objective empirical evidence.And as long as you are prepared to accept contrary evidence should it become available, and change your belief\opinion, then there should not be an issue:

1. I don't know if the bridge is there, I believe that it IS there, but I will accept evidence that it is NOT there,
2. I don't know if the bridge is there, I believe that it is NOT there, but I will accept evidence that it IS there,

Enjoy.

The same as someone that takes the position of non-belief (see Message 284): as long as you acknowledge that it is an opinion\belief that may be wrong I don't see any problems. How can you have any certainty when you don't know? Having certainty is illogical\irrational without evidence that would remove the doubt of not knowing.Enjoy