#critical thinking skills

[elder-millennial-of-zion]

There was never going to be any form of Jewish self defense that the world would deem acceptable, and there was never going to be any act of anti-Jewish terrorism that the world would deem unacceptable.

There is nothing Israel could ever do to defend itself that wouldn’t be accused of going too far, of being “way beyond self defense.” There is no method of Israeli self defense that wouldn’t be maligned as “genocide.”

Inversely, there is no atrocity that could ever be committed against Jews that wouldn’t be denied/excused/justified. There is no level of violence against Jews, however gruesome, however blatant in its goal of genocide and targeting innocents, however many children and babies are burned alive and kidnapped, that wouldn’t be justified as “resistance,” as something that the Jews must have provoked, as the very least that Jews deserve, as something that the terrorists were driven to and couldn’t possibly be expected not to do.

No act of violence against Jews was ever not going to be called “resistance,” and no response from Israel was ever not going to be called a “genocide.”

The only Jewish country in the world was never not going to be maligned as the worst country in the world.

For fuck’s sake, use some critical thinking skills.

[rebeccathenaturalist]

Okay, y'all, it's rant time again. Buckle up.

A new report just came out from Public Citizen highlighting the dangers of using apps and AI foraging guides for identifying mushrooms, particularly when mushroom foraging. It's the latest in a string of warnings that are fighting against a tide of purported convenience ("just take a picture and get your answer instantly!")

I've ranted about this since last August, and I also wrote up a detailed post on how to identify an AI-generated foraging guide. I'm also including info on the limitations of apps and AI in The Everyday Naturalist: How to Identify Animals, Plants, and Fungi Wherever You Go. I'm not just saying this to toot my own horn--it's because nature identification, and teaching it to others, is literally what I do for a living. So this is a topic near and dear to my heart.

I teach a very, very specific sort of identification class; whether we're focusing on animals, plants, fungi, or all of the above, I walk people through a detailed process of how to observe a given organism, make note of its various physical traits and habitat, and use that information to try to determine what it is. I emphasize the need to use as many sources as possible--field guides, websites, online and in-person groups, journal articles, etc.--to make absolutely sure that your identification is solid.

And every year, I get people (thankfully, a very small minority of my students) who complain because my two-hour basic mushroom hunting class wasn't just five minutes of introduction and one hundred and fifteen minutes of me showing slide after slide of edible mushrooms. There are so many people out there who just want a quick, easy answer so they can frolic in the woods and blithely pick mushrooms like some idealized image of a cottagecore herbalist with a cabin full of dried plants and smiling frogs or something.

While I do incorporate a bit of information on getting started with the app iNaturalist in my classes, it is as only ONE of MANY tools I encourage people to use. Sure, it's more solid than most apps because, in addition to the algorithmic I.D. suggestions it initially gives you, other iNaturalist users can go onto your observations later and either agree with your I.D.s or suggest something different and even explain why.

And yet--even as great as iNat is, it and its users can still be wrong. So can every other I.D. app out there. And I think that is one thing that the hyper-romanticized approaches to foraging--and nature identification in general--miss. In order to be a good forager, you HAVE to also be good at nature identification.

And nature identification is an entire process that requires you to have solid observational and critical thinking skills, to be able to independently research using many different types of tools, and be willing to invest the time, patience, and focus to properly arrive at a solid identification--if not to species level, then as far down the taxonomic ladder as you can realistically manage. (There's a reason even the experts complain about Little Brown Mushrooms and Damned Yellow Composites!)

People mistake one single tool--apps--for the entire toolkit. They assume any book they find on Amazon is going to be as good as any other, and don't take the time to look up the author to determine any credentials or experience, or even whether they actually exist or not. It doesn't help that the creators of these products often advertise them as "the only [book/app/etc.] you need to easily identify [organism of choice]!"

I mean, sure, the world isn't going to end if you never question the birdsong results on the Merlin app, or if you go through life thinking a deer fern is just a baby western sword fern. But when we get into people actually eating things they find in the wild, there's often no room for error. There are plants and mushrooms that can kill you even if you only eat a tiny amount. And even if they don't kill you, they may make you wish you were dead for a few days while you suffer through a whole host of gastrointestinal nastiness and other symptoms.

There aren't any shortcuts if you want to be safe in your foraging. You HAVE to be willing to do the work. And any teacher, author, or product that says otherwise isn't being ethical. I'm glad to see more people speaking out against the "fast foodization" of foraging in regards to overreliance on apps and the existence of AI foraging books; I just hope it's enough to prevent more people from getting sick or dying.

[funfeminism]

I think men should have to take some sort of test before reading or watching satire. Cause they can’t keep consuming American Psycho and Fight Club and earnestly adopting the ideas and getting away with it

[sunnywalnut]

No idea how basically saying "I hope people who are being harmed on both sides are able to be safe once more" is "supporting a t3rrorist state" unless I'm missing something here?

About six months ago, the situation in G🍉za became so big that people were no longer capable of ignoring it. One month after that, Micheal Sheen(and other celebrities, I'm sure. I just haven't seen them specifically) posted this tweet down below:

It reads: "On a day where those who have wished the same things and been punished for it my thoughts are with the Israeli hostages and their families and hoping for their safe release and with all the Palestine families in Gaza and hoping for an immediate ceasefire." (End quote).

While I am aware that his wording is not the best, and neutrality on the situation is not what we're looking for(and also, in a lot of cases, not possible), especially with people who have influence, I have a feeling that a lot of people are not putting these tweets in context.

This was posted five months ago. When everyone was still rushing to catch up with what we've been missing for the last 75+ years. That's a lot of information for anyone to digest. Much less being able to filter through all the Propaganda that was thrown together at that point.

Nobody is immune to propaganda. Especially when it is provided to us as fact. Celebrities are no different.

Now this is not to say "🥺🥺🥺 leave my little UwU soft boy alone you meanies🥺" he's a grown man. He can take care of himself. I don't care.

But I AM saying that when we see celebrities or influencers or creators or whoever saying something online about certain topics that are important to us(like the current g3nocide happening in G🍉za) that we need to put on our critical thinking skills cap and assign context and actually look into it ourselves instead of taking random people's word for it.

I had to Google this myself, in fact. Because I was seeing a couple out of place comments that didn't make sense to me.

However. When I did.

The answer was right there. From the man himself.

Please guys.

Let's not burn bridges and ruin a whole man's career based off one tweet 5 months ago that was worded a little weird.

We've got a lot more things to be worried about than that.

[i-merani]

Im gonna be the hater here <3

There is a difference between "this common" and "this not so uncommon". That tiny, barely visible difference is actually huge and that tiny, barely visible difference is the exact reason why what you are reading is an academic paper (and a good one probably).

"this common approach" - no meaning beside this, straight to the point, direct information.

"this not so uncommon approach" - the writer (1) wants us to acknowledge that this approach is thought to not be common and (2) at the same time wants to highlight that this is not the case, its the opposite - the approach is quite common.

This nuance is important, it is needed. Look how much i could write just about that one sentence! In academic papers authors provide their thoughts and opinions and these little details and nuances are the ways for them to do so!

Sometimes complex sentences are necessary to convey nuance of the information. These sentances are not an elaborate elitist conspiracy but a part of human communication.

Just read the fucking paper, use your brain and stop complaining on the internet.

[pink-strawberry-kissess]

I gotta rant a little about aeon...I truly don't understand the people who will say that aeon was destroyed in the remake. That just wasn't the vibe that I got. Leon's feelings for Ada seemed more subtle? Like during the fight he goes "Try using knives next time" like he can't help but wanna be playful despite still being angry. He even has this little smile on his face when Ada goes "You can stop right there" and when he turns his head you see this little smirk or smile on his face 🥺 same with when she leaves through the window, he can't help but have a soft spot for her. Sure, he's a little more distrustful, but you can tell he's not over her.

He even refuses to press his knife against her throat, keeping the jagged side with the spikes or whatever away from her. He even turns his back to Ada when he's going to pick up his gun, showing this mutual respect it seems and showing that he doesn't see her as a true threat.

When she asks him to leave with her he also seems regretful....the look on his face looks like he's disappointed. He can't even stop staring at her in the helicopter, like he's still enraptured with her even if he claims they "need to go their separate ways." It isn't until Ashley yells at him that he seems to snap out of the spell. That longing look Ada has when she sees Leon on the jetski....I felt bad for her. She even goes "Until next time Leon" aka Capcom seems to be making it clear that the story isn't over, that they WILL meet again....in re6. An re6 remake perhaps? 🤔 It's not impossible 🤣

i've explained my thoughts a few times but you seem to really need to vent so imma just let you do it bestie

yas queen go off-

we got more than one brain cell so we can read subtleties but when you already hate ada, then yeah you're gonna write off the ship lmao- people wrote off the ship in re2r and then were SO PISSED that they slept together lololol

i hope u feel better bestie, i agree with u- so does most of aeon nation lol- re4 is set in 2004 and they see each other again in 2011 and 2012 and off screen about 2009. those are like CONFIRMED instances. capcom isn't dumb enough to retcon 3 pieces of media lol

[walks-the-ages]

For the "Critical enjoying" anon, you'll have to wait a bit, as I finally put in the effort to actually make a Twitter account so I can specifically reach out directly to Martha Wells and ask her some questions about her works, and point of the previously -posted about transphobia and biological essentialism present in the works, and how to change it.

Because it boils down to this:

1) is a work bigoted because the author is deliberately baking that bigotry into their work to send a specific message, like Jkr's Antisemitism, transphobia, racism, etc?

Or is it because the author just genuinely didn't know about/ realize those elements were in their work and had already taken steps to correct their portrayal in later installments after learning more about the topic and becoming aware of more societal issues they never considered before?

Is there bigotry in a work because this is a belief the author strongly believes in and wants the audience to feel the same, like Miraculous Ladybug being written by 45 year old white men who have already shown themselves to be predators-- Winny drew and publicly posted porn of the main child characters to his Twitter with no repercussions and is still a party of this show as of August 2022,

,the entire point of Adrien's character is to brainwash young girls into thinking being the target of sexual harassment is romantic, the racism and objectification of Asian women in the show, etc,

Or is it because the creator simply didn't know that these problems and concepts even existed until someone brought it to their attention?

Like. Cis people do not go around thinking about gender, at all. Gender and sex to them are literally one and the same with zero distinction

They just accept it as a fact that Physical sex characteristics = gender, and it's not until they meet or have discussions with trans people or become aware of their struggles that they even realize they've had these preconceived biases to begin with.

I know this because I've had multiple conversations about being queer with older, cis, straight coworkers who were genuinely supportive of queer rights, they just have zero grasp on any of the basic concepts. And I mean zero. Zilch. Nada.

They support their trans cousins but use the wrong pronouns and say "identify as" until it's explained that "no, they don't identify as a male, they are a boy, and you should be showing your love and respect for him by referring to him as such even when you're not directly talking to him-- especially when you're not even directly talking to him, because that's the only way you're going to actually change your perception of him and actually use the correct pronouns and name for him when you're face to face, you have to practice and study pronouns, it's not supposed to be a pop quiz every time you see him so you end up fumbling your words and misgendering him and deadnaming him, all completely by accident because you don't think about it until you're face to face".

And then they realize "oh hey you're right, I never thought of it like that before. All of this is so new to me! I'll try to do better next time I see him."

Like. Most of the other trans people in the Murderbot fandom haven't even noticed the issue @rjalker first pointed out until it's... Pointed out.

Most people are literally not even thinking about the fact that all bots and constructs use it/its pronouns, because they're too caught up in the fact that characters are using neopronouns at all, so if the widely-trans fanbase hasn't noticed the issue, how do you expect the author to even realize its an issue?

Plus there's the fact that if you scroll through her Twitter account...She's literally reblogging All these news articles and posts celebrating queer Identities, encouraging people to vote the whole ballot to make sure anti-LGBT laws are not unanimously passed by republicans, encouraging everyone to help stop anti abortion laws being passed, raising up Native and Black and Asian voices in the right against racism, the most recent being that people are predicably being super racist, specifically anti-Native about the new Predator movie that came out August 5th 2022, aka literally just four days ago as of me typing this post.

Oh, and actively signal boosting queer authors whose books are actively trans and queer (which is why I am now going to see if my library's ebook section has "The Jasmine Throne" by Tasha Suri!)

TL;DR:

There is a world of difference between enjoying the works of Martha Wells, who has had some problematic elements in her work that have been course-corrected over the years as she learns, just like literally any random person off the street is not an immediate expert on oppression,

versus

people like the ML creators and JKR who are actively targeting their audience with bigotry to normalize it and show it as correct AND further profiting off their bigotry to go on and continue pushing their incredibly dangerous and harmful agendas.

[elder-millennial-of-zion]

It’s no longer enough to say “Israel did something bad.” It always has to be “Israel did the worst thing any country has ever done in the history of the world!” It can’t be a war, it has to be a “genocide.” And it can’t even be a genocide, it has to be the worst genocide that’s ever happened.

Do these people really think that the only Jewish country that’s ever existed just coincidentally happens to be the worst country that’s ever existed?

[makingdonalddrumpfagain]

[auressea]

[pinkrangerv]

As an Internet Elder, I'd just like to say that in MY day, some Americans--in fact, middle-class white Americans, no less--prided themselves on being tolerant of other nationalities, reasonable, and well-educated.

So it's slightly stunning that someone told me, unironically, that Jackie Chan is problematic because, being a Chinese national, he praised the government so he could take a more active role in the government of his own nation.

Just a thought, but maybe critical thinking should be taught outside of homeschooling again.

[moonstonecockatiel]

I have many thoughts on this but my phone is near dead and so is my energy. Basically I think sometimes we need to admit “I do not like this thing because of who I am as a person and that’s fine” and not make useless discourse that waters down issues that actually matter. I don’t like pairing Hunter and Willow because of my personal experiences with trauma that I project onto Hunter because he is a character I heavily relate to that is near and dear to me. The shipping discourse is what made it so especially uncomfortable for me. And that’s fine. We need to admit sometimes that we just don’t like things instead of trying to prove that you are morally bad for liking said thing. None of us are immune to our own personal biases and experiences that we project onto characters. (In fact, I think the idea of him having a crush and experiencing normal teenager things is cute! The idea of them being in a relationship isn’t to me because Hunter isn’t in a healthy enough place to be in a relationship. But that’s just me and that’s the result of my own traumas, how I process them and therefore think Hunter would process/experience them, and quite literally nobody is going to have the same outlook for the same reasons,)

We all have one shared enemy—actual fucking creeps preying on children and being gross towards characters that are also CHILDREN… and L1ly fucking 0rch@rd

[grimmywrites]

For the record, I'm just gonna say that it never occurred to me to think the 88 in your username was ANYTHING besides a year. I don't know what that anon was thinking.

Thanks. I think most people are and will be in a similar boat in that regard. I didn't even know anything about that number's connotations (it's LUCKY in other cultures, after all) until a few months ago and then I never thought about it again. I've had these numbers on the back of my name for 16 years or so (I'M OLD, YEAH I GET IT LOL). It's just so strange to me to send me a message like that without... having looked at my tumblr or writing at all? It would've just taken a little observation and critical thinking and they would've discovered the answer, you know?

[omegaphilosophia]

Enhancing Everyday Conversations: Applying Logic for Effective Communication

Logic is a powerful tool that can greatly enhance our everyday conversations. By employing logical frameworks and models, we can construct sound arguments, analyze information, resolve disagreements, and foster a deeper understanding of various topics. In this blog post, we will explore some valuable models and frameworks that can assist us in using logic effectively during our conversations, promoting rational discourse and critical thinking.

Socratic Method: Uncovering the Truth through Inquiry- The Socratic Method, named after the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates, involves the art of asking insightful questions to stimulate critical thinking. By engaging in thoughtful questioning, we can challenge assumptions, identify inconsistencies, and encourage a deeper examination of our beliefs and reasoning. This method helps us navigate conversations with intellectual curiosity and promotes logical analysis.

Toulmin Model: Constructing and Evaluating Arguments- The Toulmin Model provides a structured approach to constructing and evaluating arguments. Its elements include the claim (the main statement), grounds (supporting evidence), warrant (connecting the claim and grounds), backing (additional support), qualifier (specifying the strength of the argument), and rebuttal (addressing counterarguments). By employing the Toulmin Model, we can formulate logical arguments and critically assess the strength and validity of others' arguments.

Rhetorical Appeals: Balancing Emotions, Credibility, and Logic- Rhetorical appeals, comprising ethos (credibility), pathos (emotions), and logos (logic), are persuasive tools that help us communicate effectively. While emotions and credibility play important roles in conversations, incorporating logical appeals allows us to present sound reasoning, evidence, and logical coherence. By striking a balance between these appeals, we can influence others through rational persuasion.

Argument Mapping: Visualizing Logical Structures- Argument mapping involves visually representing the structure of an argument using diagrams or software tools. This approach helps us visualize the logical flow of information, identify premises and conclusions, and evaluate the strength and coherence of an argument. Employing argument mapping can bring clarity to complex discussions and facilitate a more systematic evaluation of ideas.

Decision-Making Models: Weighing Options with Logic- Decision-making models, such as cost-benefit analysis, SWOT analysis, or decision trees, integrate logical reasoning to assess options and make informed choices. By applying these models, we can organize relevant information, consider different factors, and weigh the pros and cons based on logical evaluation. These frameworks enable us to make decisions that align with our goals and values.

Critical Thinking Frameworks: Nurturing Rational Discourse- Critical thinking frameworks, such as Bloom's Taxonomy or Paul-Elder's Model of Critical Thinking, provide a structured approach to developing and applying critical thinking skills. These frameworks guide us in analyzing information, evaluating evidence, and constructing logical arguments during conversations. By cultivating critical thinking skills, we can engage in more meaningful and intellectually stimulating discussions.

By incorporating logical models and frameworks into our everyday conversations, we can elevate the quality of our communication. The Socratic Method encourages inquiry and critical thinking, while the Toulmin Model assists in constructing and evaluating arguments. Rhetorical appeals help us balance emotions, credibility, and logic, ensuring persuasive effectiveness. Argument mapping aids in visualizing logical structures, decision-making models facilitate informed choices, and critical thinking frameworks nurture rational discourse.

[pink-strawberry-kissess]

today I’m choosing violence (cause i'm tired of poor characterization of characters and the idolization of characters that are plain)

I’m gonna say if “being kind” or "they're so cool" are the only character traits you find interesting or that you love-

It may be time to accept that you enjoy a boring character (which is fine)

If being able to fight, or save people or have the strength/courage to go on, is the only trait they have that’s “interesting.”

Ask yourself why.

Arguably MOST characters are kind, are able to fight (to some capacity), want to save people and and are literally written in stories to have the capacity to “go on,” (unless they are killed)

Why are these the character traits you decided to go with? Are they admirable? Sure… but also name another few characters in the same piece of media that would do the exact same things?

Oh there are SEVERAL characters that have those same character traits?

Okay- So what makes your character interesting then?

I’ll wait.

So I see, you’re struggling to find anything else?

Yeah

There’s nothing inherently wrong with liking boring characters.

But acknowledging that your “fave” character has a shell like personality is good critical thinking. And sure maybe you don’t want to dissect media in this way. You want to be able to mindlessly enjoy content. That’s fine.

But when people ask you really- why do you like this character so much?

Don’t let your answer be- because they’re good.

Because when you say that, I just know that there’s literally nothing else about that character. No flaws, no interesting facets. No internal struggles. You picked a Mary Sue. A character with nothing wrong with them as to self insert or to find comfort in.

now- this isn't to say that "being good or kind," CAN'T be interesting because it can! when you use a subversive trait to counteract the "kind" trait.

if you're presented a cold, rude character that repeatedly is written to be "maybe the villain," but then you're presented with this new information of, "oh they're actually really nice, or did a really kind thing to (blank)" that's interesting, you wonder WHY, you wonder how come? and if it's well written, you can see that the character can be truly fleshed out with a personality and moral ambiguity.

where does this character, really lie?

a good character i find would actually be levi from aot to showcase a large range of ambiguous morality as well as showcasing a possible range of actions that COULD seem as contradictory, but REALLY, what they're showcasing is that despite the action going against what is canonically written for his character; it's deeper than that-

-it's showing/proving something.

from the very beginning there are approximately 3 traits that i can showcase that are projected into this character. these are core values or parts of his writing that are meant to show who is he

(also spoilers? but aot is old af so whatever)

1. Levi is a very clean/neat person

we've been presented with several notions of his cleanliness, that he hates being dirty and would go out of his way to clean things even in battle. keeping his blades clean immediately after using them. this is seen as a clear personality trait. this is something that is a part of his character, this is not going to change.

2. Levi is cold and standoffish towards others

now i'm going to connect the first trait and the second trait in the exact same moment. levi has been shown to not have many friends, he doesn't get along with people well and chooses not to.

in a single moment, we have something that goes AGAINST what we've been presented.

there is a dying soldier that is being comforted by someone else, and in his last moments levi is asked to help. levi doesn't NEED to help the dying soldier. but he does so because of his standing. but also because he chooses to.

he takes the dying soldier's hand (which is dirtied by blood) holding his hand as levi gives him comforting last words. words that make it so that he can die comfortably. that his life wasn't in vain. that he can finally go in peace.

(these are both things that he arguably doesn't want to do)

3. Levi is presented as having a "high sense of morality"

this is a pretty quick one to go against actually, levi is presented as one of the strongest. and is often allowed to lead and make decisions in split seconds. however- we are also presented with the idea of him not agreeing with his own decisions. he clearly says that he struggles with his own morality "my moral high ground has gone to shit" (im paraphrasing because i can't find the clip on youtube lol)

he chooses to do things because he feels as though it is the correct choice - EVEN IF IT ENDS IN DEATH. because of these outcomes, he is unsure of his own morals and choices and decisions and it affects him greatly.

these are very easy ways to showcase a character and give them range and to show that they are capable of being fleshed out in very simple ways.

these aren't hard concepts to grasp and can go EVEN further to flesh out characters and to showcase their personality and traits that aren't just THIS CHARACTER DOES THIS.

when i consume media- i take the time to read characters and try to understand their motivations, decisions and choices.

you DON'T HAVE TO- but when you come into spaces that are talking about characterizations of characters, why you like characters etc. and you do not want to engage in these types of conversations- then do not engage with it.