Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking

>So now you’re just straight up contradicting yourself. First you criticize him for changing policy based on new data, but then you criticize him for not changing his position based on new data?

When did I criticize him for changing policy with new data? He’s done nothing but move the goal posts, and double down on policies that were utter failures a year ago. That’s a criticism of him NOT changing with new data.

>This might be useful for you: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

The irony of this last piece is so rich that I don’t think I could have one more bite. Did you run out of talking points correct the record?

Seems like you could use this:

https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

Just a note, you are NOT studying in Stanford, Yale, etc. but rather, taking a course created by the said institutions. (Because if you we're, you should be able to credit your Coursera certificates towards a degree, and most of the time you can't.)

But other than that, it's all good.

btw, baka may DDS friends kayo na alam niyong nag avail nito, patake niyo sa kanila to https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke haha.

Tell me you don’t understand epidemiology without telling me you don’t understand epi.

These might help:

https://www.coursera.org/learn/epidemiology

https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

I know you think you're doing something here, but you're not. Some can trash these naive, ignorant voters for being Trump cult followers and still hold the position that Biden isn't going to do anything for them either.

I know this type of thinking is a bit difficult for some people to understand, but you can actually learn how to think better and smarter. Duke University has a class on Coursera, for free, that might help you better understand these types of things.

I think there are great suggestions on rethoric and how to get more familiar with the subject you guys discussed.

To add, my suggestion is: Understanding Arguments. It teaches you to deconstruct and understand the logic behind arguments. Whether arguments are valid and/or sound. You'll learn different fallacies. In addition, there is a course on coursera by the authors.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20366662#:~:text=Signs%20and%20symptoms%20of%20narcissistic,and%20require%20constant%2C%20excessive%20admiration

Lol I can't take you seriously anymore, took me 2min to check your profile and realize you're the equivalent to a female incel. Please get checked for your safety and those around you.

In regards to animals having false hope, please be consistent in your argument, if you did the research on biting behavior and how it's their natural instinct to be aggressive if locked up, then you should know that the "false hope" is just stimulation and excitement they get when interacting with new things, they don't actually form a bond or attachment that quickly.

https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

Here's a great course to help improve your arguments. I took one in my university but I bet this one would be just as good and shares a lot of the same concepts I learned. Hope this does you well.

In what world did you get that from anything in this thread?

I'd love to see your logical proof to show how

>Seeing the problems with someone saying "nobody is guilty of rape until they've been found guilty in a court of law"

and

> labeling all men as rapists

are the same thing. Please explain, and feel free to use this if you need some help getting through it.

https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

Try this.

There are many, many things that I'd like to do.

First: I will make a course in logic and critical thinking compulsory for all students starting from 8th, and introduce the students to analytical thinking as is found in modern philosophical practice. Students much be taught to make, analyze, and evaluate arguments. See here for an example of what I am talking about: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

Second: make science and mathematics more hands on. Incorporate lessons from the culture of Russian and American mathematical circles in the classroom and also in the training of teachers. Create simple experiments through which students can see the science they learn in the textbooks in action.

Third: spend some money to produce quality educational media. A single Rafale fighter costs somewhere in the vicinity of 1500 crore rupees. At a fraction of that cost, we can create high quality educational materials that will benefit every student in India. That will do a lot more to strengthen our society than a fighter jet.

Some places offer free online classes too.

Give something like this a shot - https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

If you have not tried psilocybin, please DON'T. But if you have, I hope it somewhat helped you make new mental connections. Again, if you haven't, do not try it. Save it for when you get your life together.

Have you thought about learning critical thinking? Here's why that's helpful: our thoughts and feelings are often illogical. Having good foundational critical thinking helps us challenge our own thoughts and feelings. All the thoughts and feelings you are currently having may not be logical. For instance, they can be overblown by your proclivity for negative emotions. I suggest laying off the cannabis, forcing yourself to go onto your internet browser, and start either this course or this one. They're both free.

It's extremely helpful to pair this with cognitive behavioral therapy (or CBT). Please connect with a licensed therapist to do this, or research how you can apply this to yourself on your own, which is totally possible. CBT provides a framework with which you can examine your thoughts, feelings, and actions, which are all interconnected. Do a simple search on YouTube or Google on what it is and how to apply it to help yourself please. With your newfound critical thinking skill, you can apply CBT to yourself in a manner that is conducive to getting yourself out of the cycles of negative thoughts and feelings, which fuel your harmful actions, which in turn induce more negative thoughts and feelings.

In the meantime, listen to JP's content on YouTube to gain more clinical insights into who you are and why you act and feel the way you do. Awareness is often a tremendously powerful first step towards liberation.

Your problems might seem mammoth to you, especially when you feel like you're on your own. But please do not give up and become nihilistic. You got this. You have the power. Hope this helps.

No one is strong in the logic department until they study it, and take the time to master it. Logic is a skill, something invented by the Greeks.

List of logical fallacies: http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/ENGL1311/fallacies.htm

List of cognitive biases: https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/lifestyle/50-cognitive-biases-to-be-aware-of-so-you-can-be-the-very-best-version-of-you/

There's a lot of ways to learn logic and critical thinking: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

Hello.

Caution: you don't want to get into postmodernism yet. Not at least before you find some firm footing in basics of philosophy. Reading Foucault has become a fancy, but you can wait for a while.

It is always good to begin philosophy with crash courses that can give you an overview of happenings in philosophy. That way, you might get interested in a particular branch of philosophy and take your interest forward from there. For example, philosophy of mind is an exciting field to explore. However, I'll leave that to you. Philosophy is a practice as well. So, pay attention, and you might benefit from taking notes. Do not rush. Take your time. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUHoo4L8qXthO958RfdrAL8XAHvk5xuu9

This course is an introduction to philosophy, and it starts with the fundamental question: What is philosophy? So, you might be interested in starting with this course before moving on to higher terrains.  https://www.coursera.org/learn/philosophy

Suppose you are particularly interested in logic, reasoning, and arguments. It does you well if you can start and finish off these four courses. Refer back to the crash course playlist to get an idea of logic and argumentation in philosophy. https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

This course is the best course you might come across in your life. Justice by Michael Sanders is an epic course. Once again, to understand what justice is, you might want to refer to the crash course and some of the resources I am providing below under the name 'Websites for Philosophy.' He has written a book by the same name.  https://www.edx.org/course/justice-2

Websites for Philosophy

https://iep.utm.edu/ (Using this website to know about a philosopher or a concept is an excellent way to begin)

https://plato.stanford.edu/ (Very advanced. Hold on to it. Nevertheless an indispensable resource to have).

Wikipedia is fine but does not just rely on that alone.

People to Avoid

Slavoj Zizek Ayn Rand Jordan Peterson

These are dangerous philosophers (I'm not sure if they are philosophers at all) - potent enough to brainwash anyone.

Youtube Channels

These youtube channels you can refer to if you are interested in the content. Interestingly, most of these channels provide sources below. It is always a good idea to read the material provided (Of course, not everything for now, but something that interests you).

https://www.youtube.com/c/thephilosophytube

https://www.youtube.com/c/carneadesofcyrene

Avoid anything by 'School of Life.' It is the worst channel I have come across

Objectively yes, less than half of a WWE show is wrestling; and subjectively it's WWE themselves who say they're not wrestling,.

If this still doesn't make sense to you, I've got your back:

https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke

So now you’re just straight up contradicting yourself. First you criticize him for changing policy based on new data, but then you criticize him for not changing his position based on new data? Classic.

This might be useful for you: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/logic-critical-thinking-duke