Democracy, Critical Thinking, & Journalism

[mlees]

[QUOTE=coberst]
mlees

For Socrates a necessary component of wisdom is to comprehend what one is ignorant of.

Am I wise? Do I know what I am ignorant of? I certainly know that I am ignorant of astronomy and psychology. There are many things about which it is obvious to me that I am ignorant of. Are there things about which I am not even aware of my ignorance? Are there matters about which I think I am knowledgeable of but which I am, in fact, ignorant of?

When I ask myself these questions I become conscious of a great number of things about which I am ignorant. Does this mean I am like Socrates in this matter? I do not think so. **Socrates is speaking about two types of ignorance about which most people are unconscious of.

I think that Socrates is speaking of our ‘burden of illusion’. People are unconscious of the superficiality of much that they think they know and they are unconscious of a vast domain of knowledge that is hidden from the non critical thinker.**

The uncritical mind has no means for discovering these illusions. CT (Critical Thinking) is the keystone for discovering these illusions. The Catch-22 here is how can one develop a critical mind when they are deluded into thinking they have a critical mind?

When our educational system has not taught our citizens how to think critically how can our citizens ever pull themselves out of this deep hole of illusion?
[/quote]

The trend, currently, is to rely on the advice and training of a subject matter expert. Since the total sum of human knowledge has expanded past the point in which a sungle person can become an expert in all things, we must defer to those who have become an expert in a particular field. (Sorry, that seems like I said the same thing twice.)

How can I know ‘what I think I know’ but which I really do not know? How can I learn what are my illusions?

I think that the kaleidoscope might be an appropriate visual metaphor for attitude. With each turn, while the core matter (intuition?) remains the same, the presentation changes. The changing pattern is our only correspondence with the intuition (core matter?).

Well, as far as my limited knowledge goes, I don’t think those questions have been difinitively answered, yet, in human history. But I encourage those who are interested in such endeavours to keep at it.

Most of the rest of us schlubs settle for what seems “close enough”.

We display an attitude toward most any subject. An attitude cannot be described explicitly but is a notion, which is an inference, based upon behavior. We are all inclined to behave consistently to a situation and this behavior is attributed to our attitude. Our attitudes and the quality of such attitudes are judged based on observed behavior.

Britannica specifies that attitude is “a predisposition to classify objects and events and to react to them with some degree of evaluative consistency.”

If I consult my inner self I cannot focus upon an attitude but can infer such an attitude based on behavior.

If I wish to become conscious of my intuition I can through observation of behavior describe the attitude, which, in turn, allows me to ascertain the nature of my intuition.

When a mother tells her son “you must change your attitude”. The son cannot change the attitude but the son must change his intuition from which the inferred attitude emanates. This does become a bit convoluted but in essence when we wish to change an attitude we are saying that our intuition must be modified.

Well, most people only do this kind of self evaluation when it becomes apparent that previously held beliefs or opinions are in error.

To expect folks to constantly reevaluate all of their knowledge and attitudes on a subject every time that a particular subject matter comes up is, I think, a little unrealistic.

The point of all of this is that it is the intuition we wish to understand and our attitudes are a means to discover the profile of our intuition.

Attitudes are email from the intuition. I think email is an appropriate word because the attitude is reasonably clear and the source is mysterious and at the present unknowable.

Err.. what? I thought you were saying that attitude (& observed behavior) was the outward manifestation of the inner intuition & beliefs… where did I goof up?

The attitude directs the behavior. The public and I can observe the behavior and from that gain insight as to the attitude. Under attitudes one might create the categories of values, interests, sentiments, beliefs, predisposition’s, irrational tendencies, taste, knowledge, certainties etc.

The public from my behavior can infer attitudes. The question is how do I use the attitudes as a vehicle for making conscious to me the nature of my intuition? The answer is that through solitude and concentration I can focus my conscious intellect and develop inferences as the structure of my intuition.

Solitude becomes the catalysis for developing insight into the nature of intuition. This insight may provide a pattern from which further inferences can be drawn thereby making other aspects of the intuition accessible to the conscious intellect.

I am going to guess that “different strokes for different folks” will rear it’s ugly head here. What works for you may not necessarily work for everybody…

Some folks just need a good kick in the seat of there pants.

Solitude is not meant to be sensor deprivation, which can lead to hallucinations. Solitude and perhaps a modification of normal environment can facilitate the faculty of imagination.

Solitude creates a mood that enhances the faculty of imagination, which becomes the driving force for conscious action. The faculties of imagination and reason set the human species off from our non-human ancestors. Imagination as a force for human discontent is therefore the force for human advancement. Human flexibility motivated by the discontent of imagination has provided the impetuous for human material advancement.

Ummm, do you use candles and incense? (Sorry. Heh. A little snark.) I got nuthin. My method is that I talk to, and argue with, myself. Unfortunately, that looks goofy to other folks (and it’s embarassing when I lose those arguments).

Goya said that fantasy united with reason “is the mother of the arts and the origin of their marvels.” Fantasy, the child of imagination, plus reason has produced all the scientific and humanistic and artistic accomplishments. It can also help us comprehend what are our illusions.

Well, deep introspective thought is indeed a learned/trained skill, and not an inborn one.

But, with everyone having different levels of intellect, and very different life experiences tugging and pulling on their subconsious, I don’t think you can expect to train huge masses of folks (I’m talking about on the U.S. national level) to be all little poet/philosophers of genius level.

Some folks just ain’t interested. (Or capable.)

And in my free country, you can choose mediocrity, if you want. Your free to live how you wish.

Having options, I think, is better. Just provide the opportunity to the folks who wish to pursue those paths.

That is the key to democracy. Providing the most people possible with the opportunities their desires and talents push them.

---

In your OP, you claim that democracy demands an enlightened populace. May I presume that you feel what we have now is considerably less so? (What “problem” are you trying to fix?)

That the populace we have know is making decisions (i.e. votes) based on half baked ideas and emotions? (2004 newspaper headline: “How can 60 million people be so stupid?”)

[coberst]

mlees

What problem am I trying to fix?

I think that the citizens of the US (I speak of the US only because I do not know about other nations but I am convinced it is basically true for all nations) must significantly increase their level of intellectual sophistication. I am convinced that our civilization has a strong probability of self destruction within the next 200 years if we do not change our ways.

How can we increase our intellectual sophistication quickly? We can do so only if we engage adults in the process of becoming self-actualizing self-learners. Adults generally wrap their intellects with their year book and store both in the attic after their school daze are over. Our educational system has left us severely handicapped and we must recognize this fact and take immediate action to change this fact.

I see no possibility that we will make this change quickly in our educational institutions and adult intellect just goes to waste now so we have the available brain power but what is missing is that adults have no comprehension of the problem or of their participation in the problem. The task is to quickly awaken a sleeping population.

The Internet forum offers us a medium for making this happen. The problem is that there are few riders who are prepared to ride through the land shouting “awaken, go to your libraries we have much understanding to do and the hour is late”.

How about them apples? Do you have any comment beyond the normal negative comment that prevails within our adult community?

[mlees]

[QUOTE=coberst]
mlees

What problem am I trying to fix?

I think that the citizens of the US (I speak of the US only because I do not know about other nations but I am convinced it is basically true for all nations) must significantly increase their level of intellectual sophistication. I am convinced that our civilization has a strong probability of self destruction within the next 200 years if we do not change our ways.
[/quote]

“Our civilization” will not be here in 200 years. Period. The civilization we have now has roots based on that of the 18th/19th century, but values have changed markedly. (Some in a good way. No more slavery, for example.) A new, different civilization will come about. Change is inevitable.

However, I presume you speak of some calamity or mass die off. War? Economic collapse? Global warming destroying too much infrastructure? Overpopulation? Disease? Any or all of the above? Something else?

And what makes you put a 200 number on us?

How can we increase our intellectual sophistication quickly? We can do so only if we engage adults in the process of becoming self-actualizing self-learners. Adults generally wrap their intellects with their year book and store both in the attic after their school daze are over. Our educational system has left us severely handicapped and we must recognize this fact and take immediate action to change this fact.

Wow. I thought I was a cynic…

Most folks spend the majority of their time worrying about their immediate situation and family. Job. Food. Shelter. If time permits, then entertainment, and the pursuit of philosophy and art, and hob-nobbing with the neighbors.

They learn the “system” (society) they grow up in, figure out how to get what they want within that system. (Usually.)

To expect every regular citizen (especially in a population numbering in the millions) to be emotionally invested about every event or topic that do not impact their own lives is a tad unrealistic, I think. YMMV.

This has been true since the dawn of recorded history.

I see no possibility that we will make this change quickly in our educational institutions and adult intellect just goes to waste now so we have the available brain power but what is missing is that adults have no comprehension of the problem or of their participation in the problem. The task is to quickly awaken a sleeping population.

1. To each their own, according to their abilities. I don’t think that everyone has the same potential philosophical or intellectual capacity, and it is “just a matter of education” to acheive the levels you described two posts above my last. (Post #19.)

What do you propose to do with those who can not grasp the “critical thinking” concepts, especially beyond the basic level? (i.e. Someone who consistantly fails to utilise these techniques.) Take away their right to vote?

2. Many folks, as I stated above, may wish to pick the path of least resistance, either through laziness or whatever. (You may have heard of folks who are genuinely smart, but choose to try to “cheat” the system anyway, because they thought it would be easier, or less work.)

What do you propose to do with those who choose to be sluggards anyway? Forced work or education camps?

I prefer, as I said in a previous post, to allow as much personal freedom as possible. We can debate over how much is too much, and that’s democracy in action.

The Internet forum offers us a medium for making this happen. The problem is that there are few riders who are prepared to ride through the land shouting “awaken, go to your libraries we have much understanding to do and the hour is late”.

Maybe it’s not a problem with education techniques. Maybe you just need to get the populace to be genuinely enthusiastic with actually participating in things outside their daily life.

I submit that a lot of voting age adults don’t get involved in issues (at least, in the U.S., if an issue doesn’t directly affect them at that moment) is because they think that either:

1. They can’t/won’t have an impact, at least on a national level; (“Why bother voting? I live in California. My conservative vote is going to be ignored.”)

or

2. Somebody more knowledgable than them will fix whatever’s wrong anyway. (I think a lot of the Global Warming ambivalance may reside here.)

How about them apples? Do you have any comment beyond the normal negative comment that prevails within our adult community?

I did not think I was sounding so negative. My apologies.

It just seemed to me that you were coming from a viewpoint based slightly more in idealistic theory, and less of practicality. (Given the wide variance in human potential and desires, I do not think Utopia is actually possible. )

But I do not wish to seem like I’m dismissing your thoughts out of hand, and crapping all over your integrity. If I thought you were a complete loon, or if I thought that this topic was a complete waste of time, I wouldn’t bother posting. I am not a troll.

[coberst]

mlees

My negative remark was not directed at you. I was just venting my frustrations. I do not expect everyone to become an intellectual. I estimate that 2 out of a thousand would be sufficent to change the world. With that ratio we would have 600,000 people in the US to help change the world. Train is leaving soon you must jump on board today if you want a good seat.

[mlees]

[QUOTE=coberst]
mlees

My negative remark was not directed at you. I was just venting my frustrations. I do not expect everyone to become an intellectual. I estimate that 2 out of a thousand would be sufficent to change the world. With that ratio we would have 600,000 people in the US to help change the world. Train is leaving soon you must jump on board today if you want a good seat.
[/QUOTE]

I am afraid I don’t qualify. I am of modest intellect. Please, be gentle.

[Bryan_Ekers]

[QUOTE=coberst]
My negative remark was not directed at you. I was just venting my frustrations. I do not expect everyone to become an intellectual. I estimate that 2 out of a thousand would be sufficent to change the world. With that ratio we would have 600,000 people in the US to help change the world. Train is leaving soon you must jump on board today if you want a good seat.
[/QUOTE]

It turns out that that train is powerful enough to pull along people who aren’t fighting for a choice seat, who may even be (slightly) impeding the train’s progress. It’s nice to give the entire population a shot at becoming edjumacated, but I think the best we can do is encourage the motivated, marginalize the whacko, and let nature sort itself out.

[Glazer]

I’m sorry. But I think I missed it.
What was the question?

[mlees]

[QUOTE=Glazer]
I’m sorry. But I think I missed it.
What was the question?
[/QUOTE]

@coberst

The question then becomes: is it more important to have citizens with greater knowledge and less understanding and critical thinking or citizens with greater understanding and critical thinking and less knowledge?

Which, the OP reveals later, comes from this concern:

@coberst

What problem am I trying to fix?

I think that the citizens of the US (I speak of the US only because I do not know about other nations but I am convinced it is basically true for all nations) must significantly increase their level of intellectual sophistication. I am convinced that our civilization has a strong probability of self destruction within the next 200 years if we do not change our ways.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Wow, 200 years. It’s dire but noncommittal, like a girl who says “I’d sleep with you, but then I’d have to kill you.”