Philosophy: Critical... thinking
Yesterday, I watched a program about Greek history: Homer, the Iliad, Troy, Helen....
A lot happens in 3,000-4,000 years. Civilizations come and go and get buried and lost. Of course, we are getting better at recording history... or are we?
No one knows for sure about the "facts" surrounding Troy and its war with Sparta. In fact, there are other versions about Troy that place it in England, of all places. And the great poet Homer may or may not have been an actual person. Some think he is an amalgamation of many poets and storytellers. Yet, the Iliad remains one of the great sagas of all time... fact, fiction or a little of both.
What is of interest also are the means by which this "history" was preserved through time. For hundreds of years before Homer (if he existed), parts of the tale that became the Iliad were handed down by storytellers... orally. It wasn't until later that a written version of Homer's Iliad "hit the newstands".
Now we have computers, satellite telephones, instant "facts" from numerous sources. We have archives of history in dozens of media. All is known; all is told... or not.
Dramatic events can be produced through creative camera angles and editing or outright staging. Digital photographs are easily manipulated by anyone with $200 software. Statements can be strung together electronically so there is little resemblance to what was originally said and the context in which it was said completely lost.
Facts can be manufactured or easily misrepresented... and with television and radio stations competing to be first with the "facts", they sometimes skimp on the "fact checkers". Then we have particular "facts" that might be wrong, but represent the truth... so that's okay. Sorry, Dan.
It used to take hundreds of years to create hi-story from story. Now it takes a few minutes.
That means you have the responsibility to be a critical thinker. The fabricators are absolved of their responsibility to be "truthful". They only have to sound "plausible". You must, therefore, understand:
"the relationship of language to logic,... (or have) the ability to analyze, criticize, and advocate ideas, to reason inductively and deductively, and to reach factual or judgmental conclusions based on sound inferences drawn from unambiguous statements of knowledge or belief....(or acquire) the ability to distinguish fact from judgment, belief from knowledge, and skills in elementary inductive and deductive processes, including an understanding of the formal and informal fallacies of language and thought."You need to cut through the b---s---. Election Day is near.... Do some critical thinking.
- Is John Kerry a Vietnam War hero or a Communist stooge? Can the answer be "neither"? Can the answer be "both"?
- Was George Bush a "draft dodger" or did he "serve honorably" in the National Guard? Can the answer be "neither"? Can the answer be "both"?
- Is what happened 35 years ago relevant? Why?
- Is what happened between 35 years ago and now more relevant?
- Are there patterns of decisions that anticipate future decisions?
- As president, will Bush or Kerry benefit more people? How?
- As the beneficiary of great wealth, how can Kerry represent the "common man"?
- As the beneficiary of great privilege, how can Bush represent the "common man"?
- What does the "common man" mean... careful.
- Has Bush sold out to business interests? For example?
- Has Kerry sold out to special interests? For example?
- Is Bush to blame for the economic recession or Clinton or both or neither?
- Is Bush to blame for job outsourcing or Clinton or both or neither?
- Who signed NAFTA? (Hint: January, 1994) Who both supported and criticized it?
Step right up! Getcher critical thinking here! Hurry, hurry, hurry!!!