Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Feb 08, 2016 3:08 am

<< Week of February 08, 2016 >>
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
8 Day Month

9 Day Month

10 Day Month

11 Day Month

12 Day Month

13 Day Month

14 Day Month





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page 1, 2  Next
A discussion of the Introduction (page 11 - 30) 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Owner
Diamond Contributor 3

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 14879
Location: Florida
Thanks: 2780
Thanked: 1066 times in 841 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)
Highscores: 6

Post A discussion of the Introduction (page 11 - 30)
A discussion of the Introduction (page 11 - 30)



Thu Jul 30, 2009 1:00 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reads During Parties

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3896
Location: NC
Thanks: 1477
Thanked: 1564 times in 1188 posts
Gender: Male

Post 
Riniolo makes his case here that even those of us who strive to be critical thinkers and who may pride ourselves on having very fine bullshit detectors (paraphrasing here) are prone to occasionally take a stroll down Uncritical Thinking Blvd.

I think this is Rinolio's thesis in a nutshell. When Good Thinking Goes Bad, meaning when even the finest minds amongst us are capable of prejudices and biases that can steer us into faulty thinking. I do believe we discussed on another thread here the importance of intellectual humility which, I think, goes hand in hand with awareness that we are naturally gullible creatures.

I really like the subtitle, When Your Brain Can Have a Mind of its Own. That seems to imply (to me, at least) that a lack of awareness of your brain's tendency for error leads to unconscious prejudices and biases that can steer us wrong.

Quote:
. . . [and if] nobody is immune from thinking uncritically in some contexts, then raising this issue can have some very positive benefits for us as critical thinkers in the long run and can ultimately be useful to improve the application of our critical thinking skills in a more consistent manner and to a wider range of issues.


This is a fairly simple but important concept. As Rinolio says here awareness of our tendency to accept beliefs without due diligence is an important aspect of what it means to be a critical thinker and we have to be vigilant in reminding ourselves of this tendency.

Michael Shermer, who is mentioned several times, wrote Why People Believe Weird Things. An excerpt of this book, Why Smart People Believe Weird Things can be read here. I think it makes for good parallel reading this book and especially this introduction.

http://skeptically.org/logicalthreads/id15.html


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:18 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reads During Parties

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3896
Location: NC
Thanks: 1477
Thanked: 1564 times in 1188 posts
Gender: Male

Post 
Rinolio provides a good illustration for the notion that even good thinkers can be led astray, using the esteemed Isaac Asimov as his example. If you don't have the book yet, here's the story. In 1975, Asimov, an outstanding skeptic in his own right, endorsed a "doomsday" statement by the Environmental Fund that appeared in many newspapers which stated:

1. World food population cannot keep pace with the galloping growth of population. 2. "Family planning" cannot and will not, in the foreseeable future, check this runaway growth.

In hindsight, the claim that food production was not keeping pace with population was wrong, says Rinolio. Asimov accepted this prediction apparently without considering the actual data from agricultural economists which at the time said that food production was increasing and improving.

Here, Rinolio says, The prediction endorsed by Asimov was flat-out wrong and seems almost humorous today, given that obesity is a more pressing issue . . .

By the way, I would question Rinolio's assumption that obesity is a result of an over-abundance of food. I think it's much more complicated than that. I think it's possible that we could reach a tipping point in population where some parts of the world are over-indulging in junk food, while many in the third world are starving, but that's probably another topic for another day.

Regardless, the point that good thinkers can be led astray is well taken. Likewise, I'd say that Al Gore is promoting the idea of anthropogenic global warming way before the science has fully documented the hows, whys and whats. The climate data is very complicated and speculative, yet Gore is adamant that it is real and it is happening now and that we should engage the problem now. His position reeks of ideological bias to me.

The global warming issue, by the way, is addressed in Ch. 10.

I know many good thinkers seem to reserve a special place for pseudoscientific beliefs, such as naturalistic health remedies. And, as, Rinolio explains in subsequent chapters, it's pretty clear that an expert in one field doesn't make him an expert in another.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Last edited by geo on Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:38 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:26 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Commander

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2898
Location: Round Hill, VA
Thanks: 457
Thanked: 366 times in 277 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post 
geo wrote:
I do believe we discussed on another thread here the importance of intellectual humility which, I think, goes hand in hand with awareness that we are naturally gullible creatures.

I really like the subtitle, When Your Brain Can Have a Mind of its Own. That seems to imply (to me, at least) that a lack of awareness of your brain's tendency for error leads to unconscious prejudices and biases that can steer us wrong.


*my bold


I picked this book up at the library the other day, gave it a cursory look and thought I wouldn't read it. Due to unexpected rain and a canceled tennis game I picked the book back up. To my delight, I had misunderstood what the book was about. I look forward to the discussion this book generates. Thank, Geo, for getting it started.


_________________
In love we are made visible
As in a magic bath
are unpeeled
to the sharp pit
so long concealed
--May Swenson


Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:38 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reads During Parties

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3896
Location: NC
Thanks: 1477
Thanked: 1564 times in 1188 posts
Gender: Male

Post 
Saffron wrote:
Due to unexpected rain and a canceled tennis game I picked the book back up. To my delight, I had misunderstood what the book was about. I look forward to the discussion this book generates. Thank, Geo, for getting it started.


I'm so glad it rained, Saffron. So far, I think it's a very interesting and worthwhile book. I've already decided to buy some extra copies to give to people. I've also taken to underlining numerous passages throughout something I almost never do.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:48 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Commander

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2898
Location: Round Hill, VA
Thanks: 457
Thanked: 366 times in 277 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post 
geo wrote:
I'm so glad it rained, Saffron. .


A nice little bit of serendipity, the rain. I too find the book most interesting. Here's my first underlining:

"This book will ultimately theorize that our our beliefs, especially our most cherished beliefs, can in certain situations influence our ability to appropriately apply our critical thinking skills that usually serve us well."


_________________
In love we are made visible
As in a magic bath
are unpeeled
to the sharp pit
so long concealed
--May Swenson


Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:06 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Intern

Silver Contributor

Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 158
Location: Austin, Texas
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 6 times in 3 posts
Gender: Female

Post 
Since critical thinking is to be used for evaluating claims, I find Riniolo’s coverage on that topic to be excellent. He quickly covers that “two widely agreed-upon key components are the attitude toward the claim and the method of inquiry “13). He recommends the scientific approach theory but reminds the reader that there are different kinds of scientific tests for different kinds of claims.

However, what I find most interesting is when he states that “critical thinking is not an ideological position … but it is loyal only to ascertaining truth” (15). Thus, the critical thinker is not trying to prove or disprove something; they are trying to find the truth about it.


_________________
"The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never say a common place thing, but burn, burn, burn like fabulous roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars..." ~ Jack Kerouac


Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:05 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Owner
Diamond Contributor 3

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 14879
Location: Florida
Thanks: 2780
Thanked: 1066 times in 841 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)
Highscores: 6

Post 
I'm just starting reading today.



Sun Aug 02, 2009 12:56 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Owner
Diamond Contributor 3

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 14879
Location: Florida
Thanks: 2780
Thanked: 1066 times in 841 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)
Highscores: 6

Post 
It will be interesting to see how well the author builds that case for the argument that, "we are all inconsistent critical thinkers. Even the elite critical thinker is not exempt."

I'm very interested to see how this discussion unfolds and if everyone reading this book and participating in this discussion agrees with the author's position. Often, even on BookTalk.org, I see critical thinkers not applying their skills to all areas of discussion. I think politics and economics are areas where biases flourish and cloud judgment. And I imagine I fall victim to stinkin' thinkin' (my father used to use that term) as often as the next guy. I am not trying to turn this discussion into a political debate, but it looks like Riniolo will be using examples of situations where critical thinkers turn off their critical thinking powers and cling to biases and crap beliefs. So we might be getting into that area no matter what.



Sun Aug 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Profile Email WWW
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5394
Location: Berryville, Virginia
Thanks: 1298
Thanked: 1330 times in 1037 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
You're all making this book sound too interesting. I'm going to try to find it as I travel down to Norfolk tomorrow. One thing I'm thinking--and it could be no more than an analogous situation--is whether there is an equivalent to de Waal's emotional contagion in the realm of judgment. When we see others propounding arguments and seeming to be quite certain of their truth, we can be swept along with them--especially if we are in some way emotionally primed to accept their views. They're the good guys already, in our eyes, so of course they must be right.

Shades of our old friend Robert Burton in this speculation.


_________________
No, it is impossible; it is impossible to convey the life-sensation of any given epoch of one's existence--that which makes its truth, its meaning--its subtle penetrating essence. It is impossible. We live as we dream--alone.

Joseph Conrad, The Heart of Darkness


Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:13 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reads During Parties

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3896
Location: NC
Thanks: 1477
Thanked: 1564 times in 1188 posts
Gender: Male

Post 
Krysondra wrote:
However, what I find most interesting is when he states that “critical thinking is not an ideological position … but it is loyal only to ascertaining truth” (15). Thus, the critical thinker is not trying to prove or disprove something; they are trying to find the truth about it.


Yes, this seems a key component. To that end, Rinolio also says the critical thinker not only engages the world with an evidence-demanding attitude, but has a nothing is off-limits policy. "Thus, not even our most precious beliefs are exempt from a critical evaluation." (14)


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:22 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reads During Parties

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3896
Location: NC
Thanks: 1477
Thanked: 1564 times in 1188 posts
Gender: Male

Post 
Chris OConnor wrote:
I think politics and economics are areas where biases flourish and cloud judgment. And I imagine I fall victim to stinkin' thinkin' (my father used to use that term) as often as the next guy. I am not trying to turn this discussion into a political debate, but it looks like Riniolo will be using examples of situations where critical thinkers turn off their critical thinking powers and cling to biases and crap beliefs. So we might be getting into that area no matter what.


I like Michael Shermer's quick answer to why do smart people believe weird things. "Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons."

I think you're right, Chris, that politics and economics are areas in which many of us are probably more inclined to throw critical thinking out the window. In part II of the book Rinolio provides some case studies of inconsistent thinking by Einstein and the author's own misconceptions regarding the Scopes Monkey Trial.

I like Rinolio's analogy of the baseball player who knows how to play baseball very well, but who will make mistakes if he doesn't stick to the basics:

"There exists the possibility that the baseball player will not appropriately use his ability (i.e. deviate from training and skill level) and make an error under certain conditions (i.e. performance does not match ability. . . . Likewise there exists the possibility that we may slip up and not use our critical thinking ability appropriately when evaluating certain claims." (16)


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:41 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Intern

Silver Contributor

Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 158
Location: Austin, Texas
Thanks: 0
Thanked: 6 times in 3 posts
Gender: Female

Post 
geo wrote:
Yes, this seems a key component. To that end, Rinolio also says the critical thinker not only engages the world with an evidence-demanding attitude, but has a nothing is off-limits policy. "Thus, not even our most precious beliefs are exempt from a critical evaluation." (14)


However, at the same time, he does not think that universal skepticism will work and that the beliefs that we cannot / do not challange will influence how we evaluate new claims.

So, I guess there is a fine line between skepticism and belief.


_________________
"The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never say a common place thing, but burn, burn, burn like fabulous roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars..." ~ Jack Kerouac


Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:44 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reads During Parties

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3896
Location: NC
Thanks: 1477
Thanked: 1564 times in 1188 posts
Gender: Male

Post 
Krysondra wrote:
However, at the same time, he does not think that universal skepticism will work and that the beliefs that we cannot / do not challange will influence how we evaluate new claims.

So, I guess there is a fine line between skepticism and belief.


Right, we can't examine every single assumption or belief and our baseline ultimately influences what we do examine critically and what we give a free pass. Understanding this tendency to filter out truths based on pre-existing beliefs hopefully will make us more vigilant and be willing to reevaluate things. I was once pretty convinced in global warming, but I did step back at some point and actually look at some of the data. Currently I'm agnostic in that regard. But how many beliefs have I given a free pass to? Probably lots of stuff.

Edit: Doesn't the internet now give us the ability to examine many things that would have once required a trip to the library or for us to open an encyclopedia? So, in fact, maybe we can examine many beliefs that previously would have been given a free pass.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Mon Aug 03, 2009 4:22 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Professor

Silver Contributor

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 3542
Location: NJ
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 14 times in 10 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post 
geo wrote:
Rinolio provides a good illustration for the notion that even good thinkers can be led astray, using the esteemed Isaac Asimov as his example. If you don't have the book yet, here's the story. In 1975, Asimov, an outstanding skeptic in his own right, endorsed a "doomsday" statement by the Environmental Fund that appeared in many newspapers which stated:

1. World food population cannot keep pace with the galloping growth of population. 2. "Family planning" cannot and will not, in the foreseeable future, check this runaway growth.

In hindsight, the claim that food production was not keeping pace with population was wrong, says Rinolio. Asimov accepted this prediction apparently without considering the actual data from agricultural economists which at the time said that food production was increasing and improving.

Here, Rinolio says, The prediction endorsed by Asimov was flat-out wrong and seems almost humorous today, given that obesity is a more pressing issue . . .

By the way, I would question Rinolio's assumption that obesity is a result of an over-abundance of food. I think it's much more complicated than that. I think it's possible that we could reach a tipping point in population where some parts of the world are over-indulging in junk food, while many in the third world are starving, but that's probably another topic for another day.



But was Asimov entirely wrong? Yes, we have food, but it is based on junk and processed foods. Obesity may not be due to over eating of fooodstuff, but because of the junk we eat, the corn based (Riniolo also states that food is grown to produce food or something like that...) diet we consume that our bodies cannot really handle. We do not eat much real food anymore, says Pollan. See Pollan, "Omnivor's Dilema" & "In Defense of Food" for a treatment on this issue. Great books.

So, traditional food production may not be able to sustain our population. We would of course need to find evidnece and use the scientific method to establish the validity of this.



Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:34 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page 1, 2  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:



Site Links 
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Info for Authors & Publishers
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!
    

Love to talk about books but don't have time for our book discussion forums? For casual book talk join us on Facebook.

Featured Books

Books by New Authors

Booktalk.org on Facebook 


F.A.C.T.S. 
FACTS: Freethought - Atheism - Critical Thinking - Science






BookTalk.org is a free book discussion group or online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a group. We host live author chats where booktalk members can interact with and interview authors. We give away free books to our members in book giveaway contests. Our booktalks are open to everybody who enjoys talking about books. Our book forums include book reviews, author interviews and book resources for readers and book lovers. Discussing books is our passion. We're a literature forum, or reading forum. Register a free book club account today! Suggest nonfiction and fiction books. Authors and publishers are welcome to advertise their books or ask for an author chat or author interview.



Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2016. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank