Ron. Ian,

I believe it is both, Ron.
Somewhat analogous to DQ/SQ
Both.
It's not an either/or situation.



On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Ron Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> > On May 30, 2014, at 5:53 AM, Ian Glendinning <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > "healthy scepticism" is indeed a requirement of any worthwhile discourse.
> > But of course it's neither the point, nor the whole of such discourse.
> > Having cultivated a healthy scepticism, the point is constructive
> > creativity towards new meaningful hypotheses.
> > It's crude "scientism" to think the way to arrive at truth is
> > falsification and critical thinking, that's simply a way to test
> > potential truths. The easy bit.
> >
> > Ian
> >
> Ron:
> In order for hypothesis to be meaningful, conceptualization
> Must be skillful. It's a guid to
> Belief and action, you seem to be
> Saying that the whole point of discourse is to arrive at truth,
> The whole point is to arrive at
> Meaning, if you don't have the skills
> It's highly unlikely your hypothesis,
> No matter how creative, will have
> Any significant meaning.
>
>
> "The National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking (a non-profit
> organisation based in the U.S.) defines critical thinking as the
> intellectually disciplined process of actively and skilfully
> conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating
> information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience,
> reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action."
>
>
>
> >> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 9:24 PM, david <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> "The study of philosophy cultivates a healthy scepticism about the
> moral opinions, political arguments and economic reasonings with which we
> are daily bombarded by ideologues, churchmen, politicians and economists.
> It teaches one to detect ‘higher forms of nonsense’, to identify humbug, to
> weed out hypocrisy, and to spot invalid reasoning. It curbs our taste for
> nonsense, and gives us a nose for it instead. It teaches us not to rush to
> affirm or deny assertions, but to raise questions about them.
> >> Even more importantly, it teaches us to raise questions about
> questions, to probe for their tacit assumptions and presuppositions, and to
> challenge these when warranted. In this way it gives us a distance from
> passion-provoking issues – a degree of detachment that is conducive to
> reason and reasonableness."
> >>
> >> http://iainews.iai.tv/articles/why-study-philosophy-auid-289
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >> Archives:
> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>



-- 
"finite players
play within boundaries.
Infinite players
play *with* boundaries."
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html

Reply via email to