Critical Thinking Blog 4

Junk thought is one of those tools that can be compared to pseudoscience. Both are used to mislead the general population and can easily be believed by any audience. Why? Both junk thought and pseudoscience use deception and colorful language that make them sound credible. The main difference between the two is that pseudoscience is a completely fake science while junk thought is science being used wrong. Unlike pseudoscience, Junk Thought is picked up by politicians on all sides of the arena and use certain facts or angles to make their agenda look legitimate. For example, Jacoby writes about the liberal group showing pictures of polar bears to promote sympathy for global warming. Jacoby points out that children and many people think of polar bears as big and cuddly so they sympathize and jump on the bandwagon to stop global warming. She goes on further to say that polar bears are shown when a ice chunk breaks off the southern ice shelf even though polar bears do not live in the southern hemisphere. Susan Jacoby uses many other examples like this one to describe junk thought and I completely concur with her. Americans are getting too much data these days and not thinking about how to use the data, they just use it how they need it to work for them. Instead of thinking in logical ways, people are just regurgitating information to look intellectual. The biggest problem with the junk thought being produced is it detracts from intellectual and practical thought. Its like people have been given screws and use hammer on them- it is just not going to work.

Pre-Reading Blog 4

Our Nation's attention span has diminished greatly since the advent of portable digital devices. In the past few years, we have gone from playing phone tag to texting and checking the Internet wherever and whenever we want. While cell phones greatly increased how quick and conveniently we have could get a hold of someone to talk in the nineties, the 2000's have revolutionized this instantaneous to even further endeavors. Texting has allowed people to instantly respond to a Friend. Instead of waiting after a presentation at work or a lecture in class to take a call, people can now multitask and text while doing business. Once phones became mobile computers, all the information we could possibly ever want became accessible whenever and wherever. I know teachers hate it but I admit that I randomly text while in class. I also know that I can not possibly listen to the professor and text at the same time but I have managed to be a quick switcher and listen and text at the same time. I also make sure that anyone around me can not see my phone and get distracted by what I am doing...or at least try to keep it out of sight.; Its not a guilt thing but I am just trying not to disrupt those around me. Cell phone services being costly enough with texting, I opted not to even bother with getting Internet on my phone. However, I have seen many people check the net for movie times or check there email and myspace while sitting in class. My point with all this, we have all become greatly distracted by our new gadgets and all these forms of media are to blame. Before texting, I would sit at family events and class and be completely focused on the discussion but now I can easily jump on the phone and be entertained by others miles away. While I enjoy these luxuries, I admit that we have all become greatly distracted these technologies and I wonder just how much of a hindrance they are becoming. Even if texting and surfing the net does not hinder what we are doing, I think it is a complete demoralization in manners and courtesies.

Critical Thinking Blog 3

Consider the current youth popular culture compared to those of the past. What movements do you have in your youth culture? How are you a part of your youth culture?

I am 2o (almost 21) and that puts me in the tail end of today's "youth" culture. My generation is preparing to take the reins and run the country. My generation has become the "here and now" culture and we have almost zero patience; our short patience coincides harmonously with our rude behavior to those around us. While I love my cell phone I know for a fact that it has completely altered my generation. Many students sit in class and text the whole time while others do not even bother to put their phones on silent. With the advent of internet on our phones, kids can instantly check their myspace and post to twitter (I have absolutely no clue what it is but Miley Cyrus has one). My culture is obsessed with instant communication wherever we are. For example, I went to Hawaii a couple months ago and I kept my phone with me at all times; I was talking and texting instead of enjoying the scenery and vacation.

There has been one advantage to the mass media we are all bombarded with these days- communication to rise for a cause. There is no refuting that my generation has been charged with changing our nation's way and being sustainable (Green for lamens). We have become obsessed correcting the planet's depleted fossil fuel dependance and reversing global warming. My major is architecture and my sophmore year in the program the class curriculum made a dramatic and swift change to green over aesthetic design. While music, television and other mass media still control and manipulate each generation, my generation's culture has become much more dependent on each other as we look to fix the world. I cant help but think we are as naive as any other generation's culture- we just have cell phones and myspace.

Pre-Reading Blog 3

How do you perceive your popular culture? What does popular culture consist of in your world? Music? TV? The Web? Fashion? What attracted you to this particular section of popular culture? Why do you like it? How do you understand its history? Please end your blog with at least one good critical question.

Popular culture is an all encompassing phenomanom. Music, TV, Internet, Clothes, technology, etc. are all a part of the popular culture. I can not imagine a culture as being only one area because culture is how we live our lives. Being a consumer culture, everything we buy or persuaded to buy or use is part of our culture. For example, every time we watch TV or log onto myspace we are being told to buy or use a certain product or what is cool. I do not typically fall prey to any of those adds telling me what is the next best thing to buy but I admit I buy plenty of stuff. I do not always buy the newest and best thing that the advertisers tell us to buy.

For my popular culture, TV, music, clothes, gadgets, mypsace and parties. Movies and sit coms keep me entertained on a day to day basis. I always look forward to big summer movies and we have a DVR at my house to record all our shows. The DVR lets us skip through commercials so we rarely ever watch any adds. Keeping on entertainment, Myspace and the web are almost an hourly visit for me. I spend most of my day on a computer working and doing HW so the net is a very large part of my connection with the world. Im always looking for new clothes but it is not always what is the most popular styles. For example, I am not one to wear the girl pants and sag. As for gadgets, I love my cell phone, Ipod and GPS; without those objects I am not sure how I would get through the week. I know I could survive without them but I do not know if I would ever want to. Basically, my culture revolves around communication and those around me.

Is todays generation being hurt by the instant communication that we have become so accustomed to? Most students sit in class and text the whole time and we can not understand what is so wrong with our phones going off in public.

For this blog, create your own discussion about this debate. Where do you stand and why? What critical criteria have you used to consider this issue (if at all -- maybe it's the first time you've thought about it)? Where does this issue stand among the issues of the day?

I'm sure I will get bombarded for this but I am not one who believes in religion, therefore I do not believe in creationism. However, I do understand the appeal and need for religion by the masses. Religion gives people a sense of community, belonging and guidance. Creationism is based off of religion and I have a hard time believing in anything that is built off of religion.

When you look at the Bible and it only goes back so many years and the fossil record goes further there is dilemmas in me excepting and believing in it. When the big bang theory defies genesis I have a hard time believing it. When the bible attacks certain people because of their religious stand, skin color, or sexual orientation there is a problem. When someone tells me that I'm a sinner when I have done nothing wrong there is a problem. When the bible gets rewritten because science or culture says otherwise there is a problem. One of my favorite reasons, when someone who rejects at least hearing theories about science and says it was put there by the devil to test our faith there is a huge problem. When............well you get the idea. As a logical person, I can not take into account all of these points and put all my belief and faith in it. Not to mention the total lack of real evidence supporting anything the bible portrays. Anyway, I personally do not believe in religion but accept it for the support it gives people. The bible itself has a lot of false things said but the idea of religion and the sense of community it supplies is great.

Changing gears into a partly more neutral area, Social Darwinism is not much better in my eyes. The belief is based off of religion and evolution combined to form the perfect example of pseudoscience. The belief is almost asinine yet at thee same time can not be argued with to the same extent as religion. While politics, Hollywood and other big money makers out there are based off of "old money" people who are smarter or better looking typically get into the field. If you try to say that they just know how to play politics then they are technically still smarter because they are capable of getting the job. However, the elitist ideas of social Darwinism is ridiculous. The idea that there is a superiority and hierarchy of the races is ridiculous.

What do you think of when you see the word “pseudoscience”? How do you understand the argument between evolution and creation, as Jacoby presents it? Please end your blog with at least one good critical question.

Having taken Philosophy, I have a decent understanding of what pseudoscience is. There are many things that fall into the vague category of pseudoscience; creationism, religion, pyschic abilities, etc. all fall into the vast category of pseudoscience. The science is one that has absolutely no substantial or reproducable evidence supporting it. Big Foot, for example, has a few pictures and possibly a foot print but none of it has been reproduced or the actual creature found. Therefore, Big foot falls into the category of pseudoscience because he has not been proven to actually exist. Pseudoscience does not neccessarrily mean that every belief and scientific theory falls into the group. Some of Einstein's theories have not been reproduced with scientific equations but because the equations and theory seem sound, Einstein's theories remain as theories and not pseudoscience. Opening the can of worms that is religion, religion is a pseudoscience because there is absolutely no evidence except faith and the idea does not appear to have any proof occurring any time soon. Therefore, religion falls completely into the category of pseudoscience.

Creationism falls directly into the category of pseudoscience because it has no real proof to support and can not be proven anytime soon unless with the use of faith- which can not be challenged because it is a personal belief. On the other side of theh spectrum, Evolution has real and substantial proof in the form of fossil records, carbon dating, etc. In Jacoby's view, Creationsim is a direct hindrence on the scientific community with the challenge and feud between religion with creationism and science with evolution.

Religion has been given credit for continuing any sort of intellectualism after the collapse of the Roman Empire. However, with relisgion's basis in pseudoscience it has a conflict with today's scientific beliefs and the advancement of the nation as intellectuals. Can religion ever take enough of a back seat not to hinder science and intellectualism? Keep in mind, I dont call for the end of religion because I know many people need the sense of something greater then worldly facts.

Critical Thinking Blog #1

Part OneHow do you define critical thinking? Describe a situation in which you thought through something critically. Describe a situation in which you did not think through something critically.

Critical thinking is calmly examining a situation or other topic void of emotion; utililizing different angles and approaches to the topic to percieve all scenarios and possible outcomes. Hopefully like other students, I have critically analyzed and planned my college career. I have planned different routes for different outcomes for universities. On a smaller scale, which classes to take and where to take them has also been critically decided since I go to both Cosumnes River and Sierra College- a choice decided because of my major in Architecture. When it comes to not thinking critically, a perfect situation for me would be dating. I knew better than to get involved in a relationship so close to transferring and ignored all logic. While its a good relationship there are dilemmas with habits and the fact I will probably be moving (at least) two hours away. I was not thinking when I entered a relationship- love can be blind lol.

Part Two"We often long for surefire, step-by-step procedures [to help us solve problems] and the more personally threatening a situation is, the more we want foolproof rules. But there are no rules that guarantee our thinking will be correct . . . The only way we can decide whether to follow certain rules is if we use our best reasoning to determine that those rules are reasonable, that they lead to reasonable results when followed." – Gerald Nosich, Learning to Think Things Through

Describe what you think of when you think of “intellectualism”. Does this word have positive connotations or negative connotations for you? Why? Describe what you think of when you think of “logic” and “reason.” Do these have positive connotations or negative connotations? Why?

Intellectualism is something that is fading from the world as pop culture and mass media swarm through our daily lives. I have a fond admiration for anything intectual. While I do enjoy the crude humor of TV sitcoms, I still love the simple and refined cultures. I consider myself a very logical person; reason seems more practical to me than faith or beliefs- not to attack religion because I still respect it and understand its draw for people. My immediate family is not religious and having taken so many classes with culture, philosophy, history, etc. I have incredibly positive connotations of logic, reason and intellectualism; admiring the solid facts and forwardness of reason and logic. I dont have to stretch my mind around anything that science can not explain.