There comes along once in while an invention, a breakthrough, if you will, whose benefit is matched only by its potential for danger. The Internet is just such a breakthrough. And I am not even talking about the danger of viruses and trojans. I am talking about the danger of believing too much of what you read.
Do we need courses on the danger of the net? Hell yes! But they need to be extensions of courses on critical thinking. They need to teach that just because you want to believe something and you find a site on the net that supports your wishes, it does not mean you have found confirmation. Critical thinking of all information you read, download, hear, or see is essential to intelligent thinking and to making informed decisions. Question it all, and then question the sites you go to for answers.
Do we need courses that teach intelligent use of the net? Yes, but they should be courses taught without any more reference to the net than to TV or radio or print. Teaching your children to think for themselves might even make up for not teaching them about religion, morales, or sex.
Why do I write this. Because I see posters being taken for task for writing their opinions. Because I see posters citing a list of sources and then defending them to the death. I just feel it needs to be pointed out that any opinion can be backed if one just does good searches. It does not prove a damn thing.
And I have been told I need to make it more clear when I post an opinion as opposed to when I post fact. I gotta tell you, I don't care how many big words you use, how learned you claim to be, or how many times you ask for a source, your posts are treated as opinion until I am convinced either by the logic of what you say or the validity of your sources.
I would also like to say that "logical fallacies" have both strengths and weaknesses. The strength can lie in identifying arguments that are based entirely on the fallacies. What I have seen in this forum is using the fallacies as a way of dismissing posts similar to labels such as conservative and liberal. A post may contain a logical fallacy and still have valid points. Do you dismiss people's opinions based solely on the highest grade they achieved in formal schooling? If you do you obviously will miss out on many intelligent ideas just as you do if you look for a "logical fallacy" and dismiss the poster and his ideas because you connected two dots while ignoring the other 100 dots on the page.
If I am wrong and this forum is based solely on what you can prove with two hundred links please let me know. But I have found my enjoyment and gain from forums lies more often in sharing the ideas of the posters rather than in who can post the most links or shout the most or use the biggest words.
Do we need courses on the danger of the net? Hell yes! But they need to be extensions of courses on critical thinking. They need to teach that just because you want to believe something and you find a site on the net that supports your wishes, it does not mean you have found confirmation. Critical thinking of all information you read, download, hear, or see is essential to intelligent thinking and to making informed decisions. Question it all, and then question the sites you go to for answers.
Do we need courses that teach intelligent use of the net? Yes, but they should be courses taught without any more reference to the net than to TV or radio or print. Teaching your children to think for themselves might even make up for not teaching them about religion, morales, or sex.
Why do I write this. Because I see posters being taken for task for writing their opinions. Because I see posters citing a list of sources and then defending them to the death. I just feel it needs to be pointed out that any opinion can be backed if one just does good searches. It does not prove a damn thing.
And I have been told I need to make it more clear when I post an opinion as opposed to when I post fact. I gotta tell you, I don't care how many big words you use, how learned you claim to be, or how many times you ask for a source, your posts are treated as opinion until I am convinced either by the logic of what you say or the validity of your sources.
I would also like to say that "logical fallacies" have both strengths and weaknesses. The strength can lie in identifying arguments that are based entirely on the fallacies. What I have seen in this forum is using the fallacies as a way of dismissing posts similar to labels such as conservative and liberal. A post may contain a logical fallacy and still have valid points. Do you dismiss people's opinions based solely on the highest grade they achieved in formal schooling? If you do you obviously will miss out on many intelligent ideas just as you do if you look for a "logical fallacy" and dismiss the poster and his ideas because you connected two dots while ignoring the other 100 dots on the page.
If I am wrong and this forum is based solely on what you can prove with two hundred links please let me know. But I have found my enjoyment and gain from forums lies more often in sharing the ideas of the posters rather than in who can post the most links or shout the most or use the biggest words.
