 |
Intelligence > Logic >
A response to Phyve Koowest-chuns Aynsurd, by RabidApe
It still strikes me as awfully repetitive to have the same things discussed over and over. What needs to be addressed is the issue of basic thinking, logic and research skills.
The goal is to teach a person how to think rationally. But do this “sideways”. Or as Randy Pausch puts it, do a “head fake”. This isn’t a video on the topic as such, but it wonderfully demonstrates it. It’s probably a stupidly long video for such a simple point, which I’d bet you already understand, but it’s most recent to me and it seems very very thorough in demonstrating – not explaining, but demonstrating – this.
Randy Pausch Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams
Do it sideways.
Do not use the terms of logic. These words alone are confusing to learn and remember and apply.
Begin with benign examples. Do not go for classic situations. Do not go for current or currently-used arguments.
Do it by asking questions, not by acting as an authority. It’s best to get people to draw their own conclusions and feel individual in the learning process.
Heck, merging the idea of collaboration and removing authority suggests decentralizing this. Perhaps removing a face and an account from the videos, but perhaps multiple people could provide a face or voice as appropriate. I pause to think about cdk007 or Thunderf00t having had some really wonderful videos which have “no eyes” (as I’ve heard some theists point out).
Some people will have bias towards the message because of bias towards “the messenger”. Maybe by denying strength of authority of entirely removing “the messenger” would help?
The set of topics dealing with different facets of fundamental logical thinking seems to naturally lead into much more complex and current topics of debate. It’s the kindergarden uncontentious stuff which would help a person graduate into participating in still-contentious or seemingly-contentious topics.
The project conclusion would be to create a kind of “boot camp” of resources, videos, etc. Maybe a set of videos, maybe a DVD, maybe a book, maybe a website. Maybe an island and a pony. Maybe just a cool YouTube channel.
A post-project project could then delve into now properly-grounded atheistic “debate”. A person could take any theistic “point”, know how to break it apart into separate notions, and then check each separate notion against the various kindergarden examples of logic.
Another post-project project could get into proper present philosophy. Heck, people like azrienoch [ 1 ] or the other Knighted Owls [ 2 ], or other quality YouTube philosophers might get involved.
ported