It has become common to speak of Judeo-Christian principles, but that also begs the question of precisely what those principles are. And so, not long ago, I searched for a clear set of them and came up dry. I found statements of religious beliefs and I found lists of good habits that were spawned by Judeo-Christian principles, but I didn’t find the principles themselves. Continue reading “What Are The Judeo-Christian Principles?”
To close this study, I want to explain two things that lie beneath everything we’ve covered thus far. These, really, are the foundation upon which everything else stands. And so I think that our coverage would be incomplete without describing them. Continue reading “Conclusion: Two Underlying Fundamentals”
By now we’ve gone through 17 major fallacies of logic or groups of fallacies, a significant number of lesser fallacies and additional word-borne attacks. But I still have a few topics remaining… topics that I feel are crucial to clear thinking. And so I’ll close this set of examinations with them.
I’m calling these Other Pieces, but in my mind, they are Essential Pieces, because they are drawn from my personal experience in making sense of the world and making my way through deceptions and attacks. Continue reading “Other Pieces”
There are a lot of very bright people ensconced in academia, and that’s a tragic thing, for them and for us all. Academia, you see, abuses and limits their talents.
To put it simply and directly, academia has sequestered and drained many of the best minds of our era. Academics know this and complain about it among themselves, they just don’t see any alternative. (The 21st century status quo rests upon people seeing no alternative.) Continue reading “Academia And The Tragedy of The Smart Kids”
As I’ve mentioned before, what we used to call “the offshore circuit” has been revived. It involves a fairly small group of providers and consultants, and provides professional guidance for people who’d like to structure their lives differently and gain some serious financial liberation.
My part in the group involves teaching people why and how to protect their data, and sometimes about cryptocurrencies. Continue reading “The Offshore Symposium”
Today we’ll conclude our coverage of fallacies in brief.
Kafka-trapping: A sophisticated argument or group of arguments focused upon imposing guilt upon an opponent and then using his or her sense of guilt as evidence against them.
This is obviously an especially malicious form of argument, but if used by a skilled manipulator it can be very effective. Most people, after all, have a keen sense of justice and a proclivity for self-examination. And so they can, with well chosen assertions, be made to feel guilty for something. And with that, the manipulator can close his or her case, claiming that the other person has revealed their guilt by feeling guilty. Continue reading “Fallacies In Brief, Part 3”
I haven’t written about this in seven years, and so I think it’s time to re-post about two significant experiences I had. With long-range weather forecasts being used to terrify people, I think these stories have some value. Continue reading “My Adventures At Climate Change Central”
Today we’ll continue covering fallacies in brief.
Proving too much: When an argument leads to an overly-generalized conclusion. For example: The because some notable criminals listened obsessively to Rock and Roll, Rock must cause criminality.
This trick is rather obvious, of course, but it works as so many others do: by riding on emotions to bypass analysis. Continue reading “Fallacies In Brief, Part 2”
Today we’ll start covering fallacies in brief. I think we’ve covered all the crucial ones at this point, but fallacies tend to come and go over time, and so even those which aren’t often used now may come back in a decade or two. (Beside, the fallacies I see in use may not be the same fallacies that you see in use.)
And so I’ll give brief coverage to a larger number of additional fallacies. Here we go: Continue reading “Fallacies In Brief, Part 1”
The fallacy of false equivalence (also referred to as a fallacy of inconsistency) is an equivalence drawn between two subjects, using flawed or false reasoning. The user of this fallacy makes two things sound alike – usually like they’re both the same thing – while they really aren’t. Here’s an example: Continue reading “Fallacy #17: False Equivalence”