Laws Of Thinking

MaxShimba said:

A person can be good at critical thinking, meaning that the person can have the appropriate dispositions and be adept at the cognitive processes, while still not being a good (in the moral sense) critical thinker. For example, a person can be adept at developing arguments and then, unethically, use this skill to mislead and exploit a gullible person, perpetrate a fraud, or deliberately confuse and confound, and frustrate a project.
The experts were faced with an interesting problem. Some, a minority, would prefer to think that critical thinking, by its very nature, is inconsistent with the kinds of unethical and deliberately counterproductive examples given. They find it hard to imagine a person who was good at critical thinking not also being good in the broader personal and social sense. In other words, if a person were "really" a "good critical thinker" in the procedural sense and if the person had all the appropriate dispositions, then the person simply would not do those kinds of exploitive and aggravating things.
The large majority, however, hold the opposite judgment. They are firm in the view that good critical thinking has nothing to do with... any given set of ethical values or social mores. The majority of experts maintain that critical thinking conceived of as we have described it above, is, regrettably, not inconsistent with its unethical use. A tool, an approach to situations, these can go either way, ethically speaking, depending on the character, integrity, and principles of the persons who possess them. So, in the final analysis the majority of experts maintained that "it is an inappropriate use of the term to deny that someone is engaged in critical thinking on the grounds that one disapproves ethically of what the person is doing.
Click to expand...

Max
IF you really have an academic degree.. THEN is seriously question every form of education you have ever had.

Did I not SPECIFICALLY ask you NOT to copy and past

How can you copy from Peter Facione?

Are you only able to copy written claims of others? Are you not able to think for yourself.
You should know that when you copy written statements to back your own ones up, you have to understand what you are copying.. which you are clearly not.
* Darwin urges Max To Finally (and AGAIN) IN YOUR OWN WORDS.

UNATUJAZIA NAFASI TU KWENYE JF KUANDIKA WALIVYOANDIKA WENZIO, TENA BASI VINGINE HATA KUVIFANYIA TATHMINI.

.. Some times I feel like talking to a wall.. And not just any....
 
Hawa akina MaxShimba, SCHMIDT... wanaonekana kuwa kama wanafunzi wa darasa moja, with a common interest(s) :)
 
Darwin said:
Max
IF you really have an academic degree.. THEN is seriously question every form of education you have ever had.

Did I not SPECIFICALLY ask you NOT to copy and past

How can you copy from Peter Facione?

Are you only able to copy written claims of others? Are you not able to think for yourself.
You should know that when you copy written statements to back your own ones up, you have to understand what you are copying.. which you are clearly not.
* Darwin urges Max To Finally (and AGAIN) IN YOUR OWN WORDS.

UNATUJAZIA NAFASI TU KWENYE JF KUANDIKA WALIVYOANDIKA WENZIO, TENA BASI VINGINE HATA KUVIFANYIA TATHMINI.

.. Some times I feel like talking to a wall.. And not just any....
Click to expand...

Darwin, I think first, you better choose your own apello and/or deco, iter-alia, using someones deco.

Someone usurpo/usus past modus and/or mens mentis and/or sententia does not make him ipso facto having or not having academic degree.

Penuriosus puto and reasoning is your difficultas/perturbo, ad infinitum.
 
Last edited:
MaxShimba said:
Darwin, I think first, you better choose your own apello and/or deco, iter-alia, using someones deco.

Someone usurpo/usus past modus and/or mens mentis and/or sententia does not make him ipso facto having or not having academic degree.

Penuriosus puto and reasoning is your difficultas/perturbo, ad infinitum.
Click to expand...


Jamaa naona wamekimbia. Darwin wewe kwanza use your own apello. Unamatatizo ya inops puto.
 
MaxShimba said:
Darwin, I think first, you better choose your own apello and/or deco, iter-alia, using someones deco.

Someone usurpo/usus past modus and/or mens mentis and/or sententia does not make him ipso facto having or not having academic degree.

Penuriosus puto and reasoning is your difficultas/perturbo, ad infinitum.
Click to expand...


Is this your school!!?

The Ethics of Critical Thinking

Peter Facione describes a limitation that occurs with all types of thinking:
A person can be good at critical thinking, meaning that the person can have the appropriate dispositions and be adept at the cognitive processes, while still not being a good (in the moral sense) critical thinker. For example, a person can be adept at developing arguments and then, unethically, use this skill to mislead and exploit a gullible person, perpetrate a fraud, or deliberately confuse and confound, and frustrate a project.
The experts were faced with an interesting problem. Some, a minority, would prefer to think that critical thinking, by its very nature, is inconsistent with the kinds of unethical and deliberately counterproductive examples given. They find it hard to imagine a person who was good at critical thinking not also being good in the broader personal and social sense. In other words, if a person were "really" a "good critical thinker" in the procedural sense and if the person had all the appropriate dispositions, then the person simply would not do those kinds of exploitive and aggravating things.
The large majority, however, hold the opposite judgment. They are firm in the view that good critical thinking has nothing to do with... any given set of ethical values or social mores. The majority of experts maintain that critical thinking conceived of as we have described it above, is, regrettably, not inconsistent with its unethical use. A tool, an approach to situations, these can go either way, ethically speaking, depending on the character, integrity, and principles of the persons who possess them. So, in the final analysis the majority of experts maintained that "it is an inappropriate use of the term to deny that someone is engaged in critical thinking on the grounds that one disapproves ethically of what the person is doing.


Critical Thinking Skills in Education & Life



MAX KWA MARA YA MWISHO TUMIA AKILI YAKO NASIO KUKOPI VYA WENZIO BILA TATHMINI UNATUJAZIA NAFASI BURE HAPA JF
 
Darwin said:
Is this your school!!?

The Ethics of Critical Thinking

Peter Facione describes a limitation that occurs with all types of thinking:
A person can be good at critical thinking, meaning that the person can have the appropriate dispositions and be adept at the cognitive processes, while still not being a good (in the moral sense) critical thinker. For example, a person can be adept at developing arguments and then, unethically, use this skill to mislead and exploit a gullible person, perpetrate a fraud, or deliberately confuse and confound, and frustrate a project.
The experts were faced with an interesting problem. Some, a minority, would prefer to think that critical thinking, by its very nature, is inconsistent with the kinds of unethical and deliberately counterproductive examples given. They find it hard to imagine a person who was good at critical thinking not also being good in the broader personal and social sense. In other words, if a person were "really" a "good critical thinker" in the procedural sense and if the person had all the appropriate dispositions, then the person simply would not do those kinds of exploitive and aggravating things.
The large majority, however, hold the opposite judgment. They are firm in the view that good critical thinking has nothing to do with... any given set of ethical values or social mores. The majority of experts maintain that critical thinking conceived of as we have described it above, is, regrettably, not inconsistent with its unethical use. A tool, an approach to situations, these can go either way, ethically speaking, depending on the character, integrity, and principles of the persons who possess them. So, in the final analysis the majority of experts maintained that "it is an inappropriate use of the term to deny that someone is engaged in critical thinking on the grounds that one disapproves ethically of what the person is doing.


Critical Thinking Skills in Education & Life



MAX KWA MARA YA MWISHO TUMIA AKILI YAKO NASIO KUKOPI VYA WENZIO BILA TATHMINI UNATUJAZIA NAFASI BURE HAPA JF
Click to expand...


Penuriosus puto and reasoning is your difficultas/perturbo, ad infinitum.

Naona juisi ya pilipili imekuwa kali.

Pauper puto.

Hahaha ahaha ahaha ahaha ahaha
 

Penuriosus puto and reasoning is your difficultas/perturbo, ad infinitum.

Naona juisi ya pilipili imekuwa kali. Hivi umefanya nini hapo juu?! Eti, Max kwa mara ya mwisho ... lol. Wewe nenda kosome akili za wafu akina Maria Montesor, plato, et al. Inaonekana hakuna mwenye akili aliyebaki katika upande wenu ila hao wafu.

Pauper puto.

Hahaha ahaha ahaha ahaha ahaha


 
MaxShimba said:

Penuriosus puto and reasoning is your difficultas/perturbo, ad infinitum.

Naona juisi ya pilipili imekuwa kali. Hivi umefanya nini hapo juu?! Eti, Max kwa mara ya mwisho ... lol. Wewe nenda kosome akili za wafu akina Maria Montesor, plato, et al. Inaonekana hakuna mwenye akili aliyebaki katika upande wenu ila hao wafu.

Pauper puto.

Hahaha ahaha ahaha ahaha ahaha
Click to expand...

Tena afadhali hao wanaosoma akili za wafu wana akili kwasababu wanazisomea kuliko wewe unaojifanya unajua kumbe unakopi kazi za wenzao BILA KUZIJUA UKWELI WAKE NAKUTUJAZIA HAPA JF

JARIBU KUTUMIA AKILI YAKO, COPY AND PASTE HAZISAIDII CHOCHOTE HAPA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Back
Top Bottom
Forums
New posts
Post thread
Back