Teaser
>> Monday, July 6, 2009
I so wanted to write a cool blog today because I'd had my brain tittilated. 'Cept I had to do a rush job when I came home that ate up all my free time. :(
I have to give credit to Relax Max and some folks at Gather for prompting me on a subject that I haven't spoken on in a while, critical thinking and established experts. Except, instead, I'm going taking on entrenched and sacrosanct documents as well as the paragons that created them. So all the things I was going to write on were set aside.
Why? Because I'm a big fan of thinking, of looking at things critically. Because I believe a document chalk full of wisdom should be able to withstand scrutiny. Because I'm not a fan of stagnation and I worry that it's too easy to make something so "sacred" that we close ourselves to all our options, all our necessities that may have just changed in the intervening centuries. Because I understand that even the most wise and forward-seeing people are products of the world they live in.
I happen to know the good old days weren't quite as rosy as they're often painted. In fact, I can think few things I would like less than to go back in time even 50 years (unless I had a good path back to today). But that's all part and parcel of the discussion.
I no longer have time to right the first installment on this topic (which is sure to get some people riled) tonight so everyone will have to wait until tomorrow.
.jpg){kind=spacer}
Oh well... I'm good at waiting.
Start with the New York Times. They call themselves an institution, so they qualify for your scrutiny, right?
Oh, oh! PLEASE tall me you're going to take on the B book. CAN'T wait. And count me in.
It's good to see I'm not the only one who posts unintentional puns through creative mistyping.
I already write the wrongs, so when you have time to pour, I'll have some chalk full of nuts, black, thank you. :-)
I'll still worrying about what's going gonna happen when the past catches up with us.
The Mother, I will indeed.
Thanks, Roy.
Relax Max, no one thinks anyone in the media is infallible anymore unless they're braindead. They only count as an institution if we count insane asylums. So, sorry.
Thanks, Doctor. How does one even obtain black chalk?
That's a pretty open-minded and balanced statement. An example of your critical thinking? How do YOU know what everyone thinks? How do you know what NO ONE thinks? Sounds like only what STEPHANIE thinks to me. Critical thinkers seek the truth. They are not afraid of questions and they do not squeal like a stuck liberal when their "everybody knows that" statements are questioned. Do you REALLY seek the truth? If so, it sure doesn't lie with liberals or conservatives or Democrats or Republicans. Climb out of our box. Just for a few minutes.
Relax Max, what it was was a joke. Sheesh!
"Critical thinkers seek the truth. They are not afraid of questions and they do not squeal like a stuck liberal when their "everybody knows that" statements are questioned." -Duh!
Or do you have evidence to the contrary about me?
Look, Stephanie. I'm not trying to be a troll here. I like you. But I just think people would be a lot better off if they searched for real answers and forgot all about this liberal or conservative crap. Your crowd is wrong, and so is the conservative crowd. That's why I can't join either of your clubs. I know you pride yourself on being independent and bristle at being called a liberal. But name-calling is never the answer. It doesn't matter if it is your people jumping on Sarah Palin and calling her stupid, or if it's the other crowd calling Obama a terrorist lover. You are both simply wrong.
Um, Max, what the heck does that have to do with this subject? I'm not defending or attacking ANY current news organizations or people. In fact, I have no idea where this came from or what this has to do with anything.
Which of us is assigning a label, Max? And I've yet to hit you (or anyone) up for membership. This blog reflects what I think and how I think. Nothing more. I'm not recruiting or intending to attack anybody (with the possible exception of stupid people and those come in all shapes, flavors and ideologies).
In a previous post, I stated my own opinion of Palin and even conceded that the fact that some people equate her with intelligent is one of the reasons she rubs me the wrong way. She's not a representative of female intelligence I'd be willing to endorse. You can think she's intelligent if you want, but I'll be dashed if I understand it.
However, it's not my problem either way. No one says I have to agree with you or that you have to agree with me.
Still, if your knickers are still in a twist over offhand comments about Palin in a completely different post, perhaps you should leave your comment there. I'm have no plans to speak about Palin or any other current politician in this or the upcoming posts.
Ironically, the intent of this posts and the ones that follow IS to search for truth. Perhaps you should wait until I've written more than a teaser before condemning my thinkers or "my crowd". Do I even have a crowd?
(Psst, also, just because people disagree doesn't necessarily mean either one is "wrong." Try attacking the conclusions and logic rather than the person stating them and we'll get along famously.)
K?