You wont, human nature is more or less fixed, cognitive skills are normal distributed, we are not blank slates. You first recognize that the problem is difficult, recognize you cannot social-engineer humans without infringing their rights and you try to come up with some basic rules with the implicit understanding that A) They are not perfect B) They are not immutable, and you start working from there. This is the total opposite to what it is happening now in the way the powerful groups are managing this new global, social landscape.
Yes, that. Simple things like a little stats, a default position of skepticism, an understanging that the message and the messenger are separate, would go a long way.
Not to get overtly political, but one of the two major parties will do literally anything to prevent that. Their ideology interprets critical thought as a direct assault, and they respond accordingly.
From the bottom of the page: A spokesman for the Republican Party of Texas said that the "critical thinking skills" language should not have been included in the document after the words "values clarification," reports Talking Points Memo. The members of the subcommittee "regret" the mistake, he told TPM—however, since the platform was approved, "it cannot be corrected until the next state convention in 2014."
They regret the mistake, it sounds like, so I guess it's all good. Nothing to see here.
* their curriculum explicitly aims to develop "lifelong, critical thinkers"
* they feel "reading, writing, and
critical thinking continue to play central roles in the development of literate individuals"
* students learn to "Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is valid and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; identify false statements and fallacious reasoning"
I understand that you're saying beliefs such as creationism don't stand up to any real critical thought, and I agree. But I feel the same way about many beliefs that left-leaning people tend to hold.
Sure. Many people (both commentators and friends of mine) express extreme forms of race and gender essentialism, regularly referring to groups like "white men" or "black women" as though they all have the same thoughts, feelings, and desires.
Yes, but whatever one you are thinking about, rest assured the other would do the same. This idea that half the country is bad and the other is virtuous is as infantile as it is dangerous.
(Shrug) Whatever. It wasn't "the other party" who tried to teach me, at a public junior high school, that Jesus rode a dinosaur to work.
One half of the country is bad. The sooner we pull our heads out of the ground (and other low regions) and face up to that truth, the better off we'll be. A key aspect of critical thought is that there is no inherent virtue in denying reality, and the reality is that BSAB is no longer a viable rationalization.
I am sorry, I really am, that you see the country that way. I humbly suggest that you might be shocked at what you find out if you hang out with some of the people you think are so bad. I think you will find they want the same things you do and have many of the same fears. At any rate, whatever one might think of the other half of the country, it seems we must find a way to live together. The alternative is too terrible to contemplate.
Hang out with them? I grew up with them. That was enough for me, and I'm sure the feeling is mutual.
66% of Republicans in a recent poll [1] say that Trump should not concede regardless of what happens in the courts. That amounts to advocacy of a coup d'etat. There is no room for negotiation with these people, any more than there was with the Shining Path or the Red Brigades or the Khmer Rouge. They have chosen their side and committed to it.
The alternative is too terrible to contemplate.
It's time we started contemplating it. Because the other side is doing just that, and then some.
It was a very tense election. What do you think Democrats would say if Trump had won and you polled them? Do you think they would politely accept four more years of Trump? What do you think would be the odds of violence in the cities? Say in Portland, for example? Or Seattle? Do you see violence from Republicans right now?
You seemed to have had a tough time with conservatives growing up and that is unfortunate, but I think you are being incredibly extreme in your blanket assessment of the motivations of half of your countryman.
Yeah, as a black man who grew up in the mid-west, and then lived in new england… I left the states in 2016 and have no intention of coming back until things resolve. Even during in 2016, I knew things were going to get much worse… and Trump (not necessarily his words/actions, but primal response he could evoke in otherwise "rational" or "academic" people who often see themselves above the fray) was just the latest harbinger of that (maybe the straw that broke the camels back, piled high already with many straws of societal malfeasance)… people want to ignore the slow erosion of social-economic freedoms that have been going on for decades and only decreasing more with the next administration placed in power by those who think that things will change for the better just by placing paper in boxes…
Corporate collusion with government baked in with articles of incorporation, solidified with runaway debt spending for their services against the masses is just a tip of the iceberg of societal decay ongoing here with many thinking they can always keep kicking the bill into the future for someone else to deal with… lol… I have no will to live around such a populous with such delusions of the mind.
I agree with most of your assessment. However I am myself an immigrant and, warts and all, I still think that comparatively the US is still a great place to live and I am grateful for the opportunity I was given to settle here.
If you do not mind me asking, where did you move to? How much better are things there? And what other countries do you think are in better shape than the US?
My dad was an immigrant, and my mothers parents were was well, and I do think some aspects do provide opportunities, but I'm not sure it will negate the long term tail winds faced by many and would rather wait it out while they seem to be ok with engaging in the state of affairs.
> where did you move to?
I moved to Jakarta for now (and a few other places "nearby" for weeks/months here and there pre pandemic) and have been working remotely for the past 5 years for a variety of companies globally.
> How much better are things there?
For me, there is more social economic freedom, cheaper cost of living, more social cohesion (probably related to the fact that the distribution of wealth isn't as skewed towards the wealthy as it has become in the US), and relatively weak government (less downside risk with federal diktats) with nowhere near the amount of %debt to gdp in household/corp/gov sectors. But still faces similar headwinds stagnation in many places and issues unique challenges to being spread out over many islands. Though, I still remain flexible and have my eyes out for others places that could be better in the future.
> And what other countries do you think are in better shape than the US?
Overall I think SEA is pretty good as far as near future. Not really sure about anywhere else (besides nice island enclaves few on earth can enjoy like caymens, seychelles, etc.). There's just a lot of convergence going on between areas globally in all aspects of ones life and I really think that with our current global communications infrastructure being able to enable different forms of organization, there are a lot of existential questions about what things will look like going forward: what most people will accept? what actors will exert sovereignty? how will the most indebted nation/city states (and sub jurisdictions and corporates) deal with declining tax revenues/cash flows in the face of not just mobile capital, but a mobile workforce?
