Here’s a progress report on the state of “Clear and Present Thinking”<\/p>\n
As progress on the project continues, its final shape becomes easier to see. Like any writing project, this textbook might end up looking slightly different than what it was originally planned to be. But there’s an easy way to see how it is changing: simply compare the proposed table of contents as it appears on the KStart page, to the table of contents I’m posting below, right here. <\/p>\n
You’ll notice that in this updated table of contents, some items have a checkmark beside them. that indicates a section which is done, or close to being done. Items without a checkmark are still in the planning stages.<\/p>\n
This gives you a chance to send me a suggestion or two about other topics that you think should be covered which aren’t mentioned here. Or, you could ask me questions about how I’ve covered items that I’ve indicated are done, or mostly done.<\/p>\n
Take a look, and let me know what you think!<\/p>\n
…<\/p>\n
1. Questions, World Views, and Other Basics<\/strong> 2. Habits of Good and Bad Thinking<\/strong> 3. Basics of Argumentation<\/strong> 4. Reasonable Doubt<\/strong> 5. Fallacies<\/strong> 6. Games, Paradoxes, and Strategic Reasoning<\/strong> 7. Thinking about Ethics<\/strong> 8. Thinking about Religion<\/strong> 9. Thinking about politics<\/strong> 10. Thinking about Economics<\/strong> 11. Thinking about Science<\/strong> 12. Thinking About The Arts<\/strong><\/p>\n 13. Glossary<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Here’s a progress report on the state of “Clear and Present Thinking” As progress on the project continues, its final shape becomes easier to see. Like any writing project, this textbook might end up looking slightly different than what it … Continue reading
\n\tWhat is thinking? \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tWhy is good thinking important? \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tIs logic difficult? \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tWhere does thinking happen? \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tThe Intellectual Environment \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tQuestions and Problems \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tWhat is a World View? (Schweitzer) \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tEvaluating Different World Views \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tValue Programs (McMurtry) \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tWorld Views, Civilization, and Conflict (Huntington) \u00e2\u0153\u201c<\/p>\n
\n\tSelf-Interest \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tSaving Face \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tPeer Pressure \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tStereotyping and Prejudice
\n\tExcessive Skepticism \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tRelativism (Personal and Cultural)
\n\tWilled Ignorance \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tCuriosity
\n\tSelf-Awareness
\n\tCourage
\n\tHealthy Skepticism \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tAutonomy
\n\tSimplicity; Ockham\u2019s Razor \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tPrecision; Crafting Good Definitions \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tSubtlety
\n\tConsistency
\n\tOpen-ness; Principle of Charity \u00e2\u0153\u201c<\/p>\n
\n\tPropositions \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tOther Parts of Arguments \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tModus Ponens \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tModus Tollens
\n\tStandard Syllogism
\n\tHypothetical Syllogism
\n\tDisjunctive Syllogism \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tAdjunction
\n\tConstructive Dilemma
\n\tDestructive Dilemma
\n\tInductive Generalization
\n\tStatistical Syllogism
\n\tInduction by shared properties
\n\tInduction by shared relations
\n\tScientific method (short version) \u00e2\u0153\u201c<\/p>\n
\n\tIts definition, and circumstances that warrant reasonable doubt \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tContradictory claims \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tBias and Self-deception \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tLack of evidence \/ Weak or Inconclusive Evidence \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\nConspiracy Theories \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tBelieving and\/or Doubting the Experts \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tPersonal experiences \/ Doubting One\u2019s Own Eyes and Ears \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tScams, Frauds, and Confidence Tricks \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tDisinformation and Propaganda
\n\tSpecial matters related to the news media.
\n\tSpecial maters related to advertising and and mass-persuasion.<\/p>\n
\nDefinition of a fallacy; faulty Premises; faulty Inferences; fallacies of Irrelevance
\nAppeal to authority
\nAccident
\nAmphiboly
\nComposition
\nDivision
\nRed Herring
\nStraw Man
\nAd Baculum \/ Appeal to Force
\nAd Misercordiam \/ Appeal to Emotion or Pity
\nAd Hominem
\nPost Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc \/ False Cause
\nNon Sequitor
\nAppeal to Tradition \/ Novelty
\nUndistributed Middle
\nNaturalistic Fallacy
\nComplex Question \/ Loaded Question
\nEquivocation
\nAppeal to Ignorance
\nAppeal to popularity
\nAppeal to Authority
\nQ Begging
\nFalse Dilemma
\nHasty Generalization
\nFaulty Analogy<\/p>\n
\n\tWhat Games Are
\n\tPrisoner\u2019s Dilemmas <\/p>\n
\n\tArguments that include moral propositions \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tUtilitarianism \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tDeontology (Kant) \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tDistributive Justice (Rawls) \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tVirtue \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tProfessional issues (\u2018best practices\u2019, etc.)<\/p>\n
\n\tWhy reasoning about religion is important
\n\tSome definitions: animism, polytheism, monotheism, atheism, etc. \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tSome bad arguments for why God(s) exist: (q-begging fallacy, appeal to authority fallacy, etc.)
\n\tSome better arguments for why God(s) exist: (the Ontological argument, Pascal\u2019s Wager, etc)
\n\tHow to recognise, and avoid, a cult!<\/p>\n
\n\tWhat is power? \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tHard power, soft power \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tWhat is Left, Right, and Centre?<\/p>\n
\n\tThe capitalist cycle (investment -> product -> consumer sale etc) \u00e2\u0153\u201c<\/p>\n
\n\tScientific Method explained again \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tParadigms and Paradigm Shifts (Kuhn) \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tEpistemic Values (Popper) \u00e2\u0153\u201c
\n\tHow Scientists Negotiate With Each Other<\/p>\n