You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘critical thinking’ category.

Currently a hot topic in political news is this story:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23572671/?GT1=43001

I comiserate with those who have weighed in with their shock and dismay at these allegations. However, I am also somewhat baffled at the reaction from the secular world (I have not heard any opinions from other Christians on the issue).

That a governor of the state of New York, who is supposed to be one that people can trust and emulate, someone who sets an example of high standards and solid character, would choose to follow a path of such moral degradation and sexual immorality is surely a tragedy and an outrage. Isn’t it?

Woah! Wait a second. Since when did our secular, humanistic, and hedonistic society place any value whatsoever on traditional (“old-fashioned”) sexual morality and conservative values in one’s personal life? What happened to the sexual revolution? What happened to the age of tolerance (what’s right for you is right for you and I can’t judge you)? What happened to the idea of monogamy being antiquated and unrealistic? Those are the messages I’m getting loud and clear from my culture. So how come politicians are held to a different standard?

Don’t get me wrong here – I’m not saying I actually agree with any of those things. I believe strongly in monogamy. I believe that extra-marital sex (in all respects) is morally wrong – it is sin. I also believe that leaders should be judged more harshly and that they are examples to the people they are leading.

My problem is that I simply don’t understand where the secular world gets off saying that Spitzer’s actions are disgraceful and that he should resign or be impeached.

“Particularly because of the reform platform on which he was elected governor, his ability to govern the state of New York and execute his duties as governor have been irreparably damaged,” said Citizens Union, a good-government group that supported the crusading attorney general for governor in 2006 and provided critical support in his effort to reform Albany. “It is our strong belief that it is now impossible for him to fulfill his responsibilities as governor. Accordingly, Citizens Union urges him to resign as governor.”

The fact that he spent a significant amount of his own money (he is independantly wealthy) on a prostitute seems to be the main problem here. Is it because he cheated on his wife? The fact that he is married comes up only once in the article, which doesn’t even refer to the fact that what he did was commit marital infidelity. There’s more focus on the fact that he spent so much money. Perhaps if he’d spent the money selfishly on himself in lavish cars, luxury vacations, or any kind of ridiculous indulgence it would have been applauded instead. After all the problem of selfishness that is inherent in our capitalistic and narcissistic society doesn’t seem to be on anyone’s radar. In fact the more money and toys one has, the more one’s status in society is elevated. A “funny” parallel, I think. The Biblical values of sexual morality are paraded out as if they actually mean something to these people, while Jesus’ other teachings are all but non-existent to them.

What’s up with that?

I’m becoming a closet sci-fi fan. In a small way, let me emphasize. It’s Chris’s fault.  But still, I guess I (grudgingly) enjoy it.  I’m watching Stargate Season 3 right now (last episode), and I have to say, it’s been entertaining.  Not terribly violent, fairly good language and values, and no inappropriate sexual scenes.  Kinda tame by today’s standards.  The first season was terribly cheesy, but they’ve gotten better as we went on.  I *cough* actually kind of like it.  And the best part – fairly often there are significant moral and philosophical issues in episodes, such as personhood, the meaning of life, what is defined as “good”, and the importance of being a learner in culture.

Well, now I’ve admitted it. There’s no going back…

I’ve discovered a bit about myself lately by doing the Myers-Briggs Personality Type-Indicator.  It says I am an INTP.  This is one description I found on the web, and I certainly would agree that it is describing me to a “t” (whatever that means).  It is eerily accurate (I’ve underlined the parts that especially resonated with me).

Another extremely good (perhaps even better, although longer) article/essay on the INTP personality type is found at this link: http://www.intp.org/intprofile.html

This link says that only 1% of the population are INTP’s. 

If that’s the case, it’s no wonder I feel so strange and misunderstood so often.
***
The Thinker

As an INTP, your primary mode of living is focused internally, where you deal with things rationally and logically. Your secondary mode is external, where you take things in primarily via your intuition.
INTPs live in the world of theoretical possibilities. They see everything in terms of how it could be improved, or what it could be turned into. They live primarily inside their own minds, having the ability to analyze difficult problems, identify patterns, and come up with logical explanations. They seek clarity in everything, and are therefore driven to build knowledge. They are the “absent-minded professors”, who highly value intelligence and the ability to apply logic to theories to find solutions. They typically are so strongly driven to turn problems into logical explanations, that they live much of their lives within their own heads, and may not place as much importance or value on the external world. Their natural drive to turn theories into concrete understanding may turn into a feeling of personal responsibility to solve theoretical problems, and help society move towards a higher understanding.

INTPs value knowledge above all else. Their minds are constantly working to generate new theories, or to prove or disprove existing theories. They approach problems and theories with enthusiasm and skepticism, ignoring existing rules and opinions and defining their own approach to the resolution. They seek patterns and logical explanations for anything that interests them. They’re usually extremely bright, and able to be objectively critical in their analysis. They love new ideas, and become very excited over abstractions and theories. They love to discuss these concepts with others. They may seem “dreamy” and distant to others, because they spend a lot of time inside their minds musing over theories. They hate to work on routine things – they would much prefer to build complex theoretical solutions, and leave the implementation of the system to others. They are intensely interested in theory, and will put forth tremendous amounts of time and energy into finding a solution to a problem with has piqued their interest.

INTPs do not like to lead or control people. They’re very tolerant and flexible in most situations, unless one of their firmly held beliefs has been violated or challenged, in which case they may take a very rigid stance. The INTP is likely to be very shy when it comes to meeting new people. On the other hand, the INTP is very self-confident and gregarious around people they know well, or when discussing theories which they fully understand.

The INTP has no understanding or value for decisions made on the basis of personal subjectivity or feelings. They strive constantly to achieve logical conclusions to problems, and don’t understand the importance or relevance of applying subjective emotional considerations to decisions. For this reason, INTPs are usually not in-tune with how people are feeling, and are not naturally well-equiped to meet the emotional needs of others.

The INTP may have a problem with self-aggrandizement and social rebellion, which will interfere with their creative potential. Since their Feeling side is their least developed trait, the INTP may have difficulty giving the warmth and support that is sometimes necessary in intimate relationships. If the INTP doesn’t realize the value of attending to other people’s feelings, he or she may become overly critical and sarcastic with others. If the INTP is not able to find a place for themself which supports the use of their strongest abilities, they may become generally negative and cynical. If the INTP has not developed their Sensing side sufficiently, they may become unaware of their environment, and exhibit weakness in performing maintenance-type tasks, such as bill-paying and dressing appropriately.

For the INTP, it is extremely important that ideas and facts are expressed correctly and succinctly. They are likely to express themselves in what they believe to be absolute truths. Sometimes, their well thought-out understanding of an idea is not easily understandable by others, but the INTP is not naturally likely to tailor the truth so as to explain it in an understandable way to others. The INTP may be prone to abandoning a project once they have figured it out, moving on to the next thing. It’s important that the INTP place importance on expressing their developed theories in understandable ways. In the end, an amazing discovery means nothing if you are the only person who understands it.

The INTP is usually very independent, unconventional, and original. They are not likely to place much value on traditional goals such as popularity and security. They usually have complex characters, and may tend to be restless and temperamental. They are strongly ingenious, and have unconventional thought patterns which allows them to analyze ideas in new ways. Consequently, a lot of scientific breakthroughs in the world have been made by the INTP.

The INTP is at his best when he can work on his theories independently. When given an environment which supports his creative genius and possible eccentricity, the INTP can accomplish truly remarkable things. These are the pioneers of new thoughts in our society.

http://www.personalitypage.com/INTP.html

I fear that it truly may be. Outside of the academic world (including professors, philosophy majors, and select others), there seem to be so very few people who are able to engage in calm, edifying, rational discussion or debate on issues, where there may or may not be major differing of opinions. Why is that such a tall order?

Why does the general church community in the Western world tend to ignore the part of the verse that commands us to love God with our minds as well? Why is it a social faux pas to think “outside the box” (and not in the cool, non-threatening way, but in the radical uncomfortable way)? I am forever trying to discuss things and find that so many people are just not interested or able to engage in rational discussion of some issues, such as pacifism, the church, or social justice. Those types of issues are not comfortable for most people. I have been told that I can come on strong when in these discussions, and I have worked on my delivery for years now. I take to heart 1 Peter 3:15- “Always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks you to give a reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect”. I have slowly learned how to say things in a calm and rational way, and yet I cannot speak with less conviction than what I have. I have been told that to speak with such conviction is offensive to people (this is people in the Christian community I’m talking about). Apparently it is offensive because I am presenting my opinions as if I am right. This frustrates me to no end, because the way I see it… why would I have an opinion, unless I think it is right? Who in their right mind believes something to be true that they also think could very well be false? (I also get really passionate about discussing issues and believe that it needs to be done far more than it is).

At the risk of offending, as I seem to be so good at, I would venture to say that our Western world has been so incredibly impacted by the recent revolution of tolerance, that even Christians are afraid to stand up and say that truth is NOT relative. Many have been sucked in to believing that it is improper (at best) and sinful (at worst) to claim truth on any issue.

Now I know that many people out there would say that we can never really know the truth, because we have limited human knowledge, etc. But I would contend that God created us with critical minds with the ability to reason. Of course we cannot know all truth, only God is omniscient. However that does not mean that we cannot know ANY truths. I know for example that Jesus Christ is Lord. It’s not a matter of “I think He’s Lord, but I’m really not sure, and I’m totally open to other opinions, just so I don’t offend anyone”. No. “I know He’s Lord like I know that the sun rose this morning”. I am sure.

Just to clarify, I do not think that knowing truth is the only important aspect of being a Christian, nor do I think that it is sufficient for “getting into heaven”. Nonetheless that does not negate the importance of it. I think that a relationship with Christ needs a balance of the heart, mind, and soul.

I’m still learning, still on the road… waiting for Christ to return and take me home.

I'm Red, he's Honey. I'm the writer of this blog and the source of your entertainment and/or boredom. We're parents of an exceptionally adorable child, and we have no idea what we're doing! This blog is the outlet for my thoughts along the way - welcome! Pull up a couch, grab a cup of tea, and stay a while! Or back away slowly. Whatever works.




Ultimate Blog Party 2009



Great Resources


Almost

Blog Stats

  • 5,370 Lurkers and/or Friends

Red’s Twitter

To Sum Me Up…

Flickr Photos

August 2017
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031