I’ve posted several comments here about critical thinking. It seems that nearly everywhere I look I find things that make my case that critical thinking is becoming a lost art. In this election season the two primary political parties have been having a field day taking advantage of the apparent unwillingness of people to use simple critical thinking skills.
Two examples: Democrat ads castigate Romney for advising in a New York Times editorial (published on November 18, 2008) that Detroit carmakers should be allowed to go bankrupt. And it’s costing him dearly; it will probably cause Michigan to go for Obama and may end up costing Romney the Presidential election. But did he actually suggest that Detroit carmakers should be forced out of business, with the resulting loss of thousands of jobs? Sure sounds that way from the sound bites, but in fact, even a cursory reading of what he wrote shows he had no such intention, and in all likelihood the title of the editorial was simply to catch peoples’ attention. He was writing for a drastic restructuring of The Big Three carmakers, and likely that would require bankruptcy to get out from under their crushing union contracts, future pension obligations and the like. I am certainly no fan of Romney, and I believe a Romney presidency would be a disaster for this country, but come on people. READ WHAT HE SAID and vote for (or against) him based on knowledge, not ignorance! The ad agency who wrote that ad should be ashamed of themselves for beating that drum, and believing (rightfully, as it turns out), that most people would be too lazy to check the facts themselves.
Lest we let the Republicans off the hook, an easy example that comes to mind is their ads making hay with President Obama’s comment made this past July during a rally in Roanoake, Virginia. Obama is accused of trivializing the efforts of people who built businesses, purported to have said that if they’ve been successful they didn’t build their businesses themselves.
Check out the YouTube video of the rally.
So what did he really mean? The context of his comments provides a clear answer: he was alluding to the infrastructure of our society that supports any enterprise. Roads to transport goods, communications networks such as the internet and telephone systems, an educated workforce to provide skilled employees, a marketplace demand for the product, and on and on. No business could survive, let alone prosper, without this infrastructure. And of course the business owners didn’t build those things; they are there for all to use as members of this society. Obama was referring to this patently obvious reality: we all benefit from the infrastructure that is in place largely as a result of the efforts of the government and our tax dollars. However, the Republican machine has taken his words out of context and deliberately misconstrued his meaning. And I am sure it has hurt Obama’s prospects. How badly remains to be seen; it’s possible that it will be old news on election and when people make their choice for president that day they’ll look at the trending of the economy or Obama’s handling of Hurricane Sandy when they make their decision.
There’s plenty of idealogical reasons to choose a candidate. And as I said before, I have no desire to see Romney sit in the Oval Office. But the Democrat’s advertisements taking him to task over his comments about Detroit have nothing to do with my thinking; they were taken out of context. In my opinion, there’s plenty of things to take issue with in an honest and straightforward way; there is no need to make stuff up. Same for Obama; if you don’t agree with his policies and politic outlook, so be it. But do it based on accurate information, not some hack’s spin.
Think, people! Be skeptical of what you hear. Think critically.
About BigBill
Stats: Married male boomer.
Hobbies: Hiking, woodworking, reading, philosophy, good conversation.
More thinking about muddled thinking
I’ve posted several comments here about critical thinking. It seems that nearly everywhere I look I find things that make my case that critical thinking is becoming a lost art. In this election season the two primary political parties have been having a field day taking advantage of the apparent unwillingness of people to use simple critical thinking skills.
Two examples: Democrat ads castigate Romney for advising in a New York Times editorial (published on November 18, 2008) that Detroit carmakers should be allowed to go bankrupt. And it’s costing him dearly; it will probably cause Michigan to go for Obama and may end up costing Romney the Presidential election. But did he actually suggest that Detroit carmakers should be forced out of business, with the resulting loss of thousands of jobs? Sure sounds that way from the sound bites, but in fact, even a cursory reading of what he wrote shows he had no such intention, and in all likelihood the title of the editorial was simply to catch peoples’ attention. He was writing for a drastic restructuring of The Big Three carmakers, and likely that would require bankruptcy to get out from under their crushing union contracts, future pension obligations and the like. I am certainly no fan of Romney, and I believe a Romney presidency would be a disaster for this country, but come on people. READ WHAT HE SAID and vote for (or against) him based on knowledge, not ignorance! The ad agency who wrote that ad should be ashamed of themselves for beating that drum, and believing (rightfully, as it turns out), that most people would be too lazy to check the facts themselves.
Lest we let the Republicans off the hook, an easy example that comes to mind is their ads making hay with President Obama’s comment made this past July during a rally in Roanoake, Virginia. Obama is accused of trivializing the efforts of people who built businesses, purported to have said that if they’ve been successful they didn’t build their businesses themselves.
Check out the YouTube video of the rally.
So what did he really mean? The context of his comments provides a clear answer: he was alluding to the infrastructure of our society that supports any enterprise. Roads to transport goods, communications networks such as the internet and telephone systems, an educated workforce to provide skilled employees, a marketplace demand for the product, and on and on. No business could survive, let alone prosper, without this infrastructure. And of course the business owners didn’t build those things; they are there for all to use as members of this society. Obama was referring to this patently obvious reality: we all benefit from the infrastructure that is in place largely as a result of the efforts of the government and our tax dollars. However, the Republican machine has taken his words out of context and deliberately misconstrued his meaning. And I am sure it has hurt Obama’s prospects. How badly remains to be seen; it’s possible that it will be old news on election and when people make their choice for president that day they’ll look at the trending of the economy or Obama’s handling of Hurricane Sandy when they make their decision.
There’s plenty of idealogical reasons to choose a candidate. And as I said before, I have no desire to see Romney sit in the Oval Office. But the Democrat’s advertisements taking him to task over his comments about Detroit have nothing to do with my thinking; they were taken out of context. In my opinion, there’s plenty of things to take issue with in an honest and straightforward way; there is no need to make stuff up. Same for Obama; if you don’t agree with his policies and politic outlook, so be it. But do it based on accurate information, not some hack’s spin.
Think, people! Be skeptical of what you hear. Think critically.
About BigBill
Stats: Married male boomer. Hobbies: Hiking, woodworking, reading, philosophy, good conversation.