Duela zazpi urte aste honetan, David Foster Wallacek argudiatu zuen: "Benetan pentsatzen ikasteak nola eta zer pentsatzen duzun kontrola nola gauzatzen ikastea esan nahi du". Hala ere, etengabeko sentsazionalismoaren, pseudozientziaren eta lasterbideen, erantzun azkarren eta zilarrezko balen lasterketa etengabean, zer pentsatu jakitea gero eta erronka handiagoa dirudi. Baloney Detection Kit bezalako tresnak sortzen ditugu eta animazio zoragarriak sortzen ditugu haurrei pentsamendu kritikoari buruz irakasteko, baina kritikoki pentsatzeko artea lanketa zaindua eta koherentea eskatzen duen ohitura da. "The Burden of Skepticism" izeneko bere saiakera nabarmenean, jatorriz Skeptical Inquirer aldizkariaren 1987ko udazkenean argitaratua, Carl Saganek —beti esplikatzaile artikulatu eta sutsua— pentsamendu kritikoaren bikoiztasuna eta oreka osmotikoa ederki jaso zituen:
Carl Sagan: Eszeptizismoa Eta Irekitasuna Orekatzeaz
- Available Languages
- English
- Amharic
- Arabic
- Basque
- Bengali
- Bulgarian
- Catalan
- Cherokee
- Chinese (PRC)
- Croatian
- Czech
- Danish
- Dutch
- Estonian
- Filipino
- Finnish
- French
- German
- Greek
- Gujarati
- Hebrew
- Hindi
- Hungarian
- Icelandic
- Indonesian
- Italian
- Japanese
- Kannada
- Korean
- Latvian
- Lithuanian
- Malay
- Malayalam
- Marathi
- Norwegian
- Polish
- Portuguese (Brazil)
- Romanian
- Russian
- Serbian
- Slovak
- Slovenian
- Spanish
- Swahili
- Swedish
- Tamil
- Telugu
- Thai
- Turkish
- Ukrainian
- Urdu
- Vietnamese
- Welsh
- More Languages (login required)
- Chinese (Taiwan)
- English (UK)
- Portuguese (Portugal)
"Deitzen dena iruditzen zait bi behar gatazkatsuen arteko oreka bikaina dela: zerbitzatzen zaizkigun hipotesi guztien azterketa eszeptikoena eta, aldi berean, ideia berrietarako irekitasun handia. Jakina, bi pentsamolde horiek nolabaiteko tentsioan daude. Baina modu horietako bakar bat erabiltzeko gai bazara, edozein dela ere, arazo sakonetan zaude.
Eszeptiko bakarra bazara, ideia berririk ez zaizu iritsiko. Ez duzu inoiz ezer berririk ikasten. Zentzugabekeriak mundua agintzen duela sinetsita dagoen agure zintzo bihurtzen zara. (Badira, noski, datu asko zuri laguntzeko.) Baina noizean behin, agian ehun kasutan behin, ideia berri bat ageri da, baliozkoa eta zoragarria. Guztiarekin eszeptiko izateko ohitura gehiegi baduzu, galdu egingo duzu edo haserretu egingo zara, eta edozein modutan ulermenaren eta aurrerapenaren oztopo egongo zara.
Bestalde, sinesgarritasun punturaino irekita bazaude eta ez baduzu zentzu eszeptiko bat ere, orduan ezin dituzu bereizi erabilgarriak baliogabeak eta baliogabeak. Ideia guztiek balio berdina badute orduan galduta zaude, zeren eta, orduan, iruditzen zait ideiak ez duela inolako baliorik.
Ideia batzuk besteak baino hobeak dira. Horiek bereizteko makineria ezinbesteko tresna da munduari aurre egiteko eta bereziki etorkizunari aurre egiteko. Eta, hain zuzen, bi pentsamolde horien nahasketa da zientziaren arrakastarako funtsezkoa dena".
Hona hemen zientziaren definizio ospetsu hauei gehigarri bikaina.
COMMUNITY REFLECTIONS
SHARE YOUR REFLECTION
3 PAST RESPONSES
when I said 'sick' I mean a bad feeling my friends hid in G+.
I can explain another story when I had two people who worked my store they were different clans but same community. So in msn I was chatting two of online one talked bad about the other one and I agreed then the other one talked and I greed yet two of them thought I belong to one's. So if you again look the first version of the story and the last one you can know it was meant immediate actions.
Anyway, it was great you suggested in today's dailygood though I would like friends of that community to ask and see their points. When I saw some people talking Hitler I could call myself Hitler. And some people would feel hurt. I recently learnt his history. It is like that.
Though that we talked, What I don't like is what people I socialized perceived about me. I am very sure it must made them sick but I didn't know but I sensed something was incorrect when one praised a divine. So I lacked sobriety and I didn't know that the buddy knew something about woman who spoke up. But I tell you I know it could hurt innocent people's but you have to follow the facts that I explained last week. That art was though of ten minutes on desktop and what it says except the money was meant immediate actions. Yes some sort of the story was circulated but those statements were not in me. It is very hard someone not an artist can think that.
So you need to understand the theory as wise and not come as a cranky. I really couldn't know where enmity came from when you send me frightening dailygood. If you could say that something was disgusting I could have solved and cleanness would have worked. You know, I am honesty.
This beautiful article by Carl Sagan gives us a new insight into the pattern of human thinking.
Yours Sincerely
Muralikrishna.P.