|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
 Posted - 08/06/2010 : 14:11:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Obviously, critical thinking and the practice of smoking are totally incompatible. |
It's not obvious to me. What about smoking makes it incompatible with critical thinking?
| And no skeptic that truly and completely allows his thinking processes to be guided by critical thinking would smoke, because it is self-destructive and illogical. |
But you're making the mistake of assuming your personal value judgments are shared by everyone. As Ricky pointed out, that just makes you look like a self-centered prick.
| Kil, rather sheepishly, states that "cognitive dissonance" is responsible for his smoking habit. |
Yeah, I think he either misspoke or is confused about what cognitive dissonance is.
| In effect, he is admitting that his "critical thinking" fails or does not apply to his smoking habit. |
Which has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance.
But I can throw strawmen at you as well as you can make them up yourself.| Smokers don't necessarily have to have a death wish. They may simply be uninterested in maximizing their lifespan. |
Find me a quote from any true skeptic, capable of clear critical thought, and not painfully terminally ill but rather in good mental and physical health, that is not "interested in maximizing their lifespan" and in fact wants to shorten it, which is what I was talking about. |
And I'm saying accusing smokers of wanting to shorten their lives is the strawman here.
A shorter lifespan is a consequence of smoking, not the reason for smoking. Riding in automobiles also statistically increases a person's likelihood of shortening their lifespan, but accusing people who ride in motorized vehicles of wanting to die would be an illogical accusation, which is essentially what you're doing to smokers.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 08/06/2010 14:21:22 |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 14:21:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
I have no idea if chfcrsh smokes or not. However his statement is that it is logically acceptable for skeptics to smoke. |
"Logically acceptable" is synonymous with "not incongruous?"
Is it logically acceptable for a skeptic to be a blacksmith? Or is it simply that blacksmithing isn't based on any premises which are contradictory to skepticism?
Name a premise for smoking which is contradictory to skepticism, please. I can't think of any. I also don't see where any of the benefits of not smoking share any idea space with critical thought. For example, wanting to live as long as possible isn't a prerequisite for skepticism.
Smoking seems to me to be orthogonal to skepticism. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 15:36:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
At first blush, Ricky, it does appear that your position on this subject is a bit defensive, what with all the "self-centered prick' crap... Frankly, I must state that I resent being characterized as a "self-centered prick" based on a wild presumptive leap as to what my views were of Christopher Hitchens. |
Perhaps you just didn't see the "if" in front of my statement. As someone who often sacrifices reading accuracy for speed, I can completely understand this. I was fairly certain you didn't satisfy the hypothesis of my implication, though not 100%. Indeed, I think that you don't see any benefit in smoking at all, which is where we probably disagree. Let me summarize my argument.
1. There are benefits to smoking (almost solely personal enjoyment).
2. Deciding whether to do something or not is about weighing the benefits against the costs.
3. Skepticism has very little to do with how one assesses the weight of a particular gain or cost.
It is with these three premises that I conclude one can be a smoker, a skeptic, and not suffer from cognitive dissonance. If you disagree with a premise or the (hopefully obvious) logic behind the conclusion, please let me know exactly where you disagree. |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
| Edited by - Ricky on 08/06/2010 15:39:52 |
|
|
|
dglas
Skeptic Friend
Canada
397 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 15:53:11 [Permalink]
|
According to Wikipedia, Hitchens is already dead, or not, or is, or not .... seems to be a little wiki-corrections struggle underway. ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_hitchens
|
--------------------------------------------------
- dglas (In the hell of 1000 unresolved subplots...)
--------------------------------------------------
The Presupposition of Intrinsic Evil
+ A Self-Justificatory Framework
= The "Heart of Darkness"
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 16:11:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by bngbuck
| Kil, rather sheepishly, states that "cognitive dissonance" is responsible for his smoking habit. |
|
Yeah, I think he either misspoke or is confused about what cognitive dissonance is. |
I didn't misspeak, even though it was a flippant answer. I'm not the least bit confused about what cognitive dissonance is.
Cognitive dissonance in tobacco smokers.
| The knowledge and beliefs about smoking of smokers, non-smokers, and ex-smokers were examined within a cognitive dissonance framework. The 186 respondents completed a questionnaire concerned with smoking habits, knowledge of the effects of smoking, beliefs about smoking, and estimates of risk of lung cancer to themselves and to the average Australian smoker. Smokers estimated their risk of contracting lung cancer as greater than the risk non-smokers or ex-smokers saw for themselves, but less than the risk for the average Australian smoker. No differences were found in the amount of factual knowledge about the effects of smoking. However, smokers endorsed significantly more rationalisations and distortions of logic regarding smoking than did non-smokers or ex-smokers. Smokers may experience cognitive dissonance as a result of using tobacco despite its well-publicised ill-effects, and it may be that interventions targeting rationalisations for smoking will be useful in smoking cessation. |
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 17:25:35 [Permalink]
|
HH.....
| It's not obvious to me. What about smoking makes it incompatible with critical thinking? |
Critical thinking places a high value on logic. Smoking is highly illogical because it is an activity that medical science has clearly defined as extremely unhealthy. It is not logical to continue to pursue an activity which has been clearly demonstrated to be harmful to one's own health.| But you're making the mistake of assuming your personal value judgments are shared by everyone |
My personal values or judgments have nothing to do with it. It's the judgment of a great deal of medical research to which I am referring.| As Ricky pointed out, that just makes you look like a self-centered prick. |
Thank you, Hummer. Your schoolyard baiting is duly noted, but it's a bit sad that you cannot seem to outgrow this childish habit.| Yeah, I think he either misspoke or is confused about what cognitive dissonance is. |
Kil is fully capable of speaking for himself, and he did it very well in the post above. I have no doubt that he understands cognitive dissonance as well or better than you.| Which has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance. |
Obviously, Kil and others that he quotes don't agree with you. Neither do I.
| A shorter lifespan is a consequence of smoking, not the reason for smoking. |
Indeed, a quite shorter lifespan is the best reason for not smoking that I can think of.| accusing people who ride in motorized vehicles of wanting to die would be an illogical accusation, which is essentially what you're doing to smokers. |
Hum, you better take your straw creatures back to OZ, they don't hold up well here in reality. Riding in motorized vehicles is a absolute necessity for almost everyone who lives in urban America. Smoking is a matter of choice and by no means necessary for anything except the profits of the tobacco companies. There is no similarity between the two situations. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 17:30:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
I didn't misspeak, even though it was a flippant answer. I'm not the least bit confused about what cognitive dissonance is. |
Ok, then I shouldn't have spoken for you.
| Smokers estimated their risk of contracting lung cancer as greater than the risk non-smokers or ex-smokers saw for themselves, but less than the risk for the average Australian smoker. No differences were found in the amount of factual knowledge about the effects of smoking. |
So the smokers understand smoking is bad and that it increases their risk of contracting certain diseases when compared to non-smokers, it's just that they still underestimate their personal degree of risk. In other words, the cognitive dissonance lies in thinking "I know smoking leads to bad things, but those bad things won't happen to me."
Is that an accurate description of your cognitive dissonance, Kil?
In which case, the dissonance can be resolved by being truthful to oneself about the personal health risks smoking actually entails. But if one is honest with oneself, then I don't think smoking is necessarily in conflict with critical thinking. For his part, Hitchens certainly didn't seem especially surprised by his diagnosis, saying "I have been taunting the Reaper into taking a free scythe in my direction and have now succumbed to something so predictable and banal that it bores even me."
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 17:33:13 [Permalink]
|
| Does pot count? SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 17:49:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Critical thinking places a high value on logic. Smoking is highly illogical because it is an activity that medical science has clearly defined as extremely unhealthy. It is not logical to continue to pursue an activity which has been clearly demonstrated to be harmful to one's own health. |
Lots of things are harmful to one's health. Drinking alcohol, eating sweets, using recreational drugs, not getting enough exercise, smoking and a litany of other activities are all harmful to one's health. But there is nothing "illogical" about indulging in any of them unless one wishes to live to the absolute maximum lifespan their genetics allows. It's perfectly logical if one is willing to trade a few years off the end of their life for a good time now, though. In other words, it's a value judgment.
| My personal values or judgments have nothing to do with it. It's the judgment of a great deal of medical research to which I am referring. |
No, you still don't get it. No one is disputing the medical research. What's at issue is your insistence that people place the same value on their lives, especially their final years, as you do.
Riding in motorized vehicles is a absolute necessity for almost everyone who lives in urban America. Smoking is a matter of choice and by no means necessary for anything except the profits of the tobacco companies. There is no similarity between the two situations.
|
The point of my example was that if people were interested in maximizing their lifespans then there are a whole slew of activities they would never engage in. But they do, for a variety of reasons. So it's not that people never engage in risky behaviors, it's that they make a value judgment about how much personal risk they're willing to accept. Ergo, people weigh the risks and rewards, just like Ricky said. What part of that are you having such difficulty grasping? Just because you personally think smoking offers more risk than reward doesn't make the activity "illogical."
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 08/06/2010 17:51:49 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 17:57:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Critical thinking places a high value on logic. Smoking is highly illogical because it is an activity that medical science has clearly defined as extremely unhealthy. It is not logical to continue to pursue an activity which has been clearly demonstrated to be harmful to one's own health. |
It is illogical if one's goal is to be healthy. If one doesn't care about one's health, then there's no logical reason to be concerned about health issues.
Smoking is unhealthy. That doesn't mean that anyone ought to want to be healthy. Your personal judgments have everything to do with your argument, since you're claiming that every skeptic ought to want to be healthy. But where does that "ought" come from? Upon what logic does it rest? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 17:58:44 [Permalink]
|
Dave.....
"Logically acceptable" is synonymous with "not incongruous?"
|
Yes, in this context.| Is it logically acceptable for a skeptic to be a blacksmith? Or is it simply that blacksmithing isn't based on any premises which are contradictory to skepticism? |
Yes to both.| Name a premise for smoking which is contradictory to skepticism, please. |
It is illogical. Illogic is contradictory to critical thinking, which in turn is an important part of the Skeptic's posture. | The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise. |
|
| Smoking seems to me to be orthogonal to skepticism. |
If you are speaking in the context of vector alignment, I would see the two vectors as parallel and diametrically opposed in direction. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 18:06:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
It is illogical. |
Go ahead and lay out the premises you're using that lead you to the logical conclusion that smoking is illogical. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 19:01:28 [Permalink]
|
Ricky.....
| Perhaps you just didn't see the "if" in front of my statement. |
If or no if, I just don't understand how phrases like "a self-centered prick" contribute much to discourse or understanding of another's viewpoint. Sure, I use obscene derogation freely all the time, but I try to restrict it to response from a scatological attack of one type or another from someone that needs to attack me.| Indeed, I think that you don't see any benefit in smoking at all, |
Absolutely correct, and I smoked heavily for over forty years and paid a terrible price for it.1. There are benefits to smoking (almost solely personal enjoyment).
|
There are benefits to jumping out of an airplane without a parachute (only a thrill like no other in the world)| 2. Deciding whether to do something or not is about weighing the benefits against the costs. |
Benefit - A big thrill. Cost - Death| 3. Skepticism has very little to do with how one assesses the weight of a particular gain or cost. |
A Skeptic appying critical thinking and logic to the concept decides the thrill isn't worth much pain and a probable early uncomfortable death as a consequence of a smoking habit by applying simple logic to the problem - you can only do it once and it obviates doing anything else, ever. A good Skeptic's trained Critical Thinking helps her decide that Life is better than Death for her.| If you disagree with a premise or the (hopefully obvious) logic behind the conclusion, please let me know exactly where you disagree. |
I disagree with the premise that engaging in behavior that is highly harmful to one's health and ultimely is deadly is contrary to a Skeptic's application of logic and critical thinking to decisions because to conclude that smoking is OK even though it is very harmful is to deny reality (the huge accumulation of medical statistics tha t demonstrate that a smoker will suffer and eventually die if he continues the habit. To risk death with acceptable odds and earn a great reward if the risk leads to success is probably a form of logical behavior for some. But to practically assure a painful and drawn-out death, or at least extremely uncomfortable medical procedures to save ones life from the damage done, is, to me, an illogical decision.
Those that do not employ logic, critical thinking, and skepticism (and I do believe all three are inextricably entwined) in living their personal lives, can easily rationalize their smoking habit - not everyone gets sick and dies from smoking. No, only a great majority. The statistics and doctors are wrong. Sure - try having a CABG. I'll enjoy now and let the future take care of itself. It will, almost certainly. I would wager that a large percentage of true practicing skeptics don't smoke. Maybe a [SFN} poll, Dave?
|
|
|
|
chefcrsh
Skeptic Friend
Hong Kong
380 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 19:09:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Dave.....
It is illogical. Illogic is contradictory to critical thinking, which in turn is an important part of the Skeptic's posture.
|
The bible is true because the bible says it is true? |
|
|
|
chefcrsh
Skeptic Friend
Hong Kong
380 Posts |
Posted - 08/06/2010 : 19:18:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Absolutely correct, and I smoked heavily for over forty years and paid a terrible price for it.
|
My maternal grandfather smoked and drank as only a prohibition child of Chicago could until the age of 78 when he was hospitalized for dementia, (not specifically associated with smoke or drink and certainly associated with old age) he died a year later after they took away his smokes and booze, of "natural causes" At his age and given his birth rate, h lived much longer than expected. He loved his smokes and Canadian Club, they gave him great pleasure for probably at least 60 years. He died as well as anyone can.
So now we have two anecdotes, yours and mine, they cancel each other. Go figure.
You hold great value for long life I don't. I hold great value in living life well...sucking the marrow as it were. That logically and reasonably makes me weigh risk at a lower value than you.
In fact I do not smoke, do not take recreational drugs, and only drink alcohol sparingly, as I value unclouded faculty over a buzz. I can not claim these decisions are the result of pure reason, they are part reason part opinion. Life is like that Spock. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Christopher Hitchen’s cancer
