Arguing with Sophists

Sophistry; fabricating evidence and arguments to support a position, usually based on an emotional attachment to an identity built upon falsities, rather than allowing reason and evidence to shape a position, regardless of how it affects one’s identity. Attempting to have a rational and fairminded discussion with a sophist is anything but fairminded, and never will be, as the two forms of thinking are motivated by contradictory end goals. One […] Read more »

Socratic Questioning vs Sophistry

There are two main ways to have a debate, one is to view it as a power struggle to be won, and the second is to see it as an opportunity to progress and grow. The sophists in ancient Greece would use “the tools of philosophy and rhetoric to entertain, impress, or persuade an audience to accept the speaker’s point of view,” as a means of winning an argumentative power […] Read more »

The Pre/Trans Fallacy

Aline and I run into this fallacy often, where people in the “pre-“ state of spirituality misunderstand the concept of unity, and perceive it as psychological enmeshment, much like the concepts of patriotism and/or group identification, and not in the “trans-“ state of psychological differentiation from a collective through achieving Selfhood.  Instead of doing the work to integrate and align their internal aspects of self, as a means of moving […] Read more »

Forms of Objectivity

The following are excerpts from the book “The Thinkers Guide For Conscientious Citizen’s in How to Detect Media Bias & Propaganda” by Richard Paul and Linda Elder: “Objectivity” may appear in three ways. Two are genuine. One is a facade, a counterfeit of objectivity. The Objectivity of Intellectual Humility The first form of objectivity is based on the possibility of developing intellectual humility, knowledge of our ignorance. Thus, a critical consumer […] Read more »

The One Dimensional Gun Control Debate

The issue of gun control is not a black and white either/or dilemma (false dilemma logical fallacy), but multifaceted, which means it requires an in depth multilogical approach to discern the myriad of factors involved. Trying to solve it in a one dimensional way is both naive and ignorant, as it ignores the layers of factors that led to the second amendment’s creation—as well as its attempted downfall. ~Nathan From […] Read more »