shh wrote:

Audley Strange wrote:One of my major pet peeves might be worth pointing out, that the only thing one should take from words written, is the explicit meaning of the words written. To project and extrapolate and infer that which is not written may provide some form of meaning but that meaning is often erroneous and biased based on the flawed assumptions of the reader.

I'd agree with that, I think I'd link it to something on language generally, and contradictions as well though, because I can also think of times where people say "that's not what I mean" but I know it's what they said.

Well even a brief understanding of what general semantics is ( ) would seem essential to me. But you are right. When people do that to me. I find it annoying when the say something, I hear what they say, question it and they say "oh you know what I mean" when I clearly don't. In communication, one shouldn't have to fucking guess.

Well even a brief understanding of what general semantics is ( )

I see what you did there.

shh wrote:Actually, it'd be nice to have exercises. Not sure how you'd go about that, but it'd be good if you could add some practical bits possibly at the end of a somehow relevant "reading" part, have a small "practical" which shows how to test some of the ideas, or demonstrate some general principle. Like a school book really, but without the shitty disinterest.

hackenslash wrote:That's actually a stunningly good idea. I'll have to give that some thought, as it isn't something I'd considered.

Cheers.

Yes it is.

Some textual quiz along the lines of this maybe ?

Also some example dialogs where you ask the reader to identify the logical fallacies that have been made...

I've actually been thinking about that a bit. How about Oh, Really? (An Everyday Guide To Assessing Claims)?

'Critical Thinking: A Reasonable Guide' ?

'Oh, Really?' sounds great!

One thing I thought of to add to the potential list is "weight loss advice". There is multimillion dollar shit talked about this subject when in fact all it comes down to in most cases is a bit of self discipline. I remember hearing a while back (Panorama maybe ?) that, despite the intellectual sounding biochemical claims made by its adherents, Adkins only worked because the large protein intake made you feel full up for longer so you didn't pig out on twinkie bars. Anyway, I'm sure there's swathes of crap out there that you could chew on (if chewing on crap is your thing of course)

hackenslash wrote:I've actually been thinking about that a bit. How about Oh, Really? (An Everyday Guide To Assessing Claims)?

"Are you really such a stupid cunt ?"

hackenslash wrote:I've actually been thinking about that a bit. How about Oh, Really? (An Everyday Guide To Assessing Claims)?

Since it's a kind of internet project, I'd like ORLY?

That could preclude some of the older generations from purchasing it because it is that message language. But I agree it would be more congruent and those luddite people are dying out (metaphorically) anyway.

sennekuyl wrote:That could preclude some of the older generations from purchasing it because it is that message language. But I agree it would be more congruent and those luddite people are dying out (metaphorically) anyway.

More title brainstorming...

• "the Bible of Critical Thought" -- there are a lot of books that claim to be authoritative that throw "bible" in their title; some get the defacto title of "Bible" after they have proven their value -- since I'm in software the example that immediately leaps to mind is Charles Petzold's "Programming Windows" that has been informally dubbed the Win32 API Bible. These books usually pack some heft, though, and usually strive to be comprehensive references. Interestingly, if this title were in an online catalog, someone searching for "the bible" is bound to see this one following it alphabetically by title.
• "NO SH*T!? How To Know When Something Is Unbelievable" -- taking after the familiar phrase offered when a friend tells you something outlandish
• "WTF!? A Book For Identifying and Avoiding BS" -- truth in a title; I like the shock value and that, while I'm not a lawyer, it seems to bypass the censors
• "BULLSH*T! the Art of Mental Self Defense" -- taking the asterisk(*) cue from the "Sh*t My Dad Says" book title.
• "Fundies Say the Damnedest Things" -- seen elsewhere in our forums -- it'd make a great book title; however, it might make it drastically more popular among non believers than Fundies (i.e., missing those that need it most).
• Generate a title that mocks or plays off of the long list of books in the wildly successful "Chicken Soup" series. The best I could come up with is "Logic for the human mind" -- thought I'd throw it out there even though something better is sorely needed.

shh wrote:

hackenslash wrote:I've actually been thinking about that a bit. How about Oh, Really? (An Everyday Guide To Assessing Claims)?

Since it's a kind of internet project, I'd like ORLY?

I always read that as 'Orally.' Is that so very wrong of me?


'Stuff About Things: A Goatherders Guide'

THWOTH wrote:I always read that as 'Orally.'

ORLY?

Who could resist?

Is that so very wrong of me?

I'd like some examples of what you thought people were saying, could be a whole critical thinking exercise in there.

'Stuff About Things: A Goatherders Guide'

james1v wrote:

sennekuyl wrote:That could preclude some of the older generations from purchasing it because it is that message language. But I agree it would be more congruent and those luddite people are dying out (metaphorically) anyway.

Please don't be sad. My rather throw-away thoughts were more about people who simply dismiss things because they don't understand it immediately, than the spectacular people who utilise a much greater vocabulary than they did at 4. This particular category do tend to be be of the older generations, though not exclusive to it. I'm also in utter envy of the individuals who employ an enormous vocabulary and do so with precision and accurate grammar as if indigenous to their thinking. I can't do it after hours of thought about single paragraphs.

Had the title suggested been more erudite and verbose, the comment would have stood excluding the morbid end.

If you want the people who you are targeting to read it, you can't insult them in the title. You need to get their attention without offending them before they've even read it.

When I started writing my blog, I wanted something that would get some more open-minded believers to read it, I could've called it "the Bible is full of crap" which it is, or "how stupid do you have to be to believe this." But I thought that pointing out that rational thinking, and looking at the bible rationally would be likely to make people who have some belief at least a little interested, and I was right, initially. Now, however, they've realised that I'm not going to fall for it, as they thought I would, once I'd read it, they don't bother to read my posts anymore, and my readership has dropped.

You have to look out for that one. If you want to gather readers. Just a little advice from my own experience.

I like the idea of your book Hack. And nice that you're asking for ideas.

There is book for children called The Dangerous Book for Boys. It's a bit of a hodge-podge of short 2-3 page articles written in an engaging conversational style. Due to its tone and because of the universality of the topics, it is an enjoyable read for a large age range. It might be give some ideas for choosing a format or style.

sennekuyl wrote:That could preclude some of the older generations from purchasing it because it is that message language. But I agree it would be more congruent and those luddite people are dying out (metaphorically) anyway.

Fair enough, but I actually meant something like


Similar to some of the Hitchhikers covers actually, that just have a huge DON'T PANIC with The Hitch-hikers Guide to the Galaxy as subtext.
Or how about:

(An Everyday Guide To Assessing Claims)

Maybe a bit too cliche?

I think your ideas are great shh.