Critical Thinking #2: Valid & Sound Arguments 

Because the right and the left have sound arguments? LOL

Damn I never thought of that before

And if you spend more time and even more effort, you'll change your mind again.

Are you seriously comparing Dore to Alex Jones?

David is independent now. This show left the TYT network years ago. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-92bgSRd9lY8.html And Jordan Chariton was fired from TYT last year. Your knowledge of TYT is very suspect. You seem to be unaware of many things that someone that actually hates that channel is well aware of. TYT is very comparable to Fox News. Both channels are filled with ideologues that twist the facts to fit their agenda and ignore stories that would refute their preconceived notions. I was subscribed to TYT for nearly a decade. I've seen Jimmy Dore spit on Alex Jones' face and not lose his job afterwards. I've seen the show sell out to AJ+. I've seen Cenk purposefully misrepresent Sam Harris on multiple occasions. I've seen Cenk and Ana have mental breakdowns when people disagree with them. That channel is not what you think it is. I suggest you stay unsubscribed from them.

sorry jimmy dore does that unlike david pakman and the others jimmy actually has videos where he opened up dictionaries and read from them alex jones doesnt even believe in the insanity he spews as david has told us this is called reading the dictionary the way jimmy does instead of making up your own definitions

^ just because Jimmy Dore read from a dictionary on his show does not imply he used the information in a valid and sound manner. I can't even watch his show because it's fallacy after fallacy, and the 2 people that are his seeming co-hosts contribute nothing of substance and appear more like sycophants. It's just a weird scene all around.

@@MiqelDotCom Yeah, there's actually a term for that: the "Appeal to Definition" fallacy. Critical thinking requires broader context that dictionaries can't always provide. In addition, definitions can (and do) change repeatedly over time, and words often have multiple definitions with entirely different applications (see: "erection"). It's one of the more ironic things I see in comments and posts: when someone quotes a dictionary as an authority in a debate, there's a fair chance they don't actually have a comprehensive understanding of the word in question.

KC I'm talking about the series. I've already known about deductive arguments from the prep LSAT book and most of the stuff David has already talked about in his critical thinking mini series is mentioned on the LSAT prep books. I'm just happy he's circulating this onto RU-vid for people to learn from.

KC okay, you're talking about the series, big whoop! "you're really helping your population." Or maybe people who have never come across David's videos or skeptical thinking in general could benefit. What does this have to do with the LSAT?

KC as for the gun fetish argument, there's a legitimate difference between regular gun owners, and overly zealous NRA members. To call it an ad hominem in some cases could be warranted, but often that is not the case.

This is actually a high school college preparatory level course well it seems extremely basic because David Packman is doing a great job explaining watch the same topic with the same explanations taught by a different person it will confuse the shit out of you and it’s only David being very clear that makes it simple to understand this should be understood and known by every adult American Bar Nunn you should not be able to vote or run for office if you do not know basic understandings like critical thinking however I bet 90% of Americans don’t know the critical thinking or thinking logically is actually studied and Part of a people often ramble and say well done that’s just logical and they don’t even have the slightest idea of what logical thinking is how to go about it or what it really means logic to one person is the assumption that every basic person should understand that but they don’t actually know what it takes to be logical or what makes something logical critical thinking is more in depth than elementary level education however I do hear your point in that it is definitely a necessity should be required and it should be taught at an early enough age to where if you don’t understand it you still have time in middle school or high school to learn about it more ask more questions see the average student doesn’t realize that having a good day in school is not simply going to school and getting good grades a good day in school is what was the best question that you asked today and every day you should try harder and harder to ask a better question because lots of people don’t askAnd that’s because they’re either shy or embarrassed to admit that they don’t know something but the smartest man in the room knows that they don’t know everything and so they’re constantly asking questions so that they can learn in the better the question the more that you can learn

Who's Bar Nunn?

just watch this video 2-3 times more and it will be crystal!

Really? In this case, I think more than enough examples were given which covered all sorts of scenarios regarding the validity and truth of premises and conclusions. That being said, I would be interested in a video where they make arguments regarding some simple and popular topics following these formats.

Regardless of whether it is horrible, that jab has no place in a technical discussion of logic.

Yeah what a loser the narrator is

Exactly!

It's also French

Not really a distraction, he only said like half a sentence about it. I just ignored it and continued on.

P1: White Privilege describes advantages enjoyed, on average, by those with visibly white skin in a given social context. P2: In America, those who do not have white skin are dealing with more discrimination in the CJS, infrastructure and housing, employment, income, ecology, etc. on average. Valid & Sound Conclusion: In America, White Privilege as a concept accurately describes several dimensions of life.

At no point is Trump or Russia mentioned in this video.

@@EamonKelly