Will a Real Man wear Lipstick?

[InfiniteNow]

And example would be myself and InfiniteNow. ... Does this make one of us a more critical thinker than the other?

Yup... You've been wrong each time. :beer:

 

 

Cheers.

:)

[coberst]

Was there really a need to write it (or should I say "paste" it) three times?

 

Evidence indicates that most responders do not read with understanding the OP. I assume that such sleep-reading is especially contagious regarding an internal to the thread post. Ergo repetition is absolutly necessary, in my considered opinion.

[TheBigDog]

Evidence indicates that most responders do not read with understanding the OP. I assume that such sleep-reading is especially contagious regarding an internal to the thread post. Ergo repetition is absolutly necessary, in my considered opinion.

I would submit that evidence indicates that Hypography members are typically not sleep readers, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt that they do in fact read and understand what other members are posting. Where confusion is found the poster can respond to the counter-post to clarify any misunderstandings. Thus conversation is born. :)

 

For coberst only...

 

I would submit that evidence indicates that Hypography members are typically not sleep readers, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt that they do in fact read and understand what other members are posting. Where confusion is found the poster can respond to the counter-post to clarify any misunderstandings. Thus conversation is born. :beer:

 

I would submit that evidence indicates that Hypography members are typically not sleep readers, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt that they do in fact read and understand what other members are posting. Where confusion is found the poster can respond to the counter-post to clarify any misunderstandings. Thus conversation is born. :lol:

 

Bill "Humor! Arrr arrr arrr" - Mork

[Buffy]

The definition of ‘logic’ is—the formal principles of a branch of knowledge. Like many words ‘logic’ has a common usage that most everyone relates the word to the logic of thinking.....football, ...physics, fly-fishing, ...capitalism..Democracy works best, I think, when every citizen knows the logic of good judgment and together we try to work out the best conclusions based upon our separate knowledge data bank {emphasis Buffy} and our separate set of values.

I'm a well known quibbler, but I think there's useful distinctions in the meaning of some relevant terms. I think you're merging the concepts of "logic"--which is about the *process* of thinking--with "knowledge"--which is part of the *data input* into the knowledge. This makes clearer a distinction you touched on: two people with similar understandings of the *logical* principles, can have different conclusions because their *experience* differs.

 

For example logic says that optimizing the happiness of all is the fundamental optimization function of political systems. Simplistic egaliarian political systems such as touched on in the various anarchy threads being bandied about here recently look good if you have not seen the problems that are associated with them. Those with more experence of the more convoluted and counterintuitive notions of democracy will conclude that it is superior. It all depends on your knowledge and experience.

 

Do you see the value of this distinction?

Buffy the reason I said that everyone is a critical thinker is because I have discovered that every adult’s ego goes berserk if anyone implies that their brain is not a critical thinker.

Well, actually you're just saying that they like to *think* they're critical thinkers, even when they're not! I think a lot of people are "gut thinkers" who just go with their instincts. Like Dubya. He's got some good people logic, and a large knowledge of endearing names, but when it comes to big political decisions, he doesn't seem to have any logic at all, just a gut impression of who's advice to follow. That's not to say he doesn't have strong opinions, but he has a really hard time telling you *why* he has a particular opinion.

 

Reagan on the other hand, did not always have a lot of knowledge, but he had great logic, even if there were a lot of us that didn't agree with his conclusions--and those disagreements often came in the form of *different logic* rather than different data: Moreover, Ronnie would *change his mind* when he got different data (although admittedly, he could be pretty darn selective about data: "Facts are stupid things"). That's a true sign of critical thinking: something that "gut thinkers" almost never do.

The way to fool the ego here is to say that everyone is a critical thinker and then find a definition of critical thinking that will encompass everyone and since we see that President Reagan was such a critical thinker then nobody’s ego gets upset.

Reagan actually was a master in getting people to think that he agreed with their positions. But this is *manipulation* and can only work in the long term with enormous quantities of both charisma and luck (Ronnie had both in spades). By saying this here--and worse *giving it away* you've not gained any points.

 

And to get back on the other half of this thread, I know from an attendee, Ronnie, Cap Weinberger and George Schultz were all seen in dresses and lipstick at Bohemian Club retreats.

 

The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away, :evil:

Buffy

[coberst]

Buffy

 

Logic is a word meaning the principles of a domain of knowledge. Thinking is a domain of knowledge and the logic of thinking is the set of principles for that domain. The principles encompass process, standards, and probably many other things that I would have to do some research to list here.

 

Knowledge is or can be the object of thinking. When I think I can do so in an orderly and coherent fashion or I can do it in any way that happens. If I comprehend the logic of thinking I can better organize my thoughts and my conclusions are likely to be a better reflection of the ‘reality’.

 

Logical thinking is coherent thinking. The content of my thinking is knowledge. Good conclusions depend on good logic and good knowledge.

 

The logic of utilitarianism would lead one to draw certain conclusions when considering the moral dimension. The logic of some other type of moral code would lead to a different conclusion.

 

I have been trying to convince people of the importance of Critical Thinking for a long time. I have learned that initial approach was causing problems. I was saying the few people are critical thinkers. When anyone got any thought that I was implying that they were not a critical thinker they went crazy. My solution is to start out by saying everyone is a critical thinker and that there are different kinds of critical thinkers.

 

Reagan and Bush are good examples of what almost everyone is. So if I say this is standard critical thinking we can then go on to examining what other types of critical thinking is.

 

I guess that 95% of the population is Reagan/Bush type critical thinkers. I suspect neither man has been taught Logic 101 nor neither has considered it important enough to study it on their on.

[DarkColoredLight]

Upon further thoughts, real men do wear lipstick proudly. For he would be sublime to the fact that he is wearing it. I see one scenario where this would play out. Upon smooching with a real woman, who is infact wearing lipstick, the real man would be tainted with the lipstick. This theory only holds water if the real woman thinks it's funny or knows the real man doesn't care that he has the evidence proudly displayed on his lips.

 

I assume they would ride out of the sunset, living happily ever after, on your color TV screen. Out for all that they can get, if you know what I mean.

 

oi, oi, oi!

[TheBigDog]

Upon further thoughts, real men do wear lipstick proudly. For he would be sublime to the fact that he is wearing it. I see one scenario where this would play out. Upon smooching with a real woman, who is infact wearing lipstick, the real man would be tainted with the lipstick. This theory only holds water if the real woman thinks it's funny or knows the real man doesn't care that he has the evidence proudly displayed on his lips.

 

I assume they would ride out of the sunset, living happily ever after, on your color TV screen. Out for all that they can get, if you know what I mean.

 

oi, oi, oi!

Jack Burton and Gracie Law in the elevator - Big Trouble in Little China

 

Bill

[DarkColoredLight]

I was thinking AC DC.

 

oi oi?

[PuGZ]

This idea of men not having handbags is not only a terribly Western idea, it also strikes me as perversely Anglo-centric too. I've spent a lot of time in France where it was quite unusual for a man to not have a handbag of some description. (Sorry for the nitpick, but it hadn't been covered yet in the thread)

 

The fear of homosexuality in straight men that Buffy referred to is something that mystifies myself as well. One of the aspects of my notion of a "real man" is that he is comfortable with his sexuality (whatever that may be) and appearing contrary to that sexuality shouldn't be a bother. It's fun being secure in one's sexuality, it means you can prance about like this and not worry about appearances. :artgallery: