%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |
I’d rather write than talk. Nobody interrupts! Posting monthly or less now--see below. |
My original purpose for this blog, which I started in August of 2019, was to see if I could maintain consistency, to discover what I want to write about, and to find my writing voice. In January, I started a "niche-less" blog at Wordpress.com where I've published weekly. -- Kit’s Kontemplations  . -- I'm preparing to start a Catholic blog on Wordpress.com where I'll post weekly, and another site to put the rest of my writing. I also want to spend more time reading other blogs and offering thoughtful comments, both here on WDC and elsewhere. At most, I will publish once a month at no set time in this blog starting in September of 2020. Thank you to those who have read and rated any posts on this blog. I really appreciate it. I did NOT want to write “about” me on this blog. I wanted to share my interests, discoveries and maybe a few useful insights. If anything I've written helps even one person, whether or not they respond to the post, then this blog has been successful. |
| “The truth isn’t always what we want it to be. Sometimes beliefs that don’t match up with truth are much more convenient, or more palatable, or more popular. It takes work to conform your beliefs to reality.” —Amy K. Hall Our culture, in the name of “tolerance” encourages us to believe illogical things such as: “there is no absolute truth” and “truth cannot be known”. People who make these statements seem to be absolutely sure that they know these things about truth. If there is no absolute truth then someone’s claim that there is no absolute truth is only their opinion, and a self-contradictory one at that. The statement that truth cannot be known is itself a statement that claims to be a knowable truth. We don’t invent truth; we discover it. The process for discovering truth begins with the first principles of logic that we know intuitively. The first is the law of non-contradiction; A cannot be A and non-A at the same time. For example, a cat cannot be both a cat and not a cat at the same time. The second is the law of the excluded middle. A statement that can have a truth value is either true or false; there is no middle ground. For example: a snake is either a reptile or not a reptile; there is no other possibility. Any claim we encounter is only worthy of belief if it points to the truth. “Unfortunately, many modern beliefs are based on subjective preferences rather than on objective facts.” —Unknown If we genuinely desire to find the truth, we must be willing to give up our preferences in favour of facts. “Although we cannot always trust our intuition, I contend that it is a great place to start when searching for truth. Moreover, when one’s intuition is supported by a cumulative case of data, there is good reason to continue trusting intuition.” —Tim Stratton There are a lot of factors that go into the formation of a belief. When you encounter a new idea for the first time, you will either accept or reject it. Occasionally you may withhold judgement until you research it but even then, you are inclined to either accept or reject it. Have you ever considered why you do this? Here are some questions to consider about a new idea you encounter for the first time:  Are you more likely to accept an unfamiliar idea if you read about it than if you hear about it from a friend? Does it match with your previous learning or with your experience? In the absence of related knowledge or experience, what might make the new idea appealing or at least worthy of further consideration? In the absence of related knowledge or experience, what might cause you to resist or outright reject the new idea? Could one reason be that to believe this new idea means that either you would have to exert some new effort, or that you would lose some comfort or convenience?{u{Sources: Self-Defeating Statements http://apologeticjunkie.blogspot.com/2009/10/self-defeating-statements.html Why We Care About Truth https://www.str.org/blog/why-we-care-about-truth The Ring of Truth https://freethinkingministries.com/the-ring-of-truth/ Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| How often have you heard someone say that all religions teach the same thing? Do you agree? If you disagree, have you had any success convincing someone why this belief can’t be accurate? If two statements contradict one another, they may both be false or one of the two claims could be true. It is completely and logically impossible for both contrary claims to be true. Among the worldviews, there is atheism, polytheism and monotheism. Take atheism and monotheism for example: it makes no sense that there would be both no god and one god. There are three monotheistic religions which state that there is only one God who created the universe. “Religions are superficially similar, they are fundamentally different.” —Ravi Zacharias The central doctrine of Christianity is that Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead. Judaism agrees that Jesus was crucified but denies that he rose from the dead. Islam states that Jesus was not crucified, nor did he rise from the dead. How is it possible that all three of these religions are equally true? Take this 15-question quiz to see how much you know about religion then check out the report the site provides. https://www.pewforum.org/2019/07/23/what-americans-know-about-religion/ Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| Our culture criticizes Christians for being “narrow”, even calling us intolerant bigots. Since every truth claim is exclusive, by its very nature according to logic, to make any truth claim at all makes you “narrow-minded” and “intolerant”. All truth claims are logically exclusive. If the statement is true, then the possibility of its being false is excluded; if the statement is false, then the possibilty of its being true is excluded. Mars is closer to Earth than Neptune is. This excludes the possibility of Neptune being closer to Earth than Mars is. My ethnic origins are French on my father’s side and Italian on my mother’s side. This excludes the possibility of my ethnic origins being anything other than French and Italian. One of the Laws of Logic states that A cannot be non-A. To make this clear, I will provide category, event and worldview examples: Category Examples Since a cat is a feline, the possibility of it being a fish, fowl or reptile is excluded. Since a lemon is a citrus fruit, the possibility of it being a berry, vegetable or grain is excluded. Since the birthstone for February is amethyst, the possibility of it being aquamarine, emerald or garnet is excluded Event Examples Since Martin Luther King Jr. was fatally shot at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee, on April 4, 1968, at 6:01 p.m. Central Standard Time, any possibility that this did not occur when, where, and to whom it did is excluded. Since Donald Trump, who won the most votes in the 2016 election was elected President on November 8, 2016, the possibility that anyone else was elected President at any other time in 2016 is excluded. Since Prince William married Catherine Middleton at Westminster Abbey in London, United Kingdom on April 29th 2011, the possibility that either of them married someone else in any other location is excluded. Worldview Examples If the atheist’s belief that God does not exist is true, this excludes the possibilty that pantheism, polytheism or monotheism could be true. The New Atheists loudly criticize Christianity for being exclusive when their message shares this characteristic. If the Muslim belief that Jesus was neither crucified nor did he rise from the dead is true, this excludes the Jewish belief that he was crucified and the Christian belief that he was crucified, and that he rose from the dead. If the evolution belief about creation, that the first life formed spontaneously and evolved into all plants, animals and humans with no outside help is true, it excludes the possible existence of an intelligent Creator and Designer. If scientism, which states that satisfactory answers to all questions are or will be answered by the hard sciences is true, this excludes the possibility that answers could come from any other field of study, such as philosophy or metaphysics. People often believe truth claims based on preference. Many even believe illogical self-refuting statements such as “There is no universal truth” or “You can’t know anything for certain”. Why is it that Christians get more heat for their truth claims than do atheists or those of Eastern non-theistic beliefs when they are equally exclusive? What possibility is excluded if the following statements are true? Madrid is the capital city of Spain. Crocodiles belong to the reptile family. The remedy for suffering is to not have any desires.Sources: Is Christianity too narrow? http://www.faccalgary.com/interactive/weekly/index.php?ID=86&fs=1 Christ’s Exclusive Truth-Claims Make Believing “All Religions Are Basically the Same” Impossible https://www.epm.org/blog/2017/Jun/9/christs-exclusive-truth-claims Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| With an engaging, conversational style and sparks of humour, Frank Turek and Norman Geisler demonstrate the rational weakness of the case for atheism and the strength of the evidence for theism and Christianity. Topics covered include: Does truth exist and can it be known? How we get our beliefs? Why people resist the truth despite abundant rational evidence. The universe had a beginning, therefore it had a “Cause” (Cosmological Argument). The universe has a complex design, therefore it had a “Designer” (Teleological Argument). Darwin’s theory falls apart by his own admission. A universal moral law requires the existence of a “Law-giver”. Theism is the puzzle boxtop that fits the pieces. There is credible early eye-witness testimony to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. This book is the first apologetics book I read. It launched me into a detailed study of apologetics. I’ve read other books, listened to many podcasts and watched a lot of videos on this topic. This book covers each aspect of apologetics without getting too detailed or technical. It is definitely suitable for the average reader and provides a useful jumping point for anyone who wants to dive into any branch of this study. As Christians, we are called to love God with our minds as well as our hearts and to be prepared to explain why we hold our beliefs. Studying this book is a great way to start equipping yourself to fulfill this calling. Available on Amazon in print and kindle format https://www.amazon.ca/Dont-Have-Enough-Faith-Atheist/dp/1581345615/ref=sr_1_1?cr...’thave+en%2Caps%2C170&sr=8-1 Available as an audiobook https://christianaudio.com/i-dont-have-enough-faith-to-be-an-atheist-norman-l-ge... Study Guide available on Amazon in print and kindle format https://www.amazon.ca/Official-Study-Guide-Enough-Atheist-ebook/dp/B00BFZS894/re...’thave+en%2Caps%2C170&sr=8-2 Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| When we’ve not already been trained to think critically and realize how important this skill is, the next question we ask is: “how do I get better at this?” In the article: 7 Ways to Improve Your Critical Thinking Skills, Ransom Patterson starts by explaining what critical thinking is and why it is important. The 7 “ways” he describes are: Ask basic questions. Question basic assumptions Be aware of your mental processes Try reversing things Evaluate the existing evidence Remember to think for yourself Understand that no one thinks critically 100% of the time—https://collegeinfogeek.com/improve-critical-thinking-skills/ Critical thinking steps to master include: identification, research, identifying biases, making inferences, determining relevance, and exercising our natural curiosity. This article explains what each step involves and gives suggestions about how to improve your skill in each one. —https://www.rasmussen.edu/student-experience/college-life/critical-thinking-skil... If you’re ready to really dig in, Courseara offers a free four-part course called “Think Again”. Two of the four parts of this course, parts one and four, are more about critical thinking. The other two, parts two and three, cover formal and informal logic. The first part focuses on how to recognize, untangle and reconstruct an argument and the fourth part explains how to avoid fallacies. The second and third parts cover deductive and inductive logical reasoning respectively. When I took the course, all four parts were combined. I found it so interesting and helpful that I’ve taken it twice over the past three years and I’m considering taking it (all four parts) a third time. I believe the first and fourth part would be the most useful for improving your critical thinking skills. My favourite part was the one that covered deductive logic. This one would probably be most appealing to those who enjoyed studying algebra or programming. You can just watch the videos if you want or you can do the exercises as well. Getting the textbook is helpful if you can get it but not essential. Think Again I: Understanding Arguments —https://www.coursera.org/learn/understanding-arguments Think Again II: How to Reason Deductively —https://www.coursera.org/learn/deductive-reasoning Think Again III: How to Reason Inductively —https://www.coursera.org/learn/inductive-reasoning Think Again IV: How to Avoid Fallacies —https://www.coursera.org/learn/logical-fallacies The text: Understanding Arguments is available in PDF format here: —http://zu.edu.jo/UploadFile/Library/E_Books/Files/LibraryFile_17113_11.pdf Any of the above approaces to learning critical thinking would appeal more to some people than others. How would you approach this challenge? Do you know what your primary learning style is and, therefore, what would be your most effective path? Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| Do you know someone who was taken in by a scam? Have you ever purchased a more expensive item than you originally wanted after listening to a skilled salesperson? Have you ever listened to a debate on a topic you didn’t know much about and ended up more uncertain about your opinion on the issue than you were before the debate? Thinking clearly is not a skill we’re born with. We need to learn it. Few of us were taught in school how to do it. I was in school during the 60s and 70s. We learned how to pack information in our heads and spill it out on paper during exams. Some of it I still remember but much of it has been lost for lack of relevance. Though hardly an exhaustive list, the characteristics of critical thinking include the ability to: perform objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment think clearly and rationally about what to do or what to believe, including reflective and independent thinking think in an organized and rational manner in order to understand connections between ideas and/or facts verify assumptions utilizing available, tangible, and verifiable data and facts solve problems, formulate inferences, calculate scenarios, and make well-informed strategic decisions.Having this skill would help us to: *asterick* advance our career by qualifying for a higher-level position *asterick* process the massive amount of information available to us *asterick* recognize contradicting claims, unintended fallacies or outright deception *asterick* increase our creative ability by teaching us to question our assumptions *asterick* understand and assess a situation based on all available information *asterick* help us recognize and avoid or even report scams *asterick* improve our conflict resolution skills *asterick* form more well-informed opinions *asterick* enable us to work smarter instead of working harder *asterick* make wiser decisions I want to learn to think critically. I believe it is both a valuable and vitally important skill. Looking at the above definitions and considering the effort it would take to learn this skill at my age (60+), I feel rather overwhelmed. If I make the effort, I’ll gain some skill. I’ll never be as proficient as I would have been had I been fortunate enough to start this in my teen years, but a little skill is better than none. Did you gain any of the critical thinking abilities during your school years? Did you carry any of it with you into your adult life? If not, are you at all motivated to attain these skills now? Sources: —https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/critical_thinking —https://philosophy.hku.hk/think/critical/ct.php —https://zety.com/blog/critical-thinking-skills — https://www.openminds.com/next-generation-forum/blog/value-critical-thinking-ski... —https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/critical-thinking-skills... —https://www.wabisabilearning.com/blog/critical-thinking-benefits Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| Jonathon Yang’s book: The Rough Guide to Blogging: Navigate the Blogosphere has a conversational style and covers the basics of blogging without overwhelming the reader with technical details. It’s very useful for anyone who is thinking about creating a blog because he presents the wide world of blogging without assuming the need to create a topic-specific or commercial blog. The chapters are self-contained so that you can skip some that aren’t relevant to you. Since it is an older book, published in 2006, some of the links that he provides may not work. This doesn’t really detract from the overall value of the book. I’ve already started a blog that is neither commercial nor a “niche” blog and so far, I’m only using the blogging service provided by Writing.com. Therefore, the chapters which I found most interesting and useful were: Finding blogs} Subscribing to blogs with RSS Writing tips Increasing traffic What’s Out ThereFor those who are interested in digging deeper than I am likely to for quite some time, he also covers these topics: Blog hosts Server-side blogging Audio, video and podcasts Design and add-ons Earning moneyHis final chapter lists blogs according to a wide variety of categories, from art and gossip to sex and politics, not to mention blogging. I recommend that someone interested in starting a blog to read this book before some other more comprehensive ones. There are other excellent books about blogging that are good for reference when you’re ready to dig deeper. It is available on Amazon in paperback only, either new or used for a variety of prices. I borrowed it from my local library. https://www.amazon.ca/Rough-Guide-Blogging-Jonathan-Yang/dp/184353682X/ref=sr_1_... Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| If I hand a plantain to a woman who has never seen either a banana or a plantain, the truth is that what she’s holding is a plantain. A man standing near us may think it’s an odd-looking banana or he might recognize that it is a plantain. What he won’t think is that it’s both a banana and a plantain at the same time. He recognizes what we all know intuitively: two contradictory things cannot both be true at the same time in the same sense. This is called “the law of non-contradiction.” Other examples include: Processed sugar either increases cancer cells or it does not. It can’t both increase and not increase cancer cells. Only one of these facts can be true. The fact that decades ago, we didn’t know sugar did this wouldn’t change the fact that it does. A woman who is sugar-addicted and recently diagnosed with cancer might refuse to believe it because she doesn’t want to give it up.Either Jennifer Lopez was killed in a car accident in August 2019 or she is still alive. What is impossible is that the day after her accident, she could be both dead and alive at the same time. (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jennifer-lopez-death-hoax/) The result of my friend’s blood test in April 2019 showed that his cholesterol levels were higher than his previous blood test showed. He might not know why this happened but the fact is that the levels increased. He might choose to act on this information by changing his eating and exercise habits or he might choose to ignore it and continue his current habits. What he would not believe is that his cholesterol levels both increased and decreased at the same time. Nor would he believe that they both increased and remained constant at the same time.How is it that this is so obvious in every other sphere of life suddenly gets fuzzy and confused when it comes to moral and religious beliefs? A pro-life person claims that human life begins at conception and a pro-choice person believes that a pregnant girl has something other than a human being inside her. Only one is correct. She can’t be carrying a human being and a non-human substance at the same time. Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| Some things are measurable and other things are a matter of perception or opinion. Truth that is defined as being absolute, possesses the following six qualities: 1 — Truth is discovered, not invented. If, when I weigh myself on Sunday, September 1, 2019 in the evening at 11:00 p.m., the scale reads 143.6 pounds then that is what I weigh at that time. 2 —Truth is unchanging: it can be conveyed across time. Whether the year is 2020 or 2120, it remains true that I weighed 143.6 pounds on September 1, 2019 at 11:00 p.m. 3 — Truth is transcultural: it can be conveyed across different cultures. No matter who you are or where you live, it remains true that I weighed 143.6 pounds on September 1, 2019 at 11:00 p.m. though you might express my weight as 65.24 kilograms. 4 — Beliefs cannot change a truth statement no matter how sincere one may be. If I wasn’t wearing my glasses when I weighed myself, I may have misread it and been entirely convinced that I weighed 143.8 pounds. That wouldn’t change the truth that the scale actually registered 143.6. 5 —Truth is unaffected by the attitude of the one professing it. If my goal weight with Weight Watchers is 145, I’ll be pleased when I stepped off the scale. If my goal weight is 135, I’ll have a much less pleasant reaction. Whether I’m delighted or distressed, the truth remains that I weighed 143.6 pounds (or 65.24 kilograms) on September 1, 2019 at 11:00 p.m. 6 — Truth is knowable. If I didn’t have a scale at home, it would take extra effort to discover how much I weighed, but it will certainly be possible. What personal life examples can you think of for each of these qualities of truth? Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
| Learning to think clearly in our confused society is more important than it has ever been. Not only are there many contradictory belief systems but there is social pressure to agree with all of them at the same time. Our culture calls this pressure “tolerance” and it does not conform to the basic laws of logic. “There is no absolute truth” is a statement that claims: “It is true that there is no absolute truth.” It contradicts itself, therefore, absolute truth exists. Laws of logic In the following examples, “P” refers to a thing or statement using some form of the verb “to be” such as “The cat is on the porch.” The law of identity: P is P.P is the same as itself and different from everything else. Each thing has its own combination of properties, which is what the classical philosophers called “essence”. In other words, everything has its own unique essence which is different from the essence possessed by everything else. The law of noncontradiction: P is not non-P.Something cannot be true and false at the same time. Nothing can be what it is not. Nothing can posess incompatible properties [u}Example:{/u} Either the tomcat is on the table or it is not on the table. He can’t be both on the table and not on the table at the same time. When there is disagreement between two people about a truth claim, there are two possibilities: one person is correct and the other is wrong or both persons are wrong. What is not possible is that both are correct. The law of the excluded middle: Either P or non-P.Something is either true or false. There is no third alternative. Example: There is no alternative between the cat being on or not being on the table. The laws of logic are always true. They are different from the laws of nature. God can violate the laws of nature by suspending gravity but He cannot create a square circle. Tolerance does not mean agreeing with another person’s viewpoint; it means respecting the person while disagreeing with their viewpoint. Monique from Ottawa, Canada No matter what, WRITE! |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
Yes, I know some people do that but I'm a creative writer not a journalist. Poetry sells ... but it's a money-maker for only a few. I write A LOT. Almost 180 pieces since Spring equinox. My goal is 300-400 per year. One year I went over 1,000. I need to do more editing, polishing, sharing, submitting. Writer's block? Who has time for that? I don't.