At this time I admit nothing that is not necessarily true. I am therefore precisely nothing but a thinking thing Descartes

It not whether you win or loose it ‘s how you play the game

ChristiansIslamHeaven’s Gate Supreme BeingGod Ancient Alien Human FormJesusMuhammadJames Applewhite RulesBibleQu’ranCommunity over self Principals10 Commandments 5 PillarsStrip away all Worldly Possessions GoodBelieversShariaNext Level– higher the better End of daysArmageddonal-Qiyamah (sun rising from the West) Hale-Bopp Comet Reward- resurrection HeavenJannah (Eden)Recycled– Space Ship

 Good Solid judgment- Time and effort Objective- No bias Solid logic- No fallacies  Bad Relay on emotion Rely on authority Rely on superstition Rely on assumptions Our explanations have to fit together as a coherent system. We need solid evidence for our conclusions. What is your system?

 What is your standard for knowledge? How much evidence is needed as “proof”?  When should you change beliefs? What type of evidence?  Poor decisions NOT absent of thinking Flawed or incomplete thinking  Biases unchecked (leaning to one side)  Emotion (driving our conclusion)  Incomplete (distracted by other things)

 Rules to reasoning correctly  Breaking down arguments Finding premises (evidence) Conclusion (product)  Set up of an argument Correct follow Is there an inference (connection)  Being aware of mistakes Long held beliefs

 Allows to formulate a process to problem solving Knowing the step to the/a solution We try to avoid variables And randomness Try to repeated process  Writing essays  Customer service  Balancing life

Probable inference The conclusion is the best one that can be drawn from the premises given. Get evidence to argue Evidence points us to conclusion Set up is the scientific method Arguments are evaluated on strength

 Conclusive inference The conclusion is the only one that can be drawn from the premises given. Set up with Validity Statements evaluated with Truthfulness Arguments are evaluated on Soundness

 Successful argument Proposition (set of premises) and conclusion have valid relationship (inference)  Does not apply to premises (evidence)  Argument is either valid or invalid  Argument can be valid but not true Set up right or wrong  Inference becomes central to arguments

 True and false apply to the premises Is the statement true or false?  Do not apply to whole argument  Premise, statements, are either true or false

Valid argument, false premises All Dogs are cats. All Cats are birds. Therefore, dogs are birds. Invalid argument, false premise Cats are birds. Dogs are birds. Therefore, dogs are cats.

 Nothing empirically can prove that I necessarily exists? (never wrong) I can’t trust my senses? I can’t trust feelings (crazy)? I could be dreaming? A malicious demon?

Cogito (I think) Leads to (Therefore) Ergo, sum (I am) Thinking Necessarily proves I exist The conclusion (I exist) MUST follow from the premise (I think)

 Dualistic World: He hasn’t proven the existence of his body, just his mind.  Egocentric World: Only proves that he, himself, exist, but what about us? Good proof has to be objective, but Descartes’ proof is subjective. Seems to be opposed to natural science Does thought = substance?

 NOT negative  Asking for evidence I accept/assume nothing without evidence/proof ….gathering data to formulate and test naturalistic explanations… [Skeptic Manifesto] Deny everything Believe everything Reason Evidence Skeptic

Outrageous  Aliens & UFOs  Bigfoot  ESP  Government poisoning water  Orwell's Big Brother More of dilemma  Interstellar life forms  Developing organisms  Influential thinking  Vaccinations  Tapping phones and keeping database of phone calls of everyone