Comments by "ncwordman" (@ncwordman) on "Do you understand what you are talking about?" video.

It isn't American education's fault. It is the responsibility of each of us to continue our education, on our own, after our formal schooling is done. Knowledge doesn't stay completely intact, after studying it once in high school. You have to review it, and add layers to it. This requires reading and studying on our own. And THAT is where some (or most?) Americans are failing. Can't blame the 9th grade math teacher for this.
2
@tonyv2023 Of all the ones to question, you question if he's slothful?
1
@trevorchester4439 @JamesMiller-fx5yi Guys! Anyone who knows how to do the math can do the math. Being able to do something or know something isn't special. Doesn't make you better than someone else. Critical thinking is when you STOP AND THINK. It's when you ask yourself questions about what you read or were told, instead of just accepting it. Thinking takes practice, though. We have to be willing to admit we don't already know something, in order to learn it. Otherwise, we don't.
1
@greggvee4 And the way you "engage with your opponents" is by ad hominems? That's a logical fallacy. So it's not about engaging for you, is it? But you'll engage with that troll jimohara quickly enough. You come with venom, but expect people to engage with you? Please. You're just TrollingRightAlong.
1
Why do you think that way? What's your evidence? Where's your proof? Why didn't you provide any examples?
1
@julesnagbunga1204 Reading. They're talking about reading books, and learning from those books. And they're referring to people who don't read and learn. The majority of adults don't read for their own pleasure and personal growth. Only 1% reads 5 books or more per year, without it being required of them by school or work. So it IS about literacy.
1
@emsleywyatt3400 Ever looked up his sponsors? You can. When you do, then you'll know the facts, and be able to speak knowledgeably. Really, why didn't you check that before commenting?
1
@TbarRocks Doesn't matter the politics. It's independent of blue or red. We're talking about people having the assumption that they know what they don't know. So when they believe they know it, there's no reason to actually learn it. So they don't. This comes from not reading or studying, on your own, for their own exercise and well being. They'd rather write sentences with multiple question marks at the end, and make everything about team sports...I mean politics. Imagine taking troglodytes forward through time over thousands of years, and dropping them into the 21st century.
1
A lot of people don't know what words mean. Doesn't matter if those people are blue or red. They'll assume they know the meaning, like they'll assume they're experts on everything. And when you believe you know everything already, then there's no need to actually learn anything. So they don't.
1
@Truth-xg1zf Scientists, following the scientific method, all have a bias. It's human. Its synonym is "personal point of view." But they can be objective by admitting what those biases are, and not allowing their conclusions to be based on them. Critical thinkers follow the scientific method. It's when someone doesn't admit they're biased, and concludes based on the assumption that they're not, that people reach faulty conclusions. That's what David is talking about here. He's not just "clever," but logical in his reasoning.
1
@Truth-xg1zf What David said is you have to first recognize that everyone is naturally biased. Then deliberately set that bias aside to form conclusions. That's the scientific method in a nutshell.
1
What is GENDER? See, we do know words. We know that one. You don't. If you did, you'd understand how that cliched question is nonsensical. But you don't.
1
@andrewruiz6627 First, he just explained what "bias" means, and said he was biased. Secondly, to say his money comes from "individuals and entities" doesn't really say anything: It's as vague as one can possibly be. David wasn't vague at all, and said that his money comes from his viewers. Period. Since we're all "individuals and entities," I guess you're correct, just lacking in specificity, which was explained in this very video.
1
@louislafontaine5984 They never do anything but throw stuff out. They don't ever give examples.
1
@greggvee4 You're trying too hard. Let the trolling flow. Don't force it.
1
@jimohara Good old Jim. Can always count on you to write something vague, and drop the mic like you just proved "up" is really "down." Besides, your whataboutism is nowhere near the subject at hand. Oh. You probably didn't watch the video. Probably didn't stop and think about it. Not big on stopping and thinking, huh? If you did, you'd know the subject was how personal bias can influence objectivity, to the point of negating it, if the person doesn't first set their bias aside. Can't really do that, though, huh? There'd be nothing to post then. And would have to not make a strawman, changing the meaning and subject of the discussion, just like the OP and David said. Well, thanks for illustrating the point...I guess.
1