# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 13 Reason for Belief: Patternicity (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 13 Reason for Belief: Patternicity (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Patternicity Definition:

The reason for belief in patternicity is people's subconscious prejudices, which cause them to perceive connections and patterns in apparently random objects although none exist.

Connection:

By finding significant patterns in random objects, this image of a tree trunk akin to a roaring mouth draws attention to the intrinsic human urge for patternicity. In this case, the arrangement of the bark may be interpreted by the brain as purposeful communication, giving in to the attraction of apparent order. This type of cognitive bias makes critical thinking difficult. Like the scientific approach's commitment to evaluating facts and evidence, skepticism becomes essential in these situations. People can debunk fallacious connections by identifying their prejudices and challenging claims. Taking into account the evidence evaluation step of the scientific method, a skeptic would carefully examine whether the arrangement of the bark represents a purposeful pattern or a coincidental event. This is in line with the technique of critical thinking, which asks people to define claim and recognize bias. With its imaginative imagery of a roaring mouth, the image is an expression of the necessity of challenging and critically evaluating observed patterns. It emphasizes how critical it is to get beyond the cognitive obstacles that patternicity poses and how crucial skepticism is to preserving a logical and transparent understanding of reality.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 12 Reason for Belief: Ideology (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 12 Reason for Belief: Ideology (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Ideology Definition:

The reason for belief Ideology is the set of guiding concepts and beliefs that shape attitudes and behaviors, frequently based on moral principles.

Connection:

With its emphasis on moral beliefs, this magnificent image captures the spirit of Christian ideology. Christians are unwavering in their conviction that Jesus is the holy Son of God chosen to save humanity, fulfilling the prophecy of the Messiah. Christian teachings center on the concepts of sacrificial love and salvation, which are symbolized by the Cross and the Resurrection

The second step in critical thinking—identifying bias—is crucial to comprehending this idealogy. Different religious holy books give birth to bias, which can affect the viewpoints of believers. Debunking entails critiquing historical accounts and challenging their true meanings. Scholar challenges many portions of the biblical story using the fourth step of critical thinking- evaluating evidence. This entails the barrier to critical thinking by stressing how critical it is to confront the distorted view of truth that underlies ideologies. The challenge lies in avoiding a rigid interpretation and encouraging critical thinking that recognizes the diversity and intricacy of religious beliefs. By dismantling biases, this method promotes a more inclusive understanding of truth that transcends all religious ideological beliefs.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 11 Reason for Belief: Agenticity (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 11 Reason for Belief: Agenticity (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Agenticity Definition: The reason for belief in agenticity is an inclination to add agency, purpose, and meaning, to events, often from the top down and through invisible entities.

Connection:

The "Eye of Providence" emblem, which takes the stage in this image, embodies agenticity. Deeply rooted in conspiracy theories controlling human fate, the omniscient eye becomes a powerful tool, fostering theories and stories of secret elite organizations with where the Illuminati at its center about influencing world events. Step 1 of the process of critical thinking is defining the claim, which is acknowledging that the Eye of Providence is being interpreted as a manipulative tool. Step 3's evaluation of the source challenges the skewed perception of reality that these theories promote by revealing the emblem's ancient origins in Freemasonry as opposed to any secret organization. To overcome obstacles to critical thinking, skepticism is essential, especially when real-world instances show people surrendering to group-think and accepting conspiracies without inquiry. When people do not practice critically analyzing assertions, agenticity flourishes, and anecdotes take the place of supporting data. By carefully debunking these stories, we can reveal a more reasonable viewpoint by using the scientific method to sort among figurative interpretations and determine the reality that lies beyond the tempting Eye of Providence.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 10 Red Flag: Ideological Support (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 10 Red Flag: Ideological Support (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Ideological Support Definition:

The red flag of ideological support arises when campaigns, marches, and legal efforts opposing science are motivated primarily by ideology rather than by scientific proof.

Connection:

This image depicts the movements of climate change denial. In this context, it is clear that the scientific method has been abandoned since some parties and groups, motivated by ideological reasons, reject the accepted wisdom regarding the phenomenon of global warming and claim that CO2 levels are not rising. The ongoing denial of solid scientific proof of human-caused change in the environment serves as one example of this difference. These barriers are made worse to critical thinking, where group-think that is common in people hinders unbiased assessment and prevents the open discussion for a thorough investigation required for step 4 of the critical thinking process; evaluate evidence.  When climate denial is present, skepticism becomes weakened. To debunk the claims of denial groups, it is necessary to draw attention to the weaknesses in their arguments, underscore the demonstrable validity of the scientific methods of climate change, and strive for the reintroduction of evidence-based thinking to the climate change conversation. This can only be done by investing time and resources in step 3 of the critical thinking process; evaluate source through scientific methods.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 9 Red Flag: Red Herring (Website)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 9 Red Flag: Red Herring (Website)

# data[].attributes.body
Red Herring Definition:

The red flag red herring is a hint or knowledge that is meant to be false or misleading.

Connection:

The website links the red herring to a red flag in a business setting. The red herring error frequently appears in corporate decisions while opposing salary hikes. An employer can say, "We can't raise salaries, but we still provide great benefits for our employees” (Source). This assertion presents benefits as a constructive diversion from the main problem of low salaries. In step 2 and step 3 of recognize bias and evaluate source of the critical thinking process respectively, spotting a red herring entails recognizing the misleading technique, and analyzing the sources to determine the driving force behind irrelevant information. A critical thinking barrier is a matter of a distorted view of truth. Benefits that are highlighted positively could distort perceptions and draw focus away from the main problem. In this instance, the corporation promotes red herring by shifting the conversation away from low salary and onto philanthropy, thereby making the benefits appear like a strong defense point. This strategy may persuade people to embrace the distraction without seriously challenging the main claim that the pay hikes are insufficient. People must actively practice critical thinking to get past this barrier. They must also demolish distractions and concentrate on the primary issue at hand.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is red herring? | Definition from TechTarget

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This definition explains the meaning of red herring and how this logical fallacy can distract from relevant information in a business setting.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 8 Red Flag: Mystical Energy (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 8 Red Flag: Mystical Energy (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Mystical Energy Definition:

The red flag mystical energy is defined as the invisible forces that exist outside of the normal model, influencing everything and challenging evidence.

Connection:

The illustration of the Crystal Healing highlights the mystical energy as a red flag, claiming that gemstones have a magical capacity to transmit energies that soothe the body and mind. These assertions have no scientific backing, but they are popular because of mysticism. Step 1; Define claim in the technique of critical thinking identifying the mystical powers claimed by crystal healing therapies. Step 2 of Recognise Bias identifies that people tend to associate the phrase "energy" with science, which is inaccurate. Step 3 to evaluate source reveals that mystical energies of crystal healing are not supported by reputable sources or scientific methods and are only widespread because of spiritualists. Critical thinking obstacles include a distorted view of truth that arises when individuals believe in mystical energy crystals in the absence of solid evidence. The term 'energy' deceives people by seeming scientific, and anecdotes strengthen their belief. This red flag takes advantage of people's incompetence in raising questions and group-think to convince them to buy something based on magical claims that have not been independently verified. Moreover, individuals might experience exaggerating the mystique without supporting data by attributing undesirable effects to outside causes. This demonstrates the seductiveness of mystical energy assertions and stresses the need to use critical thinking skills to prevent believing things that lack evidence.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 7 Red Flag: Ancient Wisdom (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 7 Red Flag: Ancient Wisdom (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Ancient Wisdom Definition:

The red flag Ancient wisdom is a knowledge that has been passed down through centuries and is frequently respected despite not always being backed up by evidence.

Connection:

Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), which is depicted in the image, represents the appealing nature of ancient wisdom of more than 2000 years. To treat diseases, TCM uses the energies of heaven and earth. A red flag in this wisdom is when one assumes it is successful just because it has been done historically. In the process of critical thinking, Step 1 is to define claim, which in this case is that TCM is a comprehensive medical practice. Step two in the critical thinking process is to recognize bias, which demonstrates that the TCM is intrinsically true. Critical thinking barriers, like lack of practice by following the scientific method, unquestioning trust in TCM's efficacy due to group-think, and the debunked perception of truth resulting from anecdotes instead of demonstrated validity are challenging this ancient wisdom. To overcome these barriers, it is essential to embrace skepticism which comprises steps 3 and 4 of critical thinking —evaluate source and evidence respectively. The scientific examination and research should not be hindered by the appeal of ancient wisdom. Even if a belief is ancient, it is still important to challenge it with questions regarding its mechanics and supporting data to avoid being tricked.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 6 Red Flag: Confirmation Bias (Website)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 6 Red Flag: Confirmation Bias (Website)

# data[].attributes.body
Confirmation Bias Definition:

The red flag confirmation bias is our inherent tendency to look for arguments to support our ideas and frequently overlook evidence. This affects how we make decisions.

Connection:

This website demonstrates confirmation bias by using horoscope forecasts to support the person’s desired beliefs. Confirmation bias in the real world is demonstrated by the horoscope example given on the website, which says, “Today you will encounter a situation in which you will receive good advice from a friend” (Source).  Even while getting advice from friends is common, confirmation bias makes people deliberately look for circumstances that fit their horoscope, which strengthens their trust. This example highlights the universality of confirmation bias and how it can impact perceptions and decisions, underscoring the significance of critical thinking throughout the entire process.

In the critical thinking process, step 1 of define claim and step 2 of recognize bias are crucial. The claim is a firm belief that horoscopes can impact and predict certain life events. The bias, in this context, is the tendency to view generic advice from a friend as extremely important and in line with the preconceived belief that horoscopes have an impact and that fortune is predicted by the horoscope. Confirmation bias arises when beliefs are not questioned. Group-think creates obstacles to critical thinking because it drives the need to evaluate source that contradicts existing concepts. It becomes essential to apply skepticism and follow standard procedures to overcome these barriers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why You Believe in Horoscopes: Understanding User Experience Bias

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ever wonder why your fortune cookie knows what’s in store for you, or how your horoscope so uniquely describes your personality? Without…

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 5 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Does not progress (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 5 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Does not progress (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Does not progress Definition:

The pseudoscience watchlist criteria of "Does not progress" describes fictitious hypotheses that fail to advance and stay unchanged without reliable scientific research or data over a long period.

Connection:

This image represents the old astronaut theory that suggests that aliens visited the Earth in the past and shaped human evolution. This theory, which is frequently promoted in the media, is unproven and does not follow the scientific method of research. The advocates of past astronauts base their claims on incorrect interpretations of historical documents and artifacts, but they offer no empirical support and testing for their theories. Multiple barriers to critical thinking come to light when this hypothesis is examined. Advocates lack experience in critically evaluating the data because they frequently fabricate anecdotes and offer misleading information. Group-think further hinders objective examination as supporters come together, support baseless claims, and prevent a logical assessment of the theory. The key to disproving these claims about ancient astronauts is skepticism. Scholars reject this theory as unscientific and pseudo-archaeological by using the fourth phase of the critical thinking process; evaluate evidence. This emphasizes the necessity for demonstrable validity before recognizing any alien impact on the development of humanity. Essentially, the old astronaut theory is still unproven and remains stationary. It is well-known in the media, but it is not backed up by reliable research through scientific methods, which puts it directly on the watchlist for pseudoscience.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 4 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Deliberately Creates Mystery (Website)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 4 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Deliberately Creates Mystery (Website)

# data[].attributes.body
Deliberately Creates Mystery Definition:

The pseudoscience watchlist of deliberately created mystery comprises the use of mysterious features or myths on purpose to attract people's curiosity while maintaining an atmosphere of uncertainties.

Connection:

This website explores the deliberately created mystery of pseudoscience known as the Bermuda Triangle by presenting unique allegations regarding airplane and ship disappearances under unusual conditions. This claim serves as the starting point for analysis in the first step of the process of critical thinking; Define claim. There are recurring themes in the stories surrounding the Bermuda Triangle, all of which center on mystical disappearances during clear weather and seas of calm. Step 2 of recognize bias involves identifying the sensationalism that is incorporated into tales to increase the mystery and draw attention away from simple explanations. Step 3 of the critical thinking process is "Evaluate Source" by raising questions about their authenticity and identifying the fact that many of the narratives have been modified and repeated from one story to another. Since no one knows the truth, deliberate mystification is fueled by the lack of a reputable source, which prevents critical thinking and leads to a distorted view of truth. Anecdotes fuel the mystery's persistence, undermining critical thinking and the scientific method of investigation. This emphasizes the value of skepticism and using scientific techniques to debunk manufactured mysteries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience: Excerpt » Michael Shermer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Colorful Pebbles and Darwin’s Dictum: An Introduction to Skeptic Magazine’s Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience In 1861, less than two years after the publication of Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species, in a session before the British Association for the Advancement of Science, a critic claimed that Darwin’s book was too theoretical and that he should have […]

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 3 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Use of Scientific Sounding Language that is Meaningless (Image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 3 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Use of Scientific Sounding Language that is Meaningless (Image)

# data[].attributes.body
Scientific-Sounding Language that is meaningless Definition:

A pseudoscience watchlist of scientific-sounding language is a use of vocabulary and concepts from respectable scientific domains to give pseudoscientific conceptions a sense of legitimacy.

Connection:

The picture represents the pseudoscientific phenomena of Quantum mysticism, which uses scientific terms to give it a sense of legitimacy. Concepts from metaphysics that imply a mystical element to one's perception of existence at a quantum level are known as quantum mysticism. This approach makes false claims about existence and consciousness by taking advantage of the multifaceted nature of quantum mechanics.  Step three of the critical thinking process—evaluate source—becomes essential for identifying situations when scientific terminology is being misapplied to pseudoscientific goals. The philosophical assertions of quantum mysticism are based on distorted conceptions of quantum physics and lack scientific backing. Furthermore, the barrier of distorted view of truth in critical thinking makes it difficult to understand this concept clearly and encourages its followers to adopt a group mentality. Step 2 of critical thinking—recognize bias—is essential to breaking down this false appeal of language with a scientific tone to eliminate this barrier. The misleading narrative around this pseudoscience idea is best illustrated by terminology such as "quantum healing". To debunk such pseudoscience claims, skepticism is essential. Moreover, critical thinking is also crucial to distinguish between false language associations and actual scientific discussion.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post # 2 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Money is Often Involved (Website)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post # 2 Pseudoscience Watchlist: Money is Often Involved (Website)

# data[].attributes.body
Money is Often Involved Definition:

The pseudoscience watchlist of money is often involved entails financial dealings or takes advantage of people for financial gain while making extravagant claims about miraculous treatments or secret knowledge.

Connection:

This Susan Miller’s Astrology Zone website is a representation of pseudoscience, with premium offers claiming to reveal people's undiscovered zodiac secrets and astronomical insights.  Miller's website is compelling because it emphasizes insider knowledge even if it lacks demonstrable validity. Analyzing the critical thinking process is necessary to debunk the financial temptation. Steps 1 and 4 of the define claim and evaluate evidence of the critical thinking process reveal an excessive dependence on anecdotes and an absence of scientific evidence respectively. Moreover, a distorted view of truth encourages followers to adopt a collective mentality, underscoring the pseudoscientific aspect of financial claims which is aided by Susan Miller's large readership and business relationships. Although Susan Miller is well-liked in the astronomical community, doubts are raised by the absence of evidence from science and dependence on anecdotes. Skepticism is vital because of the site's absence of reputable sources and vulnerability to group-think. Pseudoscientific principles lose credibility when critical thinking is applied, particularly when biases are acknowledged. Combining claims of secrets of zodiac signs with money-making opportunities in the field of astrology creates big pseudoscientific anxiety.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The latest in astrological trends by Susan Miller, comprehensive, complete, intelligent, and accurate. Your life in 3D: culture, style, romance, money, real estate, career advancement, travel, health, fitness, and more.

# data[].attributes.body
Swarsh

100861162