by: Sandy De Sousa - CMPT-109-21
Fall 2010, Montclair Sate University
Stage 1:

This combines the art of searching the Internet with the CARS method of evaluating webpages. It is meant to help the students understand the educational system: its mission and its history.

Other URL:
Credibility Accuracy Reasonableness Support
Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking
Identify Taragets
Critical Theories
Critical Theories

Articles: Reviews:

Critical Thinking
This article informs us about a study designed by Commission staff during the spring of 1995, that would yield descriptive information on course content and teaching practices being employed by postsecondary faculty to train teacher candidates. With assistance from the Center for Critical Thinking at Sonoma State University, an interview protocol was designed for use in telephone interviews with a cross-section of education and subject matter faculty in both public and private colleges and universities in California. During the study planning process, a decision was made to design respondent selection procedures in such a way as to assure that information collected would be generalizable to all faculty preparing teachers across the state. To accomplish this objective, two statewide probability samples were designed: a sample of teacher education faculty, and a separate sample of Arts and Sciences faculty teaching courses in Commission-approved subject matter programs. The studies objectives were based on three things: To evaluate the current standard, to identify and correct and then finally to develop policies to continue to change and enforce a better learning environment. It seems as if they're not trying to improves, but to build something entirely new. The study included 38 public colleges and universities and 28 private ones. It involved a great deal of results, but overall, no one really knows what involving "critical thinking" between students and teachers really is.

The goal of this article is to set out clearly what critical thinking is in general and how it plays itself out in a variety of domains: in reading, in writing, in studying academic subjects, and on the job. Richard Paul and Jane Willsen provide down-to-earth examples that enable the reader to appreciate both the most general characteristics of critical thinking and their specific manifestations on the concrete level. It is essential, of course, that the reader become clear about the concept, including its translation into cases, for otherwise she is apt to mis-translate the concept or fail to see its relevance in a wide variety of circumstances. Overall, the habit of virgorous researching and strong insights is a powerful thing.

Critical Theories
Though most teachers aspire to make critical thinking a primary objective of their instruction, most also do not realize that, to develop as thinkers, students must pass through stages of development in critical thinking. That is, most teachers are unaware of the levels of intellectual development that people go through as they improve as thinkers. The authors of this article believe that significant gains in the intellectual quality of student work will not be achieved except to the degree that teachers recognize that skilled critical thinking develops, only when properly cultivated, and only through predictable stages. In this article, the authors set out a stage theory based on the nearly twenty years of research of the Center for Critical Thinking and explain some of the theory's implications for instruction. They are brief, concise and to the point in their explanation with minimal theoretical elaboration. Furthermore, they believe that the "practicality" of the theory they explain here is best tested in the classroom and in everyday life. While reasing, I was expressly aware that they are approaching the human mind exclusively from an intellectual standpoint not from a psychological standpoint.

Liberal Arts -1+1=0

Stage 2:

Credibility Accuracy Reasonableness Support
Accuracy and Precision

How does "Accuracy and Precision" relate to "Vagueness and Ambguity":
In the fields of science, engineering, industry and statistics, the accuracy of a measurement system is the degree of closeness of measurements of a quantity to its actual (true) value. The precision of a measurement system, also called reproducibility, or repeatability, is the degree to which repeated measurements under unchanged conditions show the same results. Although the two words can be synonymous in colloquial use, they are deliberately contrasted in the context of the scientific method. Accuracy refers to the agreement between experimental data and a known value. You can think of it in terms of a bullseye in which the target is hit close to the center, yet the marks in the target aren't necessarily close to each other. Precision refers to how well experimental values agree with each other. If you hit a bullseye precisely, then you are able to hit the same spot on the target each time, even though that spot may be distant from the center. Data can be very precise such that each data point is close to the others, yet contain a high degree of experimental error.On the other hand, a concept is vague if the concept's extension is unclear, and if there are objects which one cannot say with certainty whether they belong to a group of objects which are identified with this concept or which exhibit characteristics that have this predicate (so-called "border-line cases").Vagueness concentrates on the lack of precision contained or available in information. Ambiguity is a term used in writing and math, and under conditions where information can be understood or interpreted in more than one way. This goes hand in hand with accuracy because ambiguity concentrates on the lack of accuracy in a statement. When you have something that can be interpreted in more than one way, it can never be accurate or hold a precise truth value.

Arithmetic Precision
How is this related to "Accuracy and Precision" in the table above?                                                     

The precision of a value describes the number of digits that are used to express that value. In a scientific setting this would be the total number of digits (sometimes called the significant figures or significant digits or, less commonly, the number of fractional digits or decimal places (the number of digits following the point). This second definition is useful in financial and engineering applications where the number of digits in the fractional part has particular importance. In both cases, the term precision can be used to describe the position at which an inexact result will be rounded. For example, in floating point arithmetic, a result is rounded to a given or fixed precision, which is the length of the resulting significand. In financial calculations, a number is often rounded to a given number of places. This relates back to accuracy and its measurements of closeness, which in this case is portrayed when a result is rounded for accuracy and precision. Arithmetic Precision describes the position of an inexact result with Accuracy and Precision is the absolute truth of an equation. Both concept merely have different ways to achieve an almost similar result.

Precision and Recall
Is this related to Accuracy and Precision above? How so?

Precision and recall are two widely used metrics for evaluating the correctness of a pattern recognition algorithm. They can be seen as extended versions of accuracy, a simple metric that computes the fraction of instances for which the correct result is returned.When using precision and recall, the set of possible labels for a given instance is divided into two subsets, one of which is considered "relevant" for the purposes of the metric. Recall is then computed as the fraction of correct instances among all instances that actually belong to the relevant subset, while precision is the fraction of correct instances among those that the algorithm believes to belong to the relevant subset. Precision can be seen as a measure of exactness or fidelity, whereas recall is a measure of completeness. This is related to accuracy and precision because is evaluates the pattern recognition algorithm, which relates back to precision and how many repeated measurements occurr under unchanged conditions and the closeness of these measurements.

Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure. A test is considered reliable if we get the same result repeatedly. For example, if a test is designed to measure a trait (such as introversion), then each time the test is administered to a subject, the results should be approximately the same. Unfortunately, it is impossible to calculate reliability exactly, but there several different ways to estimate reliability. To gauge test-retest reliability, the test is administered twice at two different points in time. This kind of reliability is used to assess the consistency of a test across time. This type of reliability assumes that there will be no change in the quality or construct being measured. Inter-rater reliability is assessed by having two or more independent judges score the test. The scores are then compared to determine the consistency of the raters estimates. One way to test inter-rater reliability is to have each rater assign each test item a score. Parellel-forms reliability is gauged by comparing to different tests that were created using the same content. This is accomplished by creating a large pool of test items that measure the same quality and then randomly dividing the items into two separate tests. The two tests should then be administered to the same subjects at the same time. Internal Consistency Reliability is used to judge the consistency of results across items on the same test. Essentially, you are comparing test items that measure the same construct to determine the tests internal consistency. If something is precuse and accurate, it is said to be reliable. On the other hand, if something is vague and ambiguous, it is not clear and there can be more than one meaning, therefore, it is not relianle. 
There is construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, content validity, representation validity, face validity, criterion validity, concurrent validity, conclusion validity, internal and external validity, experimental validity, intentional and ecological validity. In science and statistics, validity has no single agreed definition but generally refers to the extent to which a concept, conclusion or measurement is well-founded and corresponds accurately to the real world. It is so complex because it measures different aspects of the real world and dictates different information.

Note that Wikipedia does not have the authors listed. How does that affect the CARS ratings? How would you go about remedying this situation? How would the rating work out if you used the method from Widener University Evaluate Web pages
The fact that Wikipedia does not have any authors listed affects its credibility, thus deducting nearly 5 points of credibility when using the CARS method of evaluation. This website, although it is very clear cut and helpful, is edited by users and scholars. In other words, information can be authentic or can also be unqualified, the fact that there is no author will never justify that. Wikipedia relies on individuals thoughts and ideas about a subject. Since the information can be manipulated to easily, it 's a system that you must verify to be sure of its validity. Although a lot of the information is cited, it's cited by unqualified authority, making the information unreliable. I believe that the opportunity for users to be able to edit information is innovative and interesting and I'm sure that there are qualified people verifying this information before it is posted. Although Wikipedia does explain that, the mere fact that there is no exclusive author makes English teachers, for example, frown upon this website and gives it low credibility. In order to make this a more credible website, users and scholars should submit their information, and it should be posted by an authority once it is verified and their names and information should be listed on the webpage. When using the Widener University method of evaluating webpages, the qualification of the website is based on any authority rather than one specific author. When you relate this back to Wikipedia, there are various authors who edit the site, but it goes through authorities before it is posted in which you have contact information for. Therefore, when using this method, Wikipedia is a useful and reliable site.

Stage 3:

Meaning -- What Do You Think?
 Definition -- URL:
Know-That (or Know-What)
"Know-That" (e.g., that Washington D.C. is the capital of America) - this knowledge allows you to describe. Know-that is the knowledge OF something in itself, the ability to perceive or understand as fact or truth; to apprehend clearly and with certainty and to understand from experience or attainment.


"Know-How" (e.g., how to drive a car) - this knowledge allows you to apply. Know-how is an expert skill, information, or body of knowledge that imparts an ability to cause a desired result, is not readily available, and is outside the public domain. Know-how may include tangible material or intangibles which are not common knowledge.  Know-how is often tacit knowledge, which means that it is difficult to transfer to another person by means of writing it down or verbalising it. The opposite of tacit knowledge is explicit knowledge. In recent years, know how has come to be recognized as a factor of production in its own right, distinct from labor.


As it is obvious, know-that is gaining knowledge of something through experience or understanding with certainty. Once that knowledge is gained, you apply it through skill, evoking results through twhat would be considered know-how.

What is it? URL?
 Is it related to any of the others?

Tacit Knowledge
Tacit Knowledge is knowledge that is difficult to transfer to another person by means of writing it down or verbalizing it. With tacit knowledge, people are not often aware of the knowledge they possess or how it can be valuable to others. Effective transfer of tacit knowledge generally requires extensive personal contact and trust. Tacit knowledge is not easily shared. Tacit knowledge consists often of habits and culture that we do not recognize in ourselves. The tacit aspects of knowledge are those that cannot be codified, but can only be transmitted via training or gained through personal experience. Tacit knowledge has been described as “know-how”, as opposed to “know-what” (facts), “know-why” (science), or “know-who” (networking). It involves learning and skill but not in a way that can be written down. While tacit knowledge appears to be simple, it has far reaching consequences and is not widely understood.

With dedicated and focused efforts, some knowledge believed to be tacit can be transformed into explicit knowledge, which is the opposite. This body of knowledge is the organization’s implicit knowledge.

Implicit Knowledge
The value and leveragability of Implicit Knowledge is vast and represents a new frontier in knowledge management. However, an organization must take several strategic steps in order to position it adequately. First, the sources and nature of the implicit bodies of knowledge must be identified and quantified. This is not an easy step. It demands a level of scrutiny beyond what is typically applied to identify tacit and explicit resources. Getting to implicit knowledge mandates taking a second look at all the so-called tacit knowledge resources to determine whether that knowledge could be codified if it were subjected to some type of mining and translation process. Then, it requires implementing that mining/translation process. Implicit knowledge management employs tools, techniques and methodologies that capture these seemingly elusive thought processes and make them more generally available to the organization.
There is a subtle difference between Implicit Knowledge and Tacit Knowledge in that it is presumed that Implicit Knowledge hasn’t yet been codified but that it likely can be codified, while Tacit knowledge may well be impossible to codify. It could be said that Implicit Knowledge is that which hasn’t yet been “put together” either by expression, concept development, assumptions that lead to principles, or through analysis of facts or theory

Procedural Knowledge
Procedural Knowledge is the knowledge exercised in the performance of some task. Procedural knowledge is different from other kinds of knowledge, such as declarative knowledge, in that it can be directly applied to a task. For instance, the procedural knowledge one uses to solve problems differens from the declarative knowledge one poossesses about problem solving. In some legal systems, such procedural knowledge has been considered the intellectual property of a company, and can be transferred when that company is purchased. One limitation of procedural knowledge is its job-dependence, so it tends to be less general than declarative knowledge. One advantage of procedural knowledge is that it can involve more senses, such as hands-on experience, practice at solving problems, understanding of the limitations of a specific solution, etc. It is proposed as the system containing knowledge of how to do things. This kind of knowledge guides both physical activities and cognitive skills. KNOW-HOW.

It can be argued that procedural knowledge is relatively autonomous in relation to declarative knowledge in a number of ways. Procedural Knowledge also seems to involve some Propositional Knowledge.


Descriptive Knowledge
Descriptive Knowledge is the species of knowledge that is, by its very nature, expressed in declarative sentences or indicative propositions. This distinguishes descriptive knowledge from what is commonly known as "know-how", or prodecural knowledge (the knowledge of how, and especially how best, to perform some task), and "knowing of", or knowledge by acquaintance (the knowledge of something's existence).

It is also known as declarative knowledge or as propositional knowledge.

Declarative Knowledge
Declarative Knowledge is defined as the factual information stored in memory and known to be static in nature. Other names, e.g. descriptive knowledge, propositional knowledge, etc. are also given. It is the part of knowledge which describes how things are. The relations between things/events/processes and their attributes define the domain of declarative knowledge. Declarative knowledge  is responsible for what cognitive psychologists traditionally considered to be knowledge of storage containing facts and events. Declarative knowledge is symbolic knowledge, sometimes subdivided in semantic and episodic memory. Declarative memory affords an individual the capacity to store associations, and to do so in a single trial. It stores information in propositions the truth or falsity of which can be verbalized instantly.The system contains knowledge that can be thoughtand spoken about explicitly.KNOW-THAT.

BOTH Propositional Knowledge or Declarative Knowledge is knowledge or the possession of information that is either true or false.
Propositional Knowledge Propositional Knowledge is is knowledge that some proposition is either true or false. This distinguishes propositional knowledge from know-how or procedural knowledge, which is the knowledge of how to perform some task. This article discusses propositional knowledge from a variety of perspectives, including philosophy, science, and history.

What is important is that Propositional Knowledge is not enough to give you either Procedural Knowledge. Procedural knowledge may entail propositional knowledge, but the same propositional knowledge certainly does not entail procedural knowledge.

Prescriptive Knowledge Prescriptive Knowledge is the goal is to develop knowledge that can be used to improve a situation. Solutions to problems that actually occur in the complex and highly multivariate field of practice are developed in a way that, while valid for a specific situation, need to be adjusted according to the context in which they are to be applied. Prescriptive knowledge results from the successive efforts to achieve greater effectiveness, such as improved procedures or operations, and is altered and added to as greater experience is gained. however, Cautions that Prescriptive Knowledge is more than simple "nonintellectual know how;" it may be "comparable with the achievement of new Intellectual Knowledge;" and it is "often undergirded by such knowledge.

Empirical Knowledge
Empirical Knowledge OR a posteriori knowledge is propositional knowledge obtained by experience. For example, "all things fall down" would be an empirical proposition about gravity that many of us believe we know; therefore we would regard it as an example of empirical knowledge. It is "empirical" because we have generally observed that things fall down, so there is no reason to believe this will change.The vast bulk of the empirical knowledge that ordinary people possess is gained via a mixture of direct experience and the testimony of others about what they have experienced. More complicated and organized methods of gaining empirical knowledge are the methods of science, which results in a rigorously codified, scientific empirical knowledge, namely, phsyics.

Also known as Posteriori Knowledge, goes hand in hand with Propositional Knowledge.

A Priori Knowledge

A Priori Knowledge is independent of experience and is derived by reasoning from self-evident propositions.A given proposition is knowable a priori if it can be known independent of any experience other than the experience of learning the language in which the proposition is expressed. Mathematics and logic are usually considered a priori disciplines.

It is constrasted with a posterori knowledge, which is knowledge gained merely through experience.

A Posteriori Knowledge

A Posteriori Knowledge is dependent upon experience or empirical evidence appealing through instantiation and is dependent upon theory for an understanding of what through it is found to be fact It makes reference to experience; but the issue concerns how one knows the proposition or claim in question—what justifies or grounds one's belief in it. A proposition that is knowable a posteriori is known on the basis of experience. The natural and social sciences are usually considered a posteriori disciplines

It is contrasted with a priori knowledge, or knowledge that is gained through the apprehension of innate ideas, intuition, "pure reason, or other non-experiential sources.

Are there really that many kinds of "knowledges"?
After much research on all of these knowledges, I realized that in cognitive psychology, our brains are said to consist of these many "knowledges". There's the knowledge of knowing how to do something, then there's the knowledge of knowing what something is.
How are they related to one another?
All of these knowledges are very closely related if not exactly the same. Majority of them relate to our ability to perform tasks and they each go hand in hand. One knowledge develops into the other and explains different methods of utilizing ideas and remembering them.

What about Quantity and Quality of Knowledge?
Knowledge accumulation means either new knowledge (an increase in its quality), greater access to existing knowledge (an increase in its quantity), or both. The quality of knowledge is revealed in the sum-total of its qualities and certainty. The unity of these qualities and properties is, in fact, quality. The nature is revealed in its properties, which constitute the mode of the object's relationship with other things. Futhermore, The basis of quantitative thinking is the objective discreteness of things and processes. Quantity has two main meanings: the measure of generality of the elements when we put them together; or the divisibility (real or putative) of an idea. The quality of knowledge is always more vital than the quantity of it. You may have 3 major and useful points which can help you a great deal. Or on the other hand, you can have numerous, invalid ideas that won't serve you any justice.

What are "intensive" properties and "extensive" properties? (in science)
In the physical sciences, an intensive property also called a bulk property, intensive quantity, or intensive variable, is a physical property of a system that does not depend on the system size or the amount of material in the system, it is scale invariant and does not change when the sample changes. By contrast, an extensive property also extensive quantity, extensive variable, or extensive parameter of a system is directly proportional to the system size or the amount of material in the system, meaning is changes when the size of the sample changes.
  • For example, density is an intensive property of a substance because it does not depend on the amount of that substance; mass and volume, which are measures of the amount of the substance, are extensive properties.

"Empiricism" vs "Rationalism"
Empiricists share the view that there is no such thing as innate knowledge, and that instead knowledge is derived from experience, either sensed via the five senses or reasoned via the brain or mind.  Locke, Berkeley, and Hume are empiricists (though they have very different views about metaphysics).
  • Compared to Empiricism, Rationalism has one more entity that exists:Innate knowledge.  According to the Empiricist, the innate knowledge is unobservable and inefficacious; that is, it does not do anything.  The knowledge may sit there, never being used.  Using Ockham’s Razor (when deciding between competing theories that explain the same phenomena, the simpler theory is better), Empiricism is the better theory. Locke, an empiricist, says that our experiences tell us about the nature of reality, but how can we ever check our experience with what reality really is, in order to know that?  Rationalists do not think we can, so we have to rely on reason.
Rationalists share the view that there is innate knowledge; they differ in that they choose different objects of innate knowledge.  Plato is a rationalist because he thinks that we have innate knowledge of the Forms [mathematical objects and concepts (triangles, equality, largeness), moral concepts (goodness, beauty, virtue, piety), and possibly color – he doesn’t ever explicitly state that there are Forms of colors]; Descartes thinks that the idea of God, or perfection and infinity, and knowledge of my own existence is innate; G.W. Leibniz thinks that logical principles are innate; and Noam Chomsky thinks that the ability to use language (e.g., language rules) is innate.
  • Rationalists claim that there is innate knowledge that gives us fundamental truths about reality, but even among rationalists (e.g., Plato, who believes in reincarnation and Forms and Descartes, who does not believe in either but does believe in a soul), there is disagreement about the nature of reality, the self, etc.  How can this be, if there is innate knowledge of these things. According to Empiricism, you can combine things, separate them, and nothing else.  With Rationalism, we come to experience with ready-made tools for creativity.  E.g., Plato would say that we’re in touch with abstract, immutable realities, which provide lots of material with which to create.

What is "Justified True Belief"? "Justified True Belief" is one definition of knowledge that states for someone to have knowledge of something, it must be true, it must be believed to be true, and the belief must be justified. In more formal terms, a subject S knows that a proposition P is true if, and only if. These three conditions, justification, truth and belief MUST be met in order for there to be knowledge.  First, belief: you do not know something unless you also hold it as true in your mind; if you do not believe it, then you do not know it. Second, truth: there can be no knowledge of false propositions; belief in a falsehood is delusion or misapprehension, not knowledge. Third, justification: the belief must be appropriately supported; there must be sufficient evidence for the belief.

What is it? URL?
How are they related?

Data is distinct pieces of information, usually formatted in a special way. All software is divided into two general categories: data and programs. Programs are collections of instructions for manipulating data. Data can exist in a variety of forms, as numbers or text on pieces of paper, as bits and bytes stored in electronic memory, or as facts stored in a person's mind. Strictly speaking, data is the plural of datum, a single piece of information. In practice, however, people use data as both the singular and plural form of the word.The term data is often used to distinguish binary machine-readable information from textual human-readable information. For example, some applications make a distinction between data files, files that contain binary data and text files, files that contain ASCII data. In database management systems, data files are the files that store the database information, whereas other files, such as index files and data dictionaries, store administrative information, known as metdata.

is raw. It simply exists and has no significance beyond its existence. It can exist in any form, usable or not. It does not have meaning of itself. In computer parlance, a spreadsheet generally starts out by holding data. It relates to the past; it deals with what has been or what is known

Information, in its most restricted technical sense, is an ordered sequence of symbols. As a concept, however, information has many meanings. Moreover, the concept of information is closely related to notions of constraint, comminication, control, data, form, instruction, knowledge, meaning, mental stimulus, pattern, perception, and representation. Often information is viewed as a type of input to an organism or designed device. Inputs are of two kinds. Some inputs are important to the function of the organism (for example, food) or device (energy) by themselves. Other inputs (information) are important only because they are associated with causal inputs and can be used to predict the occurrence of a causal input at a later time (and perhaps another place). Some information is important because of association with other information but eventually there must be a connection to a causal input. In practice, information is usually carried by weak stimuli that must be detected by specialized sensory systems and amplified by energy inputs before they can be functional to the organism or device. The ASCII codes are represented in binary, the numeral system most commonly used for encoding computer information

is data that has been given meaning by way of relational connection. This "meaning" can be useful, but does not have to be. In computer parlance, a relational database makes information from the data stored within it. It also relates to the past; it deals with what has been or what is known

Knowledge is defined as expertise, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject; or what is known in a particular field or in total; facts and information; and awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation. Philosophical debates in general start with Plato's formulation of knowledge as "justified true belief." There is however no single agreed definition of knowledge presently, nor any prospect of one, and there remain numerous competing theories. Knowledge acquisition involves complex cognitive processes: perception, learning, communication, association and reasoning. The term knowledge is also used to mean the confident understanding of a subject with the ability to use it for a specific purpose if appropriate.
Knowledge is the appropriate collection of information, such that it's intent is to be useful. Knowledge is a deterministic process. When someone "memorizes" information, then they have amassed knowledge. This knowledge has useful meaning to them, but it does not provide for, in and of itself, an integration such as would infer further knowledge.In computer parlance, most of the applications we use (modeling, simulation, etc.) exercise some type of stored knowledge. It also relates to the past; it deals with what has been or what is known

Is Knowledge "compressed information"? Knowledge is information of which someone is aware. Knowledge is also used to mean the confident understanding of a subject, potentially with the ability to use it for a specific purpose.Compressed Information would be a more veritable point. Just like in computer science and information theory, data compression or source coding is the process of encoding information using fewer bits than an unencoded representation would use, through use of specific encoding schemes. Just like with knowledge, humans compress information in order to better remember it, which doesn't take away from the understanding of a subject, it just makes matters easier. When memorizing something, a person usually breaks it down into pieces so it is easier to relate back to and understand, therefore, knowledge is compressed information.


Who was the person?


"There are two kinds of truth, deep truth and shallow truth,  and the function of Science is to eliminate the deep truth." - Niels Bohr -- as quoted in Five Minds by Howard Gardner.
Niels Bohr was a Danish physicist who made fundamental contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum mechanics, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1922. Bohr mentored and collaborated with many of the top physicists of the century at his institute in Copenhagen. He was part of a team of physicists working on the Manhattan Project. Bohr married Margrethe Nørlund in 1912, and one of their sons, Aage Bohr, grew up to be an important physicist who in 1975 also received the Nobel prize. Bohr has been described as one of the most influential scientists of the 20th century.
The function of science is to get to the point. You eliminate all of the but-if's and you find the actual truth.

“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.”- Robert Heinlein

Robert Anson Heilen was was an American Science Fiction writer. Often called "the dean of science fiction writers, he was one of the most popular, influential, and controversial authors of the genre. He set a high standard for science and engineering plausibility and helped to raise the genre's standards of literary quality. He was one of the first writers to break into mainstream, general magazines in the late 1940s, with unvarnished science fiction. He was among the first authors of bestselling, novel-length science fiction in the modern, mass-market era. For many years, Heinlein,  Isaac Asimov, and Arthur C. Clarke were known as the "Big Three" of science fiction. Within the framework of his science fiction stories, Heinlein repeatedly integrated recognizable social themes: The importance of individual liberty and self-reliance, the obligation individuals owe to their societies, the influence of organized religion on culture and government, and the tendency of society to repress non-conformist thought. He also examined the relationship between physical and emotional love, explored various unorthodox family structures, and speculated on the influence of space travel on human cultural practices.
All that is listed in the quote is everything that is essential in life. For someone who lives a splendid life, they should have gotten the opportunity to fulfill each one of those tasks because most of them involve everyday life. You should live, explore, create results and die accomplished.

"If it can't be expressed in figures, it is not science; it is opinion." - Robert Heinlein--Spoken by character Lazarus Long in Time Enough for Love (1973) Leon E. Stover, Heinlein (1987)

Leon Eugene Stover (1929–2006) was an anthropologist, a sinologist, and a science fiction face, who wrote both fiction and nonfiction. He was a scholar of the works of  H.G Wells and Robert A. Heinlen. It was a mention in Stover's unpublished biography of Heinlein [he had originally been authorized to write a definitive Heinlein biography, but later had a falling-out with Heinlein's widow] that led researcher Robert James to discover the hitherto-unpublished Heinlein novel For Us, The Living: A Comedy of Customs. Science isn't opinion, it is factual and it involves experiments and reliable results.


Many feel that our world environment, which is so characterized by brutality and suffering, is more consistent with Darwin’s tooth-and-claw, “survival-of-the-fittest,” principle, than it is with the notion that the earth is tended by a benevolent God. There might be some leverage in this argument if there were no other rational explanation for the ills of this globe. Many folks are impressed with the evolutionary case because it is buttressed, they believe, with tangible evidence, whereas religion seems to partake of a dreamy, surreal environment. After all, scientists have “fossils” to prove their case, don’t they? Another reason why many so readily accept evolution as the explanation for mankind, is that such allows them to “cut loose” from God, and hence to be free from moral and religious obligations. They thus can become their own “gods,” and write their own rules. Richard Dawkins says that “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. Some have been thrust toward evolutionary ideology because they are repelled by the confused state of the religious world. 

 ============================ CONCEPTS ===================================

Articles, Definitions, etc on "CONCEPT". What is it? How do you know if you have one? Put the definitions, ideas, etc, and give the URLs.

A concept is a cognitive unit of meaning - an abstract idea or a mental symbol sometimes defined as a "unit of knowledge," built from other units which act as a concept's characteristics. A concept is typically associated with a corresponding representation in a language or symbology such as a single meaning of a term. There are prevailing theories in contemporary philosophy which attempt to explain the nature of concepts. The representational theory of mind proposes that concepts are mental representations, while the semantic theory of concepts (originating with Frege's distinction between concept and object holds that they are abstract objects. Ideas are taken to be concepts, although abstract concepts do not necessarily appear to the mind as images as some ideas do. Many philosophers consider concepts to be a fundamental ontological category of being. The meaning of "concept" is explored in mainstream cognitive science, metaphysics, and philosophy of mind. The term "concept" is traced back to 1554–60 (Latin conceptum - "something conceived") but what is today termed "the classical theory of concepts" is the theory of Aristotle on the definition of terms.

Concept formation is the process of developing abstract rules or mental constructs based on sensory experience. Concept formation figures prominently in cognitive development and was a subject of great importance to Jean Piaget, who argued that learning entails an understanding of a phenomenon's characteristics and how they are logically linked. Noam Chomsky later argued that certain cognitive structures (such as basic grammatical rules) are innate in human beings. Both scholars held that, as a concept emerges, it becomes subject to testing: a child's concept of "bird," for example, will be tested against specific instances of birds. The human capacity for play contributes importantly to this process by allowing for consideration of a wide range of possibilities.
Surveying the wide-ranging literature on concepts in search of an answer to the question “what is a concept?” quickly reveals the diversity of claims made by various users of the word.* For Sartori, to have a concept is to have an ability to “distinguish A from whatever is not-A”  while for Geach (1957), Putnam (1981), and Gillett (1992), the ability to use a word correctly is evidence for the possession of a concept. For Riggs, a concept is constituted by a “mental image”, while for Putnam “possessing a concept is not a matter of possessing images” (1981, p.19). For Lambert and Shanks (1997) concepts are the “alphabet” of individual cognition, while for Gillett (1992) they are inherently public and intersubjective. For Sartori a full-fledged concept has a defining set of necessary characteristics, while for Freeden (1994) many full-fledged concepts entail quasi-contingent non-necessary characteristics.

A concept is a general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences, it is formed in the mind; a thought or notion. Everyone has concepts because everyone has thoughts and notions. Althought they might not always be accurate concepts, it's a persons way of experiencing, rationalizing and learning. Definition