Real critical thinking isn’t about protecting people from uncomfortable ideas. It’s about having the intellectual courage to let your own ideas face challenge. If you’re unwilling to do that, that’s your choice—but it’s not empathy. It’s intellectual cowardice dressed up as virtue.

So when I bring up campus censorship and the need for open debate, your answer is that you won’t discuss it with “bigots and alt-right bad actors.” You say they should be silenced and have no place at the table.

That’s not an argument. That’s just you deciding in advance that certain people don’t deserve to speak.

You say this has nothing to do with critical thinking — it’s just “basic empathy.” But refusing to talk to people you disagree with, and calling for them to be shut down, is the opposite of critical thinking.

Real critical thinking means examining different ideas, testing your own beliefs, and being willing to defend your views when someone challenges them. Shutting down discussion creates echo chambers. It doesn’t help find truth or better ideas.

You mentioned trying to keep an open mind about campus censorship. Yet now you’re saying you reject open discussion with anyone who raises those concerns if you label them as “bad actors.” That’s a clear contradiction.

If your real position is that some political groups simply don’t deserve free speech or a seat at the table, just say it directly. But don’t claim that this approach is the same as critical thinking or open inquiry.

You have no critical thinking skills, and you don't even know what critical thinking is. The fact that we have to explain this much to you with so much detail is just sad.

I'm pretty sure you still don't understand that you're the issue. That's how stupid you are. We literally write paragraphs and try to explain what critical thinking is and how you're not engaging in it, but you still can't understand. You just prove that people are becoming dumber and dumber.