What is source criticism?

 

#What_is_source_criticism_?

Governments always label news or public information that is against their interests as an unrealistic and inaccurate source.

However, if we do a more detailed analysis, we will find that what is published contradicts the collective thinking of the ruling establishment.

This thinking is trivial to those who have sufficient human, behavioral and social knowledge.

Therefore, use science and knowledge as much as you can, develop your mind fully, and start studying.

For example, I see ideas that are wrong from my point of view because the author contradicts my thoughts or his religion contradicts mine.

These things prevent me from learning what I need to. Religion plays a role in human learning, which hinders learning. For example, I want to confirm what a Jew wrote, even if it is wrong.

This is wrong. Or I want to confirm what a Muslim wrote because we share the same thoughts. This is very wrong. Or I want to confirm what a Christian wrote because it is my religion. This is wrong. Science has nothing to do with religion.

 Someone who wants to learn and is developed completely removes religion from their thoughts and thinks humanly and sees humanity.

A capable writer, regardless of their religion, does not matter to the reader because the reader wants to analyze and use the scientific things that are in the text and learn.

The writer must always be impartial, writing without regard to culture and customs, based on a realistic and sharp vision of the future, based on what exists or has happened, based on past experiences and careful analysis.

Of course, careful analysis without studies is insufficient. It is these studies that help the writer to analyze what he has studied, and science and knowledge are very important. According to Barbara Pease and Allen Pease, no analysis without studies can be called analysis.

A long-term study, whether practical or theoretical, can help our mind to get closer to reality and to carry out an analysis that is informative for the reader.

How to write a source criticism?

Source criticism

Who is the text written for?

What genre does the text belong to?

What is the purpose of the text?

Is the text fact related or does it express the sender's opinions?

Is the text objective?

Is the information extensive and balanced?

Are there possible conflicts of interest?

A critic of open source cannot be completely fair and correct because the critic is a human being and humans are fallible. There may be things within the source code that conflict with the person's views and thoughts. This conflict can lead to criticism.

People have the right to criticize all kinds of news, whether scientific or medical, and to try to correct it. This is a positive action. Criticism implies a healthy mind that takes a step forward and moves towards evolution.

Since a human being is behind all the sources, it is not possible to publish information to that source as a correct and accurate source. Since a human being is behind it, it is possible that changes in the person's behavior and performance occur due to financial problems, which calls into question the entire source.

Since no source can be 100% correct, the sources of the text must be scrutinized. The impartiality or impartiality of the writer must be carefully examined, which side the person is connected to, or which government organization and political, social and religious thoughts the person is connected to. These play a role in the person's behavior and performance.

Today, videos can be one of the most powerful and reliable sources because videos are always accurate and show the location and event. Video makes the reader confirm what they are seeing. Because video is clear and understandable, a text cannot be accepted as widely as a video, even if it is scientific or reliable news.

Criticism of sources is done by people who are independent in every way and not affiliated with a government. Today's cyberspace has broken these barriers, and I think many people who have an inherent conscience understand what is right and what is wrong. Videos tell the truth.

Don't forget this: No human is superior to another. All humans are equal in terms of humanity, but some are more educated and some are less educated. No politician is superior to an ordinary person. No boss is more important than his worker. Everyone is human. A police officer is a human being like you and me. There is no difference between us. He is an employee to enforce the law. A judge is a human being like you and me. There is no difference between us. He is the only one who chose this field and worked hard to achieve that position.

When you face a judge or a police officer or a government employee or a president, never consider yourself less than him. You are not less than him. You are a human being. He is a human being. Just learn how to respond.

Do you have any questions?

 I'm at your service. I'll give you better explanations in the future.

Kind regards

Samuel

samuelku34@gmail.com

0046735501680