All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
May 16, 2007 - Skeptoid
12:02
Skeptoid #45: The Importance of Teaching Critical Thinking

Teaching critical thinking to students needs to be much more than simply asking the Socratic questions. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Making Critical Thinking Relevant 00:04:57
One thing that students could use more of is the foundations of critical inquiry into the things they're actually faced with in daily life.
Whether this is a conspiracy theory, an anti-vaccine belief, or miracle diets, we all come into daily contact with things that aren't true.
Our schools do a poor job in preparing students to recognize these and fight them head-on.
Teaching critical thinking is today on Skeptoid.
A quick reminder for everyone, you're listening to Skeptoid, revealing the true science and true history behind urban legends every week since 2006.
With over a thousand episodes, we're celebrating 20 years of keeping it focused and keeping it brief.
And we couldn't have done it without your curiosity leading the way.
And now we're even offering a little bit more.
If you become a premium member, supporting the show with a monthly micropayment of as little as $5, you get more Skeptoid.
The premium version of the show is not only ad-free, it has extended content.
These episodes are a few minutes longer.
We get rid of the ads and replace them with more Skeptoid.
The Extended Premium Show available now.
Come to skeptoid.com and click Go Premium.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
The importance of teaching critical thinking.
Today we're going to do something a little bit different.
Rather than talk about any one specific phenomenon, I want to talk in general terms about the importance of teaching critical thinking to young people and how and why it can and should be done better.
A skeptical approach to life leads to advances in all areas of the human condition, while a willingness to accept that which does not fit into the laws of our world represents a departure from the search for knowledge.
We had a critical thinking class at my high school as an elective, and I think it was generally considered to be the most boring and useless class you could take.
If memory serves, the bulk of the class involved reading and studying Plato's Socratic dialogues.
If you read them as a teenager, you may recall your reaction was to find them pretty darn dry.
They were dialogues between Socrates and other people about such riveting subjects as ancient politics, philosophy, and even mathematics.
I don't mean to criticize Socrates, it's just that studying the man in his 2400-year-old writings is about the least interesting and relevant way for a modern young person to get excited about what Socrates was communicating.
Nobody I knew who walked out of that class ever remembered a single concept or applied it to their life.
You can disagree with me and say that you find the Socratic dialogues to be brilliant and fascinating.
My point is that the average teenager does not.
But the concepts Socrates introduced, such as the Socratic questions, are brilliant and fascinating when we apply them to things that interest us.
More significantly, they become relevant.
Take a few Socratic questions.
What is the source of your information?
What assumptions are you making?
Is a different conclusion more consistent with the data?
What is an alternate explanation for this phenomenon?
What if we encouraged young people to ask these questions not of early Greek politics, but of the issues they're hit in the face with every day?
global warming, television psychics, alternative medicine, new age religions, popular assumptions about alternative fuels, alternative foods, alleged correlations between Xbox violence and actual violence, magnet therapy.
Isn't it more useful to encourage better ways to think about the subjects that people are already thinking about?
I have a favorite example of an older, less interesting critical thought exercise that was made more relevant and interesting.
The philosopher Bertrand Russell, in criticizing major religions, conceived of what became known as Russell's Teapot, a small China teapot allegedly orbiting the sun.
Since nobody could disprove its existence, Russell argued that the only reason its existence shouldn't be taken for granted is that there are no ancient texts written about it.
He applied Socratic reasoning to point out that ancient texts do not constitute proof of an unprovable concept.
Russell's teapot was freshened when a grad student named Bobby Henderson wrote to the Kansas Board of Education in 2005, which had just mandated that the Christian story of creation should be taught instead of science.
Russell's Teapot and Facts 00:05:45
He insisted that by the same logic, his non-disprovable flying spaghetti monster deities myth of creation should be taught with equal time.
Fans appreciative of Henderson's logic have since formed the parody religion known as Pastafarianism.
The flying spaghetti monster is goofy and glib, but it is a valid example of using critical thinking to analyze the value of a real phenomenon that we face today.
Teachers, what would your students come up with if you asked them to apply similar reasoning and invent an alternative to television psychics, founded upon the same assumptions that Sylvia Brown asks us to make?
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding.
Together, get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
Finding fault with television psychics or the Kansas Board of Education is not by itself a positive contribution.
Skepticism should not be merely a negative influence.
Skepticism is not about debunking, disproving, or ruining anyone's faith.
Skepticism is about applying the scientific method to arrive at a conclusion that is evidenced to be beneficial, like curing cancer.
If during this process it first becomes necessary to debunk an unsupported alternative that's in the way, such as treating cancer with magnets, then that debunking serves as a stepping stone to the final solution.
Debunking should never be an end in itself, because that alone creates nothing useful.
As scientists, we are interested in learning, and often that involves replacing an older hypothesis that's found to be wrong.
Some people criticize science by pointing out that it does not know everything and doesn't have all the answers.
Case in point, the popular movie, What the Bleep Do We Know?
Obviously, this criticism is true.
Science is all about the fact that we don't know everything.
Science is the learning process.
There are ideologies that do offer all the answers, often divine in nature or based on ancient philosophies.
When you have all the answers, there is no longer any need to learn, and thus no use for science.
If we want to improve the world, improve the human condition, improve technology, learning and thus science is the essential way forward.
Ideologies that offer all the answers are the essential route to developmental stagnation.
When you hear someone criticize science because it doesn't have all the answers, don't argue with them.
Instead, point out that that's the strength of science.
We couldn't be learning more every day if we presumed to already know everything.
Some people criticize skepticism because it doesn't leave well enough alone.
Many paranormal beliefs and alternative systems, even though they may lack hard scientific evidence, bring comfort to those who practice them and are a positive force in many people's lives.
There is value and enlightenment to be found in life that isn't necessarily found in a science book.
It is often argued that skepticism is not merely unimportant, it can even be harmful.
Young people should not complacently accept this short-sighted argument.
First of all, happiness and enlightenment are all around us in our world.
They are not found only within a given pseudoscience.
But moreover, once we begin investing our faith in unsubstantiated or supernatural phenomena, we are contributing to the redirection of attention, influence, and funding away from technologies and concepts that have been evidenced to be beneficial to humanity and to our world.
As my good friend says, The choice between pseudoscience and science is the choice between stagnation and progress.
Progress toward long life, health, happiness, a cleaner planet, bountiful food, knowledge, and peace.
Support Skeptoid Premium 00:01:16
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Hello everyone, this is Adrian Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and moose.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, Premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile nonprofit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX.
Export Selection