Superstition vs reason, which will triumph?

Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Image via Wikipedia

There are two ways of looking at the world – through faith and superstition or through the rigours of logic, observation and evidence – in other words, through reason. –Richard Dawkins

At the beginning of the 21st century we are experiencing a virtual war against reason that is happening due to at least two important reasons. Firstly, the religion virus has spread far and wide in recent decades capitalizing on doubt and confusion about modern intellectual achievements and cultural changes that have emancipated people from the grasp of religion. Secondly, science is advancing so rapidly that the common person cannot absorb all the new knowledge. Highly technical scientific reports are so numerous that even experts complain they are being swamped by information What chance do lay persons have? How many simply give up ever understanding.

To fill the void, peddlers of superstition have flooded in to offer bizarre alternatives to science that seem to make sense and don’t require rigor or careful thought. Purveyors advocate impossible untested schemes of quack medicine and psychics abound that have absolutely no logical grounding whatsoever. The most aggressive superstition peddlers attack the very notion that evidence and fact are critical in the search for truth. They cavalierly toss out epistemology backed by centuries of investigation and careful study. They claim one can “know” something through feelings, emotions, ephemeral insubstantial hunches. President George W. Bush, a proud born-again christian, claimed he went with his gut feeling to answer the most profound questions. According to him, what felt right is right. This is stupifying ignorance raised to the umpteenth power. If he used his gut to think with, one wonders if he used his brain to digest his food. The fool.

Richard Dawkins, a leading proponent of science education and a tireless advocate of using reason to seek the truth, stars in a two part television program, “The Enemies of Reason“, broadcast by Britain’s Channel 4 television. Here is part one.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7218293233140975017#

Part Two:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7218293233140975017#docid=6004927014381716642

Enhanced by Zemanta


Are you a critical thinker?

Quality thought is vital. So why don’t schools foster it?

By Linda Elder

From the March 12, 2009 edition of Christian Science Monitor

Dillon Beach, Calif. – How can we hope to thoughtfully address the economic issues, conflicts, world poverty, and many other pressing concerns that trouble our planet, if we don’t take the way we think seriously?

We can’t. To effectively deal with these issues, we must cultivate the spirit of critical thinking throughout human societies.

Right now we are not even teaching the skills and dispositions of the critical mind in our schools. We are not cultivating the intellect.

Everyone thinks; but we don’t always think well. In fact, much of our thinking, left to itself, is sloppy, distorted, partial, uninformed, or prejudiced. Yet the quality of our life and all of the decisions we make depend precisely on the quality of our thought. At present, the act of thinking is virtually ignored.

Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking that aims to take the reasoning we all do naturally to a higher level. It is the art of analyzing and evaluating with the goal of improving thought. When making a decision, it is the difference between weighing information to come to a logical conclusion and making snap judgments without understanding the information.

Consider some of the great thinkers: H.L. Mencken, Tom Paine, Mark Twain, Abraham Lincoln, Bertrand Russell, and Jane Austen. They became some of the greatest thinkers by not accepting information at face value, but by thinking deeply for themselves, asking questions, and refining their thinking over time. It wasn’t easy. Of his own thinking, Charles Darwin said: “I have as much difficulty as ever in expressing myself clearly and concisely; and this difficulty has caused me a very great loss of time, but it has had the compensating advantage of forcing me to think long and intently about every sentence, and thus I have been led to see errors in reasoning and in my own observations or those of others.”

His diligence paid off. Darwin’s critical thinking pushed the boundaries of science and society. And isn’t the purpose of education to give students the tools to thoughtfully contribute (on a small or large scale) to society? Right now we are not doing that. With few exceptions, we are not teaching them how to fully and deeply comprehend what they read or write with clarity, precision, and purpose. We are not teaching students to integrate ideas within and among subjects. We are not teaching them to entertain (in good faith) viewpoints with which with they disagree.

We are failing them at the most fundamental level.

Some believe that critical thinking was once cultivated in schooling. But it is fair to ask if it has ever really been fostered in a meaningful way in mainstream schooling (and the standardized testing movement is only making it worse). Teachers, like students, live in a nonintellectual culture, one that, for the most part, neither values fair-minded critical thinking nor encourages it.

If we want to effectively deal with the tremendous problems we now face, we must begin teaching students to discipline their own thinking. Teachers must move beyond rote and merely active engagement, and work toward transforming how students reason through complex issues, to look beyond easy answers.

We must teach students that the only way to learn a subject or discipline is to learn to think within the logic of it, to focus on its purposes, questions, information, to think within its concepts and assumptions.

It is true that some students learn some critical thinking implicitly along the way. But, as is evident in the dismal state of affairs, our collective thinking simply isn’t good enough.

There is some good news. Many global organizations such as the Peace Corps, UNICEF, and Amnesty International are promoting critical thinking within a particular area of importance. As part of their reaccreditations, the University of Louisville and Eastern Kentucky University are both making concerted efforts to bring critical thinking across the curriculum. But much work is still needed. William Graham Sumner, the Yale academic and essayist may have put it best when, in 1906, he said:

“The critical habit of thought, if usual in society, will pervade all its mores, because it is a way of taking up the problems of life. Men educated in it cannot be stampeded by stump orators…. They can wait for evidence and weigh evidence, uninfluenced by the emphasis or confidence with which assertions are made on one side or the other. They can resist appeals to their dearest prejudices and all kinds of cajolery. Education in the critical faculty is the only education of which it can be truly said that it makes good citizens.”

His warning resonates today. Though there is no quick and easy fix, we can all start by beginning to think about how we think. We can question our purposes, our assumptions, our ideas, and our inferences. We can question whether we are considering the views of others to understand them, or to dismiss them. We can open our minds to the larger world with all of its complexities. If we are to reverse the downward spiral we are presently experiencing, we must begin to actively and deliberately foster fair-minded critical thinking in our schools, our homes, our social institutions, in government, and indeed, in every part of human life.

Linda Elder is the president of the Foundation for Critical Thinking, an education nonprofit organization concerned with fostering fair-minded critical societies. She is an educational psychologist who has co-written four books on critical thinking and 20 thinker’s guides.

http://www.criticalthinking.org/

Enhanced by Zemanta


Conversational Intolerance, Part II

Richard says:
A forum participant responds:
But I am an educated woman of science.
++++++++

Apparently, the delusion can strike anyone. You might think you are seeing the hand of a creator, but this is your delusion talking, not the rational thinking of a “woman of science”. The screaming you hear is in your imagination. In fact if you have been trained in science you should get a refund, because the training was no good. Or are you talking about creation “science”. In which case, I think we are done here.

Please do not represent yourself to others as a scientific thinker unless you can actually think and act like a scientist. Otherwise, you disgrace people who actually are scientists. We have a gigantic problem with scientific ignorance and stupidity in the USA fostered by religious people. Please do not add to the problem.

Children are a completely natural biological result of human sexual mating. There is nothing supernatural about them and they hardly scream they are the result of a supernatural process. They do scream, and their screams may seem unworldly, but this is not because of any supernatural reason.

This is not about you or me winning anything. It is about your delusion and your willingness because of your illness to pass delusional thinking to your innocent vulnerable children.

If this sounds hostile to you maybe it is because for the first time in your life another human spoke to you in frank uncompromising terms about your illness. You may think you are fine because there are dozens or hundreds of other people around you that share your delusion. You are not fine, and neither are they.

Enhanced by Zemanta