How can we help our youth to think critically?

Question

I mean what can we do to help them understand that advertising is not the truth. And how can we help them to see through faulty thinking like bigotry and racism. How can we help them not to be sexist. We need to help our youth see through the lies and ignorance around them so that they will be able to improve society. The answer lies in finding a way to get our people to think logically and analytically. Obviously our education systems have failed in this way, even if not completely.

Answer 1

I think we need to include more student debates in our classrooms, where a person must defend the pro or con of an issue --- and not necessarily take the standpoint he or she personally agrees with. When I was in school (I'm over 50) we did this every week with current events, and teams were formed by counting off 1,2 1,2.... So you could end up defending something you don't beleive in personally -- but you had to do a good job anyway for the sake of the team (and your grade!) I remember once having to defend Hitler in a debate about WWII -- not my cup of tea as a Jew, but it made me struggle to see things from the other side of a war. (A modern equivalent would be to take the side of the Iraqi insurgency -- the point being, that both sides think they are right, both sides have valid points, both sides are wrong in some areas.)

In the Talmud there are similar debates for the sake of debate to sharpen the mind -- including a rabbi who assigned his students to list reasons why a lizard (a forbidden food) should be eaten. The point was not to get Jews eating lizards. It was to examine something from many sides. These types of exercises force students tothink outside the boxes they normally live in, to see a broader picture. Som eof my most memorable moments in school were these debates -- and I have retained an ability to think critically.

Answer 2

Well, you cannot control anyone. That's for sure. If anyone will prove that to you, it will be a youthful spirit.

Although, if you as a parent support and absolutely stand against a certain thing. That does stick. There is a quote by Einstein, "Prejudice is a thing that young adults have built by the age of 18."
It's true. And at the still-young age of 18 all we've experienced is menial misdemeanors of childhood and the characteristics of our parents.

My answer? The problem isn't the youth not thinking enough. To try and force us to be something we aren't yet is absurd. The problem is the media; and perhaps the public schooling.

I think we have suffered enough oppression from adults' fears. While big industries advertise whatever sells the easiest; and that's the issue.

Answer 3

I think a good place to start is to teach them to question everything. Maybe even tell them some things that are obviously (to us) untrue, and see which ones question you on it. Children have to learn not to trust everything they hear, but to evaluate everything based on their experience (which will grow).

Another important step is knowing who to trust and who not to trust. And you can't let someone tell you who and who not to trust! Some sources are reliable; those are constantly proved right. Others are unreliable; they are frequently proved wrong. If kids question their religion, let them! They will learn if the teachings are trustworthy, and how? by their fruit! Then it's much more convincing than if it were shoved down their throat.

Finally, I think two things in school should be taught more (besides music, of course): cause-and-effect and logic. Cause-and-effect, to look back and see what historically happens in a given situation. Logic to look into the future and know what will happen. If your school doesn't teach this stuff, play games with your kids. Pretty much all games require the use of strategy.

Oh, wait! I forgot about role models! If kids see more people logically analyzing things they hear and see, more people challenging the status quo, more people using their own minds, they will be trained to use their own minds as well.

Well said, btraglio! If we never use our minds creatively as children, we can't hope to develop creative minds later on!

Answer 4

Ridding ourselves of our catatonic dependency on television would be one way, though that's probably about as easy as parting the Red Sea. My generation, those who are just starting to move into the second levels of the workforce, are among the first of the coming Instant Gratification Generation. We want it all distilled to us in one hour or less. Hence the obscene increases of ADD and ADHD among young people in the last 15 years. An unhappy by-product of this is the atrophy of the imagination because TV gives you the visuals and the audio (as oppoed to books or free play). Young people don't go out in the backyard and imagine kingdoms and castles of their own anymore because they can go to the Playstation and be teleported into (somebody else's) alternative reality. Weaken the imagination and you will also weaken the ability to think creatively, reason, and form coherent ideas. Crap on a stick is what you get in the end, my friend.

This is coming from a teacher, but don't blame it solely on the education system. Blame it on parents as well. (Of course, many people don't like to do this because it means admitting fault in their own duties as a parent.) I can't stress that enough. The patterns that govern a child through their school years and into adolescence are set in the child's mind long before they get into the classroom. There is pervasive sociological and biological evidence for this. I know that schools aren't as good as they should be, but teachers should not be the kicking stump for parents' abdication of their responsibility to stimulate their child's mind at an early age as opposed to plopping them in front of the TV screen. It's that simple.

Answer 5

Try to make them adopt a critical approach to some life issues, how? By getting acquainted with the co called critical thinking, that is see below:

Methods of critical thinking
Critical thinking has a useful sequence to follow:

Itemize opinion(s) from all relevant sides of an issue and collect Logical argument(s) supporting each.
Break the arguments into their constituent statements and draw out various additional implication(s) from these statements.
Examine these statements and implications for internal contradictions.
Locate opposing claims between the various arguments and assign relative weightings to opposing claims.
Increase the weighting when the claims have strong support especially distinct chains of reasoning or different news sources, decrease the weighting when the claims have contradictions.
Adjust weighting depending on relevance of information to central issue.
Require sufficient support to justify any incredible claims; otherwise, ignore these claims when forming a judgment.
Assess the weights of the various claims.
Mind maps provide an effective tool for organizing and evaluating this information; in the final stages, one can assign numeric weights to various branches of the mind map.

Critical thinking does not assure that one will reach either the truth or correct conclusions. Firstly, one may not have all the relevant information; indeed, important information may remain undiscovered, or the information may not even be knowable. Second, one's bias(es) may prevent effective gathering and evaluation of the available information.

Critical thinking may be distinguished, but not separated, from feeling. Refusal to recognize their interaction in real life leads to various forms of self-deception, individually and socially; and at the left, right, and mainstream of economic, political, and religious issues. Further analysis and resources about this interaction may be found in Roderick Hindery (2001): Indoctrination and Self-deception or Free and Critical Thought.

[edit]
Overcoming bias
To reduce one's bias, one can take various measures during the process of critical thinking.

Instead of asking "How does this contradict my beliefs?" ask: "What does this mean?"

In the earlier stages of gathering and evaluating information, one should first of all suspend judgement (as one does when reading a novel or watching a movie). Ways of doing this include adopting a perceptive rather than judgmental orientation; that is, avoiding moving from perception to judgment as one applies critical thinking to an issue. In the terminology of Edward De Bono's Six Thinking Hats, use white hat or blue hat thinking and delay black hat thinking for later stages.

One should become aware of one's own fallibility by:

accepting that everyone has subconscious biases, and accordingly questioning any reflexive judgments;
adopting an egoless and, indeed, humble stance
recalling previous beliefs that one once held strongly but now rejects
realizing one still has numerous blind spots, despite the foregoing
How does one ever eliminate biases without knowing what the ideal is? A possible answer: by referencing critical thinking against a "concept of man" (see Erich Fromm). Thus we can see that critical thinking and the formation of secure ethical codes form an integral whole, but a whole which remains limited without the backing of a concept of humanity.

Finally, one might use the Socratic method to evaluate an argument, asking open questions, such as the following:

What do you mean by_______________?
How did you come to that conclusion?
Why do you believe that you are right?
What is the source of your information?
What assumption has led you to that conclusion?
What happens if you are wrong?
Can you give me two sources who disagree with you and explain why?
Why is this significant?
How do I know you are telling me the truth?
What is an alternate explanation for this phenomenon?
[edit]
Reaching a conclusion
One useful perspective in critical thinking involves Occam's Razor. Also called the "principle of parsimony," Occam's razor states that one should not make more assumptions than necessary. In other words, "keep it simple". Given the nature of the process, critical thinking is never final. One arrives at a tentative conclusion, given the evidence and based on an evaluation. However, the conclusion must always remain subject to further evaluation if new information comes to hand.

[edit]
Critical thinking in the classroom
In the UK school system, the syllabus offers Critical thinking as a subject which 17-18 year olds can take as an A-Level. Under the OCR exam board, students can sit two exam papers: "Credibility of Evidence" and "Assessing/Developing Argument". Students often regard the subject as a 'lightweight' or 'bonus' qualification, as they can achieve competence after very little formal teaching.

[edit]
Quotation

Answer 6

Feed their curiosity. That's what my parents did for me. If I was wondering what that guy with that telescope thing is doing, then my parents and me went up to him and asked. He was a surveyor. But when they ask something and you respond "none of your business," you're killing their curiosity, the need to ask and ponder. So they eventually accept whatever they hear, because the truth is "none of their business". Curiosity starts in early childhood, you have to breed and foster it, then it will grow and blossom in adulthood.

Answer 7

Maybe the question should be "how do we get our youth
to think"? Actually, if they'll attend a Bible believing church,
everything they hear will be the truth, and the truth will set
them free. And, it is free, right, and moral.

Answer 8

no, not as long as parents pay attention to what they're watching. yes it is very easy to slip through the internet while moms got her back turned for a sec, but as long as SOMEONE is there i dont think it would be as much of a bad influence

Answer 9

Let's educate them with a kind of education that liberates the mind and not with the kind that indoctrinates..."Capitalist Science," organized religion, etc... come to mind.

Answer 10

Start with something that "youth" can relate to; how much life experience have they had.