Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

How can students be taught to think for themselves?

For building independent thinking and critical thinking, a lot of it starts with knowing how to spot logical fallacies, lies, propaganda, sophistry, etc.

I remember in my classes, we were taught about arguments based on ethos vs logos vs. pathos and that was a good start, but didn’t explore logical fallacies that much, which I wish we had. Blind trust in authority and emotional thinking is why so much for the world is going down the wrong path. If a student can see the problem with trusting authority too readily, or the problem with falling for a piece of propaganda aimed at the heart strings, they’re already ahead of the curve.

I find that trying to spot what’s wrong with a statement or theory is more productive than simply looking at the dozen reasons why it’s right, because you can pick and choose supporting ‘evidence’ that ignores that few counter-examples proving it wrong. So spotting the flaw, the ulterior motive, the contradiction, what’s being left out or ignored… that’s an important component of critical thinking.

That said, the simplest exercise is to pose a juicy question and allot 5/10/15 minutes for a student to ponder, brainstorm, write out possibilities, think them over, and come up with an educated guess or opinion about it. This combination of introspection, reason and intuition really gets the brain going.

If afterwards they see/hear what other people came up with, they get to enjoy other perspectives and maybe realize what they themselves missed, or perhaps they see what’s missing in those other perspectives.

That’s just one example. By juicy question, I mean something that makes you think, something that elicits “Huh… that’s a good question.”

Or it can be something more abstract that simply engages thought.

Convenient one is a question about the differences between similar things, like: “What’s the difference between a genius and a savant?” Or any two closely related words. Discernment often involves zooming in to distinguish between two similar but different things, where one might be conflated with the other. Sloppy thinking ignores these.

Logical fallacy examples are good too, asking students what’s wrong with this argument. Ideally, they’d be able to spot these more when they see the news and social media headlines.

But the key being: focused thought on a topic, digging within oneself for ideas, analyzing what comes through to ensure it checks out, and distilling it all down to one or more statements that can be shared with others. That’s a full sequence from problem to solution, with intuition and logic forming the steps between. This is what critical thinking tends to entail.

I only mention this because that’s what I’ve done. I read or watch or experience things, notice the unanswered questions or problems or paradoxes, and let that be my question that I ponder on, specifically in my notebook. If I were just casually chatting and walking I wouldn’t be able to drill so deep to break through to a good answer. It’s the depth that matters most, and generally people don’t want to go there or say it hurts to think or throw their hands up. But a little at a time, especially if made enjoyable, builds the capacity for depth of critical thinking.

Tom Montalk - http://montalk.net