Often the Left asserts that the Right, and especially White
Conservatives, has been “indoctrinated” with such things as White Supremacy, racial
bias and hatred, etc.
In similar fashion the Right often asserts that the Left has
been "brainwashed" – to hate Trump and his supporters, to hate America, to
embrace Socialism, etc.
In most cases such name calling is the result of someone
being faced with a viewpoint that is contrary to their own. Why does a simple difference of view, stark
as it might be, almost immediately devolve into name calling and the hatred
that follows?
I submit that this almost knee-jerk reaction is a defensive
one resulting from lack of critical thought.
Let me explain.
When one has thought through and chosen to accept a
position, rather than simply adopting without thought that of another, the
thinker will be certain in their position.
The thinker will know it can be defended. The thinker will likely also be curious to
hear the views of others about the viewpoint that he has formulated. He will
always be ready to further assess both his view as well as that of others.
Those who are secure in their positions are not defensive
about them. But, if one, without thought,
has merely put on the cloak of another and called it his own, then if attacked
he is unable to defend that position and so becomes both fearful and
defensive. He cannot rationally discuss
the underlying aspects of the position, so instead of engaging in such a
discussion he simply throws negative names and labels at the one holding a
differing view in an attempt to drive them away.
Taken advantage of by those who sincerely promote their
viewpoint (whether for the general good or for their own), many simply adopt a
view that superficially sounds good to them.
But when challenged, they are left without ability to reasonably respond,
discuss, and understand something different or challenging to their adopted
view. They can only react to what they see as and attack and, without understanding of their position they resort to name-calling as their only defense. And, it is they, the name-callers,
who are the ones who in some way have indeed been indoctrinated or brainwashed.
Now, the interesting question is which came first, the
indoctrination/brainwashing, or the inability to think critically?
From the moment anyone is born they face some sort of
indoctrination. Indoctrination is
defined as “the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of
beliefs uncritically.” Of course, there
are some things that children must be taught as a basic means of survival – don’t
touch a hot stove, don’t eat household cleaners, etc. Others as a basic matter of civilization. Relieve yourself in the bathroom, not the
living room. Parents will also teach
their children the value system that they believe is good and best for their
children. Some of this early teaching
will likely fall into what might be termed a mild form of brainwashing – “the
process of pressuring someone into adopting radically different beliefs by
using systematic and often forcible means.”
But, good parenting, and good schooling will teach the growing
child the additional and crucial piece of humanity called critical thinking – “the
objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.” It is this piece that allows the individual
to assess the information provided to him and to reach his own judgments - judgments that will determine whom he will be as an individual.
Note, I do not suggest that children should be left to their own devices without any rules. Of course
some "indoctrination" into the family culture and requirements is necessary
just as larger groups and the greater society must be taught certain rules and
cultural norms that maintain the civility and civilization of that society. But indoctrination must be balanced with
critical thinking.
Sadly, too many parents and too many educators do not want
those they are raising to question; rather they look for blind acceptance of
what they offer. They want the
individuals in their care to be and become the individuals whom they would have
them be rather than the individuals whom they are or are capable of becoming. This is not only unfair to each individual; it
is also unfair and harmful to humanity as a whole.
Too many individuals hold beliefs and values that are not
truly their own; they do not have the strength of a person that has been taught
to critically evaluate information and has indeed done so in regard to their
own beliefs. It is only then that they
have both the strength and courage to fully engage peacefully and productively
with others, some with the same and some with differing or even opposing
beliefs and values.
And, without the strength of their own convictions, the uncritical
thinkers become open fodder for those who would make one or another particular
viewpoint the dominant if not only viewpoint in society. Such a goal is not for the benefit of the
un-thinkers; they are simply used by those who promote a goal for their own end
– usually their own power to demand that all think as they do.
It is difficult to raise or teach critical thinkers. It means teaching them to question everything
and that includes the one raising or teaching them. Most people don’t like being challenged and
yet that is an essential part of teaching another to be a critical
thinker. Not easy, but essential. If someone is not taught the importance of
asking “why?” then one is being left to the control of others, a control that
usually does not end well for the controlled.
When critical thinking is not a working skill, others will easily
take advantage of that fact. It is only
then that indoctrination and brainwashing on a grander scale becomes
possible. And, when that brainwashing or
indoctrination is political, we no longer are able to have reasonable policy
discussions, we are no longer able to reach across the aisle and compromise for
a greater good. And we devolve to name-calling
and hatred.
Critical thinking – both teaching it and doing it – takes courage. But it also imbues each and everyone of us the
strength to be the individual that we are meant to be, not the useful tool of
someone else who would think for us. And
if we would use our critical thinking, rather than simply calling names at
those with different views we could perhaps have discussions instead. With a sharing and a critical, curious, and
open-minded examination of both our views, perhaps we can understand both. We can understand if, where, how we may have
similar goals as well as accepting where we cannot.
We are all capable of thinking critically, we are just not
often encouraged to do so. Hence, I challenge
everyone rather than accepting political policies, to ask “why?” And again, and
again, keep asking why to every answer you get until you just can go not
further. Ask what supports a point, who
conducted a study, are there different studies, are there additional facts,
etc. Assess the answers. How well do they support the policy
asserted? What questions do you still
have about that policy? Is it truly a policy
that you wish to adopt and defend?
I realize that most people will not do this. They will simply accept what sounds good and
move on. But we really must address many
of the currently proposed policies more critically, assessing not only the
policy itself but its ramifications and consequences, for if we do not question
now, we may be giving up our opportunity to ever do so. With
critical thinking perhaps we could replace the names “indoctrinated” and “brainwashed”
with “open-minded,” “tolerant,” and “understanding.” It is those words that are necessary for a
truly strong and free society.
No comments:
Post a Comment