Don’t just teach your children to read…Teach them to question what they read. Teach them to question everything.
The late George Carlin took nothing at face value. His deep and often cynical analysis of behavior and ideas was always refreshing in a world filled with apathetic acceptance of propaganda swaddled in the guise of politics, religion, culture, class, race, and gender. Forgive me if I left anything off the list. His point, however, is clear. Accept nothing someone tells you or what someone writes and you read. Do not believe the surface for if you do you’ll surely be disappointed. But what does it mean to question everything? What does it actually mean to read critically?
I have one anecdotal piece of evidence, a story that is funny while carrying the seeds of corporate greed at its core. It was widely reported in the late 1980’s that when toilet training one’s children, it is best to wait until the child asks to be trained. In an era of child centered parenting, a period in which I raised my own children, this bit of news reporting seemed to make a great deal of sense until I learned that the studies that were widely reported were funded by manufacturers of disposable diapers. The question arises as to whether the studies results were motivated by a reasonable interpretation of the data or by the profits to be made from selling one or two more years worth of disposable diapers? Fortunately for my kids, they were unable to use disposable diapers so we opted for cloth. The point of this anecdote is to simply point out that when a study is widely reported it is always appropriate to ask where the funding source for the study came from. Does the funder have an economic or idealogical stake in the results of the study.
It is always important to think clearly about claims made that appear on the surface to be quite logical. Another example: An argument made by fundamentalists for whom the literal (surface) meaning in the Bible is without flaw claims that evolution must be wrong by partially making their case that the human eye is too complex an organ to be made other than by divine design. This is an argument from incredulity which, in its simplest form, goes something like this: I can conceive of no other possible solution so X must be the case. The argument from incredulity is one of the weaker forms of argumentation because, for the most part, those who make the argument fail to consider sources outside of those which make them most comfortable. Consulting other sources, scientific sources, that argue for the evolution of the human eye using evidence from many species allows one to argue from extant evidence and not from belief systems or ideology.
Teach your children to read critically, open their eyes to the very idea that there is always more than one way to get to the roof but if you can’t think clearly you might not recognize them.