Smart people?? [slight editions]
I would suppose that people of the post enlightenment realize the importance of logic when reasoning. Yet, the typical characterization of one’s smartness, according the average individual, is one who can memorize information, calculate complex calculations in a short period, and apply technical knowledge onto technical problems. It seems that society is deluded by their own confabulated presuppositions, and ignores the importance of logic. To think that society, in general, prefer robots to thinkers, conformers to enquirers. To most intellectuals, I believe I would be quite right to assume that this they are most likely to find amusing, that many of these supposedly ‘smart’ people are actually somewhat irrational – committing typically violated logical fallacies.
Here are only A FEW of the logical fallacies that people typically commit – including many of the ‘smart’ ones – thus proving how irrational a human being can be at times:
1. Hindsight Bias
2. Hasty Generalization
3. Availability Error
4. Representative Heuristic
5. Subjective Validation
6. Appeal to faith
7. Appeal to psyche
8. Appeal to intuition
9. Appeal to mystical experience
10. Appeal to the Person
11. Against all odds
12. False Dilemma
13. Appeal to masses
14. Personal Incredulity
15. Naturalistic Fallacy
16. Genetic Fallacy
17. Appeal to authority
18. Faulty Analogy
19. Appeal to tradition
20. Appeal to fear
21. False Cause
What is most interesting about the tendency to being irrational in the foregoing respects is that out of twenty-one, religion generally scores sixteen – maybe the reader might know what they are... This means that religion is about 76.2% irrational when taken in the context of typical violated fallacies – let alone other untypical fallacies. Ironically, I shall be extending on this on another article extensively.
One has to wonder if the educational system does anything at all to aid students in their ability to reason logically. Yet, until this very day, I have not yet seen any empirical evidence, nor at least a personal experience, proving that the majority of people coming out of the system is capable of engaging in a logical discussion or argument. Are people who can use logic appropriately and correctly not the ones who are intelligent? The fact is, critical thinking is an asset to the human intellect, and should never be forgotten.
2 comments:
Mm. This post on "smart people?" was rather hasty. What makes you think society labels only people who can memorize as smart people? Do you really think that educational instituions reward based on route memorization? I question the institutions you are talking about. Read the mission statement of schools- it usually speaks of application of knowledge. In addition, in response to your statement about the typical(wrong implied) characterization of "smart people" I dont really know what you have against the ability to quickly do complex calculations, but to me, thats a form of intelligence. so is being able to apply technical knowledge(however you define it).
Besides, I think there has to be a balance in memorization. Its not all bad. In order to be in a position to really question and think creatively (so called being"smart" and solving problems) within a discipline, memorization is required to form a base. You agree? Lastly, as a sidepoint, some of the heuristic errors you mentioned exist due to evolution. They expedite the brain's processing of information, saving us time in assessing situations. They are human characteristics, and I think that smart people are human too ^^
Perhaps I did not extend fully on what I actually meant. I apologize.
I would like to use the example from science, with respect to the topic regarding institutions, as that is the subject which I am mostly into. First years of college, I find, is very skimpy. In physics, one is introduced to Einstein's theory of relativity as opposed to really understanding how einstein came with with his equation. Another example omes from chemistry, that being chemical equilibrium. I believe this has to do with thermodynamics or fluid dynamics, but what is ironic is that the educational system does not concentrate on that first. Rather, they explore the surface of many complex theories, without actually extensively analyzing the theories themselves. Equations are memorized without actually giving much thought into them, onl because students do not have the time to do so. This is a problem because by doing so, students are not learning to critically analyze the theories, and are not even given the basics first. What I was trying to point out was that people who get good marks in the first few years of college or university or high school are not actually smart. Most of the time everything requires memorization.
I agree with you that memorization, yet only to some extent, is beneficial. For without knowledge, how ten does one ponder about the bigger questions about the universe?
When I talked about the application of such information to technical problems, I was refering to that that people simply apply what they know, though not justified or proved to be true in front of them, and do not actually see the significance of what they do. There are actually a few scientists (out of the many other hundreds of thousands others)who actually still misinterpret what a scientific theory is! While a scientific theory is, actually, an explanation that encompasses all known facts, laws and hypotheses (the initial ones to start off the research), these few scientists claim that theories are not facts, and should not be taken seriously. Fact is, scitific theories are taken more seriously then facts, because scientific theories explain facts!
I agree with you on the last point, but that is not an excuse to be irrational. Humans are much more intelligent creatures, and should learn their place in the animal kingdom. Whenever I communicate with friends, or family, I realize that their closely held beliefs are based on very superficial and illogical arguments! Some say they believe God exists because they love God! As a person of science, it's just like saying I believe this theory to be true because it appeals to what I am. The truth of any matter does not depend on one's appeal to emotion (a logical fallacy), but the empirical evidence- those being relevant and credible. Many people use such an excuse to be irrational, and subconsciously they compromise their own intellect to the point where even their beliefs are held based on very incredible and illogical grounds.
From the perspective of science, the eduational system should enforce critical thinking, not simply skimping and having an overview of complex scientific theories. It should, in fact, teach the basics, not give explanations to simple questions.
Post a Comment