推荐本书

夜的黑

Beyond Feelings: A Guide to Critical Thinking，作者是Vincent Ruggiero，此书于2007年发行第八版。

全书下载附件。

夜的黑

INTRODUCTION

Beyond Feelings is designed to introduce you to the subject of critical thinking. The subject is undoubtedly new to you because it is not taught in most elementary and secondary schools. In fact, until fairly recently it was not taught in most colleges. During the 1960s and much of the 1970s the emphasis was more on subjectivity than on objectivity, more on feeling than on thought.

Over the past ten years, however, a number of studies of America's schools have criticized the neglect of critical think, and a growing number of educators and leaders in business, industry, and the professions have urged the development of new courses and teaching materials to overcome that neglect.

It is no exaggeration to say that critical thinking is one of the most important subjects you will study in college regardless of your academic major. The quality of your schoolwork, your efforts in your career, your contributions to community life, and your conduct of personal affairs will all depend on your ability to solve problems and make decisions.

The book has four main sections. The first, "The Context," will help you to understand such important concepts as individuality, thinking, truth, knowledge, and opinion and to overcome attitudes and ideas that obstruct critical thinking. The second section, "The Problems," will teach you to recognize and avoid nine common errors that often occur, singly or in combination, during the thinking process. The third section, "A Strategy," will help you acquire the various skills used in addressing problems and issues. This section includes tips on identifying and overcoming you personal intellectual weaknesses, as well as techniques for becoming more observant, clarifying issues and conducting inquiry, interpreting evidence, analyzing other people's views, and making sound judgments.

At the end of each chapter you will find a number of applications to challenge your critical thinking and provide exercise for your skills. These applications cover problems and issues both timely and timeless. The fourth section of the book, "Some Contemporary Issues," presents additional important issues that continue to occupy the attention of the best thinkers of our time.

In brief, Beyond Feelings is designed to help you acquire the intellectual skills necessary to solve the exciting problems of today and tomorrow.

夜的黑

Suppose someone asked, "Who are you?" it would be simple enough to respond with your name. but if the person wanted to know the whole story about who you are, it would be more difficult to answer. You'd obviously have to give the details of your height and age and weight. You'd also have to include all your sentiments and preferences, even the secret ones you'd never shared with anyone – your affection for you parents; your desire to please the crowd you associate with; your dislike of your older sister's husband; your allegiance to Budweiser beer, the Ford Motor Company, the Denver Broncos, Calvin Klein jeans, and Bruce Springsteen.

Your attitudes couldn't be overlooked either – the impatience you have when an issue gets complex, your aversion to English courses, your rejection of communism, your fear of high places and dogs and speaking in public. The list would go on. To be complete, it would have to include all your characteristics – not only the physic cal but the emotional and intellectual as well.

To provide all that information would be quite a chore. But suppose the questioner was still curious, and now asked, "How did you get the way you are?" if your patience were not yet exhausted, chances are you'd answer something like this: "I'm that way because I choose to be, because I've considered other sentiments and preferences and attitudes and made my selection. The ones I chose fit my style and personality best." That answer is a natural enough one, and in part it's true. But in a larger sense it's not true. The impact of the world on all of us is much greater than we usually realize.

INFLUENCES ON IDENTITY

You are not only a member of a particular species, Homo sapiens, but you exist at a particular moment in the history of the species. Being a young adult today is quite different from being a young adult thirty years ago, and very different from being a young adult in 1500 or 10,000 B.C. The world's state of progress differs, and likewise its knowledge and beliefs and values. The opportunities for learning and working and relaxing are not the same. So people's daily thoughts and actions vary.

Variations in place and circumstance also can make a difference. If you're from a large city, the odds are you look at many things differently from someone in the country. A person raised for eighteen years in New York City or Los Angeles who goes to college in a town of 3,000 will find the experience difficult. So will a person raised on an isolated farm. But probably for opposite reasons!

If you are an American sports enthusiast, you're probably interested in football, baseball, or basketball. But if you were Chinese, you'd be much more familiar with and excited about ping-pong, and if you were European, soccer. If your father is an automobile mechanic, you undoubtedly know more about cars than does the average person. If you mother is a teacher, you'll tend have a somewhat different perspective on school and teachers than do other students.

In much the same way, all the details about your family very likely have some bearing on who you are. Their religion, race, national origin, political affiliation, economic level, attitudes towards one another, all have made some contribution to your identity.

Of course, people may reject what they are taught at home. People between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one often have sharp and apparently permanent differences with their parents in terms of beliefs and values on many issues. Still, whether you accept or reject what you are taught, your present position grows out of those teachings. It is a response to your upbringing. Given different parents with a different culture and different values – growing up, say, in Istanbul rather than Dubuque – your response would necessarily be different. You would, in that sense, not be the same person.

THE ROLE OF MASS CULTURE

In centuries past, the influence of family and teachers was the dominant, and sometimes the only, influence on children. Today, however, the influence exerted by mass culture (but broadcast media, newspapers, magazines and popular music) is often greater.

By age eighteen the average teenager has spent 11,000 hours in the classroom and 22,000 hours in front of the television set. He or she has done perhaps 13,000 school lessons, yet has watched more than 750,000 commercials.

What effects does mass culture have on young people (and many adults, as well)? To answer, we need only consider the formats and devices commonly used. Modern advertising typically bombards the public with slogans and testimonials by celebrities. This approach is designed to appeal to emotions and create artificial needs for products and services. As a result, many people develop the habit of responding emotionally, impulsively, and gullibly to such appeals.

Television programmers use frequent scene shifts and sensory appeals such as car crashes, violence, and sexual encounters to keep audience interest from diminishing. Then they add frequent commercial interruptions. As a result, many people find it difficult to concentrate in school or at work. They may think the teacher or the job is boring when, in fact, mass culture has made them impatient with the normal rhythms of life.

Finally, mass culture promotes values that oppose those held by most parents. Play is presented as more fulfilling than work, self-gratification more desirable than self-control, and materialism more meaningful than idealism. People who adopt these values without questioning them may end up sacrificing worthy goals to their pursuit of "a good time" and lots of money.

EFFECTS ON SELF-IMAGE

The circumstances of our lives are so influential that they affect not only our view of the world but also our view of ourselves. If you were to make a list of your capacities for different kinds of activities, you might say, for example, "I work well with mechanical things, but I have no talent for dealing with ideas." Would that be accurate? Not necessarily! It would be what you had come to believe about yourself, the conclusion you'd reached as a result of your experience. However, it might very well be a conclusion you reached too soon.

Dr. Maxwell Maltz explains the amazing results one educator had in improving the grades of school children by changing their self-images. He had observed that when they saw themselves as stupid in a particular subject (or stupid in general), they unconsciously acted to confirm their self-images. They believed they were stupid, so they acted that way. Reasoning that it was their defeatist attitude rather than any lack of ability that was defeating them, the educator set out to change their self-images. He found that when he accomplished that, they no longer behaved stupidly!

Maltz records how this same negative self-image kept a salesman from ever reaching more than a certain level of sales. When his territory was changed to a larger and more promising territory, he continued to make the same dollar amount, not a bit more. The trouble was found to be not in the conditions of his work but in his self-image. He had decided he couldn't exceed a certain amount, and so he subconsciously prevented himself from doing so.

Maltz concludes from these and other examples that our experiences can work a kind of self-hypnotism on us, suggesting a conclusion about ourselves and then urging us to make it come true[ Maxwell Maltz, Psycho-Cybernetics (New York: Pocket Books, 1969), pp. 49-53].

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EARLY YEARS

Psychologists agree that the early years of life are the most significant in shaping a person. Like sapling trees, small children are very pliable. The reasons for this are obvious. Everything is new to them. They are constantly recording impressions, and they lack any sophisticated process for sorting out those impressions and dealing with them. Children cannot think analytically. They cannot even express their reactions verbally.

The impact of children's early experiences can be profound, affecting their basic outlook toward themselves and other. Dr. Thomas A. Harris suggests that there are four such outlooks, and not all of them are healthy:

I'm not OK – You're OK.
I'm not OK – you're not OK.
I'm OK – You're not OK.
I'm OK – You're OK.

The first outlook occurs for everyone between birth and age two or three. It develop-s when children sense their own fumbling helplessness and adults' comparative ability. The difference in size and skill makes adults seem almost godlike. And so children feel inferior.

Age two or three, in Harris's view, is an important juncture. Children may continue in the first outlook with their feelings of inferiority lessening as they grow in knowledge and skill. Or they may slip into the harmful second or third outlook. The second develops when mothers are unusually cold. Lacking any encouragement, the children literally lack a reason to live. If they survive, they tend to become emotionally stunted, unable to accept recognition from anyone. The third outlook occurs when cruel, unloving parents beat and abuse their children. Each time the children experience an episode of violence, they are forced to provide their own encouragement and comfort. Thus they turn away from others. (Harris calls this outlook the criminal position because the history of many psychopathic individuals reveals it.)

The fourth outlook, Harris stresses, is the only conscious one. That is, it is the only one based on faith, thought, and action. People fortunate enough to have had caring, encouraging parents get the necessary start. Then through later childhood and adolescence, they gradually grow out of both the emotional, unthinking responses of the child and the uncritical dependence on earlier teachings. They become thinking, self-directed people – individuals. They have both a sense of their won worth (I'm OK) and faith and trust in others (You're OK).[ Thomas A. Harris, I'm OK – You're OK: A Practical Guide to Transactional Analysis (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), pp. 37-53]

BECOMING AN INDIVIDUAL

What does individuality mean and to what extent can a person be an individual? In the current popular imagination, individuality means "doing your own thing," responding to life's situations in whatever way seems most natural. The problem with that notion is that it ignores all the shaping forces we have been discussing. It denies the fact that each of us has been channeled and conditioned to a great degree. It pretends there is some inner self untouched by all that we have experienced, all that has happened to us.

The fact is that if you define individuality in the popular way and act on that definition, you'll be acting like Pavlov's famous dog. Pavlov rang a bell whenever he placed food in front of the dog. After a while, he conditioned the dog to drool when he heard the bell, even though no food was presented to him. The dog was doing what came naturally to him. But what came naturally was influenced by his experience. He was controlled by a force outside himself.

Obviously, individuality must be something more than that. It must be the habit of developing your own personal responses to people, issues, and situations, rather than mindlessly endorsing the responses you have been conditioned to make. These guidelines will help you achieve individuality:

Tree your first reaction to any person, issue, or situation as tentative. No matter how appealing it may be, refuse to embrace it until after you have examined it.
Decide why you reacted as you did. Consider whether you borrowed the reaction from someone else – a parent or friend, perhaps, or a celebrity or fictional character on television. If possible, determine what specific experiences conditioned you to react this way.
Think of other reactions your might have had to the person, issue, or situation.
Ask yourself whether one of the other reactions is more appropriate than your first reaction. And when you answer, resist the influence of your conditioning.

To ensure that you will really be an individual, and not merely claim to be one, apply these guidelines throughout your work in this book, as well as in your everyday life.

APPLICATIONS

Suppose you asked a friend, "How did you acquire your particular identity – your sentiments and preferences and attitudes?" Then suppose the friend responded, "I'm an individual. No one else influences me. I do my own thing, select the sentiments and preferences and attitudes that suit me." How would you explain to your friend what you learned in this chapter?
Ask yourself the question "Who am I?" Write down ten answers to this on ten separate slips of paper. Use the first three paragraphs of this chapter to help you to choose your answer. Arrange the pieces of paper in priority order in terms of their importance to you. Which self-descriptions are most important to your? Why?
Identify the various positive and negative influences that have shaped you. Be sure to include the particular as well as the general influences and the subtle as well as the obvious. Which of those influences have had the greatest effect on you? Explain the effects as precisely as you can.
Not your immediate reaction to each of the following questions. Then apply the four guidelines given in this chapter for achieving individuality.
Should freshman composition be a required course for all students?
Should athletes be tested for anabolic steroid use?
Should creationism be taught in high school biology classes?
Should polygamy be legalized?
Should the voting age be lowered to sixteen?
Group discussion exercise: Discuss each of the following questions with two or three classmates, applying the four guidelines for developing individuality that are given in this chapter. Be prepared to share your group's ideas with the class.
Should extremist groups like the Ku Klux Klan be allowed to hold rallies on public property?
Should the prison system give greater emphasis to the punishment or to the rehabilitation of inmates?
Should doctors and clinics be required to notify parents of minors when they prescribe birth control devices for the minors?

夜的黑

When Arthur was in the first grade, the teacher directed the class to "think." "Now, class," she said, "I know this problem is a little harder than the ones we've been doing, but I'm going to give you a few extra minutes to think about it. Now start thinking."

It was not the first time Arthur had heard the word used. He'd heard it many times at home but never quite this way. The teacher seemed to be asking for some special activity, something he should know how to start and stop. Like his father's car. "Vroom-m-m," he muttered half aloud. Because of his confusion, he was unaware he was making the noise. "Arthur, please stop making noises and start thinking."

Embarrassed and not knowing quite what to do, he looked down at his desk. Then out of the corner of his eye he noticed that the little girl next to him was staring at the ceiling. "Maybe that's the way you start thinking," he guessed. He decided the others had probably learned how to do it last year, that time he was home with the measles. So he stared at the ceiling.

As he progressed through grade school and high school, he heard that same direction hundreds of times. "No, that's not the answer, you're not thinking – now think!" And occasionally, form a particularly self-pitying teacher given to talking to himself aloud: "What did I do to deserve this? Don't they teach them anything in the grades anymore? Don't you people care about ideas? Think, dammit, THINK."

So Arthur learned to feel somewhat guilty about the whole matter. Obviously this thinking was an important activity that he'd failed to learn. Maybe he lacked the brain power. But he was resourceful enough. He watched the other students and did what they did. Whenever a teacher started in about thinking, the screwed up his face, furrowed his brow, stretched his head, stroked his chin, stared off into space or up at the ceiling, and repeated silently to himself, "Let's see now, I've got to think about that, think, think (I hope he doesn't call on me), think." Though Arthur didn't know it, that's just what the other students were saying to themselves.

Because Arthur's situation is not all that uncommon, your experience may have been similar. That is, probably many people have gold you to think, but no one ever explained what thinking is, how many kinds of thinking there are, and what qualities a good thinker has that a poor thinker lacks.

Thinking is a general term covering numerous activities from day-dreaming to reflection and analysis. Here are just some of the verbs Roget's Thesaurus includes for the word think:


appreciate
believe
cerebrate
cogitate
conceive
consider
consult
contemplate
deliberate
digest
discuss
dream
fancy
imagine
meditate
muse
ponder
realize
reason
reflect
ruminate
speculate
suppose
weigh


However, all of those are just he names that thinking goes under. They really don't explain it. The fact is after thousands of years of humans' experiencing thought and talking and writing about it, it remains in many respects one of the great mysteries of human existence. But though much is  yet to be learned, a great deal is already known.

ONE BRAIN OR TWO?

Brain function research has revealed the importance of a small bundle of nerves found between the left and right sides of the brain. Until recently that bundle, the corpus callosum, was thought to have no significant function. Now, however, scientists know that the brain is not one center of thought and learning but two. Each side has control over certain skills. When the corpus callosum is intact, the two sides work in harmony (although one may dominate). But when the corpus is cut or damaged, the left side of the brain is no longer aware of what the right side is doing and vice versa. Experiments performed with patients in this condition reveal hand controlled by the "blind" eye cannot later identify the object by touch. It is a familiar object to one part of the brain but totally unfamiliar to the other.[ Maya Pines, "We Are Left-Brained or Right-Brained," New York Times Magazine, September 9, 1973, pp32ff.]

We now know, too, that each half of the brain has its own memories and its own train of thought. The left half deals mainly in words and is associated with analysis and logical thinking. The right half deals mainly in sensory images and is associated with intuition and creative thinking.[ Thomas R. Blakeslee, The Right Brain (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1980).] Despite the separateness of the hemispheres, however, the brain's functions are profoundly integrated.

Some researchers regard the brain as synonymous with the mind. Western philosophy, however, has traditionally held that there is an important difference. According to this view, the brain is a physical reality whereas the mind is metaphysical – that is, nonmaterial.

CRITICAL THINKING DEFINED

The word critical often carries negative connotation, implying excessive faultfinding. That connotation does not apply to the term critical thinking, which refers to the process of evaluating ideas. When we think critically, we judge the accuracy of statements and the soundness of the reasoning that leads to conclusions. Critical thinking helps us interpret complex ideas, appraise the evidence offered in support of arguments, and distinguish between reasonableness and unreasonableness. Both problem solving and decision making depend on critical thinking, as does the meaningful discussion of controversial issues.

One of the keys to proficiency in critical thinking is skill in asking relevant questions. Where the uncritical accept their first thoughts and others' statements at face value, critical thinkers challenge all ideas in the following manner:

Thought        Question
Professor Vile cheated me in my composition grade. He weighted some themes more heavily than others        Did he grade everyone on the same standard? Were the different weightings justified?
Before women entered the work force, there were fewer divorces. That show that a woman's place is in the home.        How do you know that this factor, and not some other one(s), is responsible for the increase in divorces?
A college education isn't worth what you pay for it. Some people never reach a salary level appreciably higher than the level they would have reached without the degree.        Is money the only measure of the worth of an education? What about increased understanding of self and life and increased ability to cope with challenges?

Critical thinkers also use questions philosophically; in other words, to wonder about issues, probe them more deeply than is customary, and look for new insights. Consider, for example, the term values. We hear it frequently today in statements like "Our country has lost its traditional values" and "There would be less crime, especially violent crime, if parents and teachers emphasized moral values." Here are some of the questions a critical thinker would ask:

What is the relationship between values and beliefs? Between values and convictions?
Are all values valuable?
How aware is the average person of his or her values? Is it possible that many people deceive themselves about their real values?
Where do one's values originate? Within the individual or outside? In thought or in feeling?
Does education change a person's values? If so, is this change always for the better?
Should parents and teachers attempt to shape children's values?

CHARACTERISTICS OF CRITICAL THINKERS

There are a number of misconceptions about critical thinking. One is that being able to support beliefs with reasons makes one a critical thinker. Virtually everyone has reasons, however pathetic they may be. The test of critical thinking is whether the reasons are good and sufficient.

Another misconception is that critical thinkers never imitate others in thought or action. If that were the case, then every pigheaded person would be a critical thinker. Critical thinking means making wise decisions, regardless of how common those decisions are.

A third misconception is that critical thinking is synonymous with having a lot of right answers in one's head. There's nothing wrong with having right answers, of course. But critical thinking is the process of finding answers when they are not so readily available.

Yet another misconception is that critical thinking cannot be learned, that one either "has it" or does not. One the contrary, critical thinking is a matter of habit. The most careless, sloppy thinker can become a critical thinker by developing the characteristics of a critical thinker.

We have already noted one characteristic of critical thinkers – skill in asking appropriate questions. Another is control of their mental activities. American philosopher John Dewey once observed that more of our time than most of us care to admit is spent "trifling with mental pictures, random recollections, pleasant but unfounded hopes, flitting, half-developed impressions."[ John Dewey, How We Think (Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath, 1933), p.4.] Good thinkers are no exception. However, they have learned better than poor thinkers how to stop that casual, semiconscious drift of images when they wish and how to fix their minds on one specific matter, examine it carefully, and form a judgment about it. They have learned, in other words, how to take charge of their thoughts, to use their minds actively as well as passively.

Here are some additional characteristics of critical thinkers, as contrasted with those of uncritical thinkers:

Critical Thinkers        Uncritical Thinkers
Are honest with themselves, acknowledging what they don't know, recognizing their limitations, and being watchful of their own errors.        Pretend they know more than they do, ignore their limitations, and assume their views are error-free.
Regard problems and controversial issues as exciting challenges.        Regard problems and controversial issues as nuisances or threats to their ego.
Strive for understanding, keep curiosity alive, remain patient with complexity and ready to invest time to overcome confusion.        Are impatient with complexity and thus would rather remain confused than make the effort to understand.
Set aside personal preferences and base judgments on evidence, deferring judgment whenever evidence is insufficient. They revise judgments when new evidence reveal error.         Base judgments on first impressions and gut reactions. They are unconcerned about the amount or quality of evidence and cling to earlier views steadfastly.
are interested in other people's ideas, so are willing to read and listen attentively, even when they tend to disagree with the other person.        Are preoccupied with self and their own opinions, and so are unwilling to pay attention to other's views. At the first sign of disagreement they tend to think, "How can I refute this?"
Recognize that extreme views (whether conservative or liberal) are seldom correct, so they avoid them, practice fair-mindedness, and seek a balanced view.        Ignore the need for balance and give preference to views that support their established views.
Practice restraint, controlling their feelings rather than being controlled by them, and thinking before acting.        Tend to follow their feelings and act impulsively.

As the desirable qualities suggested, critical thinking depends on mental discipline. Effective thinkers exert control over their mental life, direct their thoughts rather than being directed by them, and withhold their endorsement of any idea – even their own – until they have tested and proved it. John Dewey considered this mental discipline to be identical with freedom. That is, he argued that people who do not have it are not free persons but slaves. Here his words:

If a man's actions are not guided by thoughtful conclusions, then they are guided by inconsiderate impulse, unbalanced appetite, caprice, or the circumstances of the moment. To cultivate unhindered, unreflective external activity is to foster enslavement, for it leaves the person at the mercy of appetite, sense, and circumstance.[ Ibid., pp.88-90.]

THE ROLE OF INTUITION

Intuition is instinctive knowing or perception without reference to the rational process. Of all aspects of thinking, it is perhaps the most dramatic and therefore the most fascinating. History records many cases of important discoveries just "occurring" to people. They may not even be consciously considering the matter. Then all of a sudden the answer comes to them, seemingly out of nowhere.

The German chemist Kekule found the solution to a difficult chemical problem that way. He was very tired when he slipped into a daydream. The image of a snake swallowing his tail came to him – and that provided the clue to the structure of the benzene molecule, which is a ring, rather than a chain, of atoms.[ R. W. Gerard, "The Biological Basis of Imagination," The Scientific Monthly, June 1946, p. 477.] The German writer Goethe had experienced great difficulty organizing a large mass of material for one of his works. Then he learned of the tragic suicide of a close friend. At that very instant the plan for organizing his material occurred to him in detail.[ Ibid., p.478.] The English writer Coleridge (you may have read his "Rime of the Ancient Mariner" in high school) awoke from a dream with between two and three hundred lines of a new and complex poem clearly in mind.

Intuition is not restricted to famous men and women. Most of us have had similar though less momentous experiences with it. And two facts are common to all these experiences, great and small alike. The first is that intuition cannot be controlled; the second is that intuition is not completely trustworthy. Even the strongest intuition can prove wrong. For both reasons, though intuition is always a welcome companion to critical thinking, it is never a substitute for it. This, of course, is no cause for concern because many other skills of thinking can be controlled and developed.

CRITICAL THINKING AND WRITING

Writing may be used for either of two broad purposes – to discover ideas or to communicate ideas. Most of the writing you have done in school is undoubtedly the latter kind. But the former can be very helpful, not only in sorting out ideas you've already produced, but in stimulating the flow of ideas. For some reason, the very act of writing down one idea has a way of producing additional ideas.

Whenever you write to discover ideas, focus on the issue you are examining and record all your thoughts, questions as well as assertions. Don't worry about organization or correctness. If ideas come slowly, be patient. If they suddenly come in a rush, don't try to slow the process down and develop any one of them, but jot them all down. (There will be time for elaboration, and for correction, later.) Direct your mind's effort, but be sensitive to ideas on the fringes of consciousness. Often they, too, will prove valuable.

If you have done your discovery writing well and have thought critically about the ideas you have produced, the task of writing to communicate will be easier and more enjoyable. You will have many more ideas – tested and proven ideas – to develop and organize.

APPLICATIONS

How closely has your experience with thinking in school matched Arthur's?
Do you find it difficult to ponder important matters? Are you able to prevent the casual, semiconscious drift of images form interrupting your thoughts? Do you have less control in some situations than in others? Explain.
Rate yourself on each of the seven characteristics of good thinkers that are listed above. Which are you strongest in? Which weakest? If you behavior varies form situation to situation, try to determine what kinds of issues or circumstances bring out your best and worst mental qualities.
Is there any pattern to the way you think about a problem or issue? Does an image come to mind first? Or perhaps a word? What comes next? And what after that? If you can't answer these questions completely, do this exercise: Flip half a dozen pages ahead in this book, pick a sentence at random, read it, and note how your mind deals with it. (Such thinking about your thinking may be a little awkward at first. If it is, try the exercise two or three times.)
Read each of the following statements carefully. Then decide what question(s), if any, a good critical thinker would find it appropriate to ask.
Television news is sensational in its treatment of war because it gives us pictures only of injury, death, and destruction.
My parents were too strict – they wouldn't let me date until I was sixteen.
It's clear to me that Ralph doesn't care for me – he never spoke when we passed in the ball.
From a commercial for a new network: "The news is changing every minute of the day, so you constantly need updating to keep you informed."
The statement of an Alabama public elementary school teacher who had students recite the Lord's Prayer and say grace before meals: "I feel part of my job as a teacher is to instill values children need to have a good life."[ "Teacher Uses Prayer," Binghamton (New York) press, November 16, 1982, p.1.]
State and explain your position on each of the following controversial issues, applying what you leaned in this chapter.
The rape laws in some states require that the force used in the act be sufficient to produce a fear in the victim of serious physical injury or death. Some laws also require that the victim earnestly resist the assault. Where those conditions are not present, a rapist will not be prosecuted.
In what was believed to be the first national attempt to bring economic pressure to make a television network tone down the sex and violence in its programming, the Coalition for Better Television urged the public to boycott products made by RCA because the network owned by that company, NBC, had "excluded Christian characters, Christian values, and Christian culture from their programming." NBC denounced the move as "an obvious attempt at intimidation."[ "Religious Group Aims TV Boycott at NBC," The (Oneonta) Star, March 5, 1982, p.1.]
The increase in violent crimes by teenagers and even young children in recent years has prompted many people to urge that the criminal justice system treat juvenile offenders as adults. Some even argue that the most serious offenders should receive the death penalty.
In 1989 President George Bush publicly rejected a proposal to ban assault rifles. His view supported the National Rifle Association's position that the right to bear arms should not be abridged. Many police organizations strongly disagree with this position.
The U.S. Supreme Court has considered the cases of two teenagers who committed heinous crimes. In one seventeen-year-old raped and then murdered a gas station attendant. In the other a sixteen-year-old stabbed a liquor store owner eight times, killing her. Many believe the death penalty is appropriate in such cases. Others believe that the death penalty is always inappropriate for minors regardless of the crime.[ Binghamton (New York) Press, march 27, 1989, p.1A.]
An unstable man called an Alabama television newsroom and threatened to kill himself. The station notified the police and then dispatched a camera crew to the scene. The crew reportedly stood by, filming, while the man doused himself with lighter fluid and lit two matches in an unsuccessful attempt to ignite himself. They moved in to stop him only after his third, successful attempt. The television station subsequently ran the film footage on the air. One member of the crew explained later, "My job is to record events as they happen." Many people find fault with the television crew's response to the situation.[ "When 'News' Is Almost a Crime," Time, March 21, 1983, p.84.]

夜的黑

For hundreds of years philosophers battled over whether "truth" exists. The argument usually concerned "Truth" with a capital T, a kind of complete record of whatever was, is, or will be, error-proof, beyond doubt and dispute, a final test of the rightness or wrongness of people's ideas and theories.

Those who accepted the existence of this Truth believed it was a spiritual reality, not a physical one. That is, it was not a celestial ledger or file-drawer – yet it was beyond time and space. It was considered an understanding among the gods, or an idea in the mind of God, or simply the sum total of Reality. Could human beings ever come to know Truth? Some said no, never. Others said yes, but only in the afterlife. Still others said that the wisest and best of humans could catch glimpses of it and that the rest of humanity could learn about it through these special ones.

Those who rejected this notion of an awesome, all-embracing Truth argued that it was an empty notion. How could all reality be summed up that way? More important, what possible evidence could be offered in support of its existence? Many who reasoned this way dismissed the idea of Truth as wishful thinking, a kind of philosophical security blanket. A few went further and denied even the existence of truths (no capital).

Our age has inherited the whole argument. The focus, however, has changed. It seldom concerns Truth anymore, most people seem to doubt its existence. And even if it does exist, they reason, it's of little help to us in our world and our lives because it is beyond human understanding. Even many people of strong and rather conservative religious views no longer consider the question of Truth important to the understanding or practice of their faith.

Still the problem of truth (no capital) remains, and the position we take toward this question does have an important bearing on how we conduct our thinking and acting. Unfortunately, there is a good deal of murkiness and confusion about the concept. The rest of this chapter will attempt to shed light on it.

What comes through our senses exerts a powerful influence on us. It presents itself as true, and we are inclined to believe it. In addition, what we see is shaped by our individual way of seeing. We focus on what interests us. We filter out of our perception what seems unimportant to us. So each of us perceives the word around him, and the events that fill this life, in a unique way. No two people see the same event precisely alike.

Now if we were to stop our analysis here and consider only the fact of our uniqueness, we might understandably conclude that truth is relative; that is, that it varies from person to person, that one person's truth is another's error, and that there is not higher claim to validity than individual viewpoint.

THE QUALITY OF PERCEPTION

But there is more to consider. First, we can be mistaken in what we perceive. The barroom brawler may be so uncertain of his own worth that he sees everything anyone does near him as mocking him. If two students walk by him sharing a joke, completely unaware he is there, he will interpret their laughter as directed at him and start a fight with them. He will have heard them laughing and be absolutely certain they are mocking him. And yet he will be wrong!

College students are often positive that their textbook contains a certain statement. So they answer an exam question with perfect confidence that they are right. Yet when they get the corrected test back and find the question marked wrong, then hurriedly flip open the book, and examine the passage again, they may find it does not say what they thought at all.

Your parents probably watched in awe as Tarzan uttered his famous yell and swung through the treetops to catch the villain. Tell them that Tarzan never made that yell and they'll say, "False, we heart it with our own ears." And yet it's not false. According to one of the men who first played the role of Tarzan, Buster Crabbe, that yell was dubbed into the films in the studio. It was a blend of three voices – a soprano's, a baritone's and a hog caller's.

At least a dozen times every weekend from September to January, the imperfection of human observation is underlined by that marvel of technology, the instant replay. Is there a fan left in the land who isn't occasionally to be found screaming, "Bad call," only to be proved wrong a moment later? We can be sure enough to bet a week's wages that a pass receiver's feet came down in bounds. And then that unemotional camera shows them plainly three feet out.

THE QUALITY OF INFORMATION

Second, our information can be inaccurate or incomplete. The quality of a belief depends to a considerable extend on the quality of the information that backs it up. Because it's a big world and reality has many faces, it's easy for us to be misinformed. For example, which way does the water in a sink circle as it goes down the drain? Clockwise or counterclockwise? If you're more of an experimenter than a gambler, you'll find a sink, run some water, and find out the truth. The problem is you can only be half right that way (no matter how much your sink cost). If the sink is north of the equator, the water will circle counterclockwise, and if it's south, clockwise.

Even in more common situations, it's easy to be misinformed. How many drivers take the wrong turn because of faulty directions? How many people get on the wrong bus or train? How many car owners put too much or too little air in their tires on the advice of some service station attendant? Now if misinformation is common enough in such relatively simple matters, how much more common is it in complex matters like law and medicine and government and religion?

It's possible, of course, to devote a lifetime of study to a particular field. But not even those who make that kind of commitment can know everything about their subject. Things keep happening too fast. They occur whether we're watching or not. There's no way to turn them off when we take a coffee break or go to the bathroom. The college student who hasn't been home in three months may be able to picture the neighbor's elm tree vividly. Yet it may have been cut down two months ago. The soldier may have total recall of this hometown – every sight and sound and smell – and return home to find half of Main Street sacrificed to urban renewal, the old high school hangout closed, a new car in his best friend's driveway.

EVEN THE WISE CAN ERR

So far we've established that people can be mistaken in what they perceive and that the information they receive can be faulty or incomplete. But these matters concern individuals. What of group judgment d—the carefully analyzed observations of the best thinkers, the wisest men and women of the time? Is that record better? Happily, it is. But it too, leaves a lot to be desired.

All too often, what is taken as truth today by the most respected minds is proved erroneous tomorrow. You undoubtedly know of some examples. In the early seventeenth century, when Galileo suggested that the sun is the center of our solar system, he was charged with heresy, imprisoned, and pressured to renounce his error. The "truth" of that time, accepted by every scientist worthy of the name, was that the earth was the center of the solar system.

A little more than a century ago Darwin scandalized the Western world with his claims that the earth was far older than 5,000 years and that human beings descended form apes. The error of this was obvious to every schoolchild. The truth of the traditional view was based on the Bible itself. How could it possibly be wrong? Here are some examples you may not have heard of:

For a long time surgeons used talc on the rubber gloves they wear while performing surgery. Then they discovered it could be poisonous. So they switched starch only to find that it too can have a toxic effect on surgical patients.[ Time, August 14, 1972, p.52.]
Film authorities were certain they were familiar with all the films the late Charlie Chaplin ever made. Then in 1982 a previously unknown film was discovered in a British screen archive vault.[ "Chaplin Film Is Discovered," Binghamton Press, September 8, 1982, p.7A.]
For hundreds of years historians believed that, though the people of Pompeii were trapped by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79, the people of neighboring Herculaneum escaped. Then the discovery of eighty bodies (and the hint of hundreds more) under the volcanic ash revealed that many from Herculaneum were also trapped.[ "Town's Terror Frozen in Time," New York Times, November 21, 1982, Sec. 4, p.7.]
Your grandparents probably learned that there are eight planets in our solar system. Since Pluto was discovered in 1930, your parents and you learned there are nine. But if the observations of Joseph L. Brady of the University of California prove correct, your children will learn there are ten.[ "A Tenth Planet?" Time, May 8, 1972, p.46.]
After morphine was used by doctors for some years as a painkiller, it was found to be addictive. The search began for a nonaddictive substitute. What was found to take its place? Heroin.[ Herrman L. Blumgart, "The Medical Framework for Viewing the Problem of Human Experimentation," Daedalus, Spring 1969, p.254.]

TRUTH: A DEFINITION

Where does all this leave us? If an individual can be wrong and even the most widely endorsed conviction of an age is not necessarily correct, what can truth be?

The truth about something is what is so about it, the facts about it in their exact arrangement and proportions. Did time run out before the field goal was kicked? How does gravity work? Who stole your hubcaps? Are there time/space limits to the universe? Who started the argument between you and your mother last weekend? Have you been working up to your potential in this course? To look for the truth in any of these matters is to look for the correct answer, the answer that completely expresses reality in the matter. What ever difficulty we may find in discerning or stating the truth is beside the point.

That last sentence deserves emphasizing. Much of the confusion about truth arises from complex situations in which the truth is difficult to ascertain or express. Consider a question like "Are there really UFOs that are piloted by extraterrestrial beings? Although the question is often hotly debated, and people make assertions that purport to express the truth, there is not yet sufficient evidence to say we know the truth about UFOs. That, however, doesn't mean that there is no truth about them or that people who affirm their existence and people who deny it are equally correct. It means that whatever the truth is, we do not yet possess it.

Similar difficulty arises from many psychological and philosophical questions like "Why are some people heterosexual and other homosexual?" "Is the cause of criminality genetic or environmental or a combination of the two?" Are human beings inherently violent?" "Is there an afterlife?" "What constitutes success?" The answers to these questions, and to many of the issues you will encounter in the applications in this book, will often be incomplete or tentative. Yet that fact should not shake your conviction that there are truths to be discovered.

Having the right frame of mind can make your pursuit of the truth less burdensome and give it some of the adventure the greatest thinkers of history experienced. A good way to begin is to keep the following thought in mind: "I know I've got limitations and can easily be mistaken. And surely I'll never find all the answers I'd like to. But I can observe a little more accurately, weigh things a little more thoroughly, and make up my mind a little more carefully. If I do so, I'll be a little closer to the truth."

That's far different from saying, "Everyone makes his or her own truth" or "It all depends on how you look at it." And it is much more reasonable.

APPLICATIONS

For years grade school students faced this question on their science tests: "True or False – The famous rings of the planet Saturn are composed of solid material." If the students marked "true," they lost credit, because the "truth" was that Saturn's rings are composed of gas or dust. Then in 1973 radar probes revealed that all those wrong answers were right. Saturn's rings are in fact composed of solid matter.[ "Back to School," New York Times, March 11, 1973, pp.57ff.]
The scene is a dormitory head resident's office. Two students are being questioned. A few minutes earlier they were engaged in a fistfight in the hall. The head resident asks them again and again how the fight started. The stories conflict. Because each student seems genuinely convinced that the other one was the aggressor, and there were no witnesses, the resident ahs no hope of discovering the truth. But is there a truth to discover? Or are there two truths, one for each student's story? What light does the chapter shed on these questions?

A strange phenomenon that affects a tiny number of the world's inhabitants has interested psychologists for some time. It occurs during what Norwegians call the murky time, the two months each year during which areas above the Arctic Circle experience almost unrelieved darkness. The effects on people have been discovered to be unfortunate, even dangerous. At worst, people experience severe tenseness, restlessness, fear, and a preoccupation with thoughts of death and even suicide. At best they experience an inability to concentrate, a tiredness, a lack of enthusiasm for anything, suspicion, and jealousy. Part of the cause is seen as lack of sleep. Accustomed to day and night, people become confused by constant darkness.[ "The Murky Time," Time, January 1, 1973, pp. 57ff.] This phenomenon poses an interesting test of truth. Would it be proper to say the phenomenon was true before it was recognized and acknowledged by psychologists? Or did it become true only when they became aware of it? And what of your relation to the phenomenon? Before you became aware of it for the first time, whether reading it here or elsewhere, it was not "true to you." But did that make it any less true? Explain in light of this chapter.

Evaluate the following dialogues in light of what you learned in this chapter. If you lack sufficient knowledge to judge the issue, do some research.
Lois: We should really quit smoking, Francis. The evidence is growing that it's a factor in a number of diseases.Francis: Don't get nervous about it, Lois. So far there has been no definitive study – only theories and speculation and "suggested links." Nobody ever died from those. If they come up with a conclusive link between smoking and disease, there will be time enough to quit.
Martha: I don't care what the courts say about abortion – I'm convinced it's murder because the fetus is a human being.Marian: If you want to believe that, fine. Just don't impose your beliefs on others and prevent them from exercising their rights.Martha: You don't seem to understand. It's no just a fetus in my uterus that's human but the fetus in the uterus of every pregnant woman.Marian: Nonsense. You have no right to classify what exists in someone else's uterus. That's her business. You should mind your own business.
Barbi: Television shows about suicide should not be aired.Ken: Why?Barbi: Because they cause people to commit suicide.Ken: That's ridiculous. How can a drama or documentary that show the tragedy of suicide cause people to commit suicide?Barbi: I don't know how it happens. Maybe some people have thoughts of suicide already and the show reinforces them. Or maybe they focus on the act of suicide and lose sight of the tragedy. All I know is that attempted suicides increase after the airing of such shows.
Mabel: I notice when you get a newspaper you immediately turn to the astrology column. Do you really believe that nonsense?Alphonse: It's not nonsense. The planets exercise a powerful influence on our lives; their positions in the heavens at the time of our birth can shape our destiny.Mabel: I can't believe I'm hearing such slop from a science major.Alphonse: What you fail to understand is that astrology is science, one of the most ancient sciences at that.
Jake: What did you think of the chapter "What is Truth?"Rocky: It's stupid.Jake: What do you mean?Rocky: It contradicts Chapter 1.Jake: I didn't get that impression. Where's the contradiction?Rocky: In Chapter 1 the author says that "I'm OK, you're OK" is  a mature attitude and that we should strive to be individuals and think for ourselves. Now he says that his idea about truth is OK and ours isn't and that we should follow his. That's a contradiction.
Group discussion exercise: How many times have you been certain something was true, only to find out later that it was not? Discuss those experiences with two or three of your classmates. Be prepared to share the most dramatic and interesting experiences with the rest of the class.

夜的黑

Sally looks up from her composition and asks her roommates, "How do you spell embarrass?"

Nancy says, "I'm not sure. I think it has a double r and a double s. oh, I really don't know."

Marie smiles her nasty-cute smile. "I guess spelling isn't your cup of tea, Nancy. The correct spelling is e-m-b-a-s-s. Only one r."

By this time Sally has already opened her dictionary. "Might as well check to be sure," she says. "Let's see, embargo, embark… here it is, embarrass. Double r and double s. You were right, Nancy."

Let's consider what happened more closely. Marie knew the answer, but she was wrong. Nancy didn't know, but she was right. Confusing. What kind of thing can this "knowing" be? When you're doing it, you're not doing it. And when you aren't you are.

Fortunately it only appears to be that way. The confusion arises because the feelings that accompany knowing can be present when we don't know. Marie had those feelings. She no longer wondered or experienced any confusion. She was sure of the answer. Yet she was mistaken.

REQUIREMENTS OF KNOWING

Nancy was in a better position than Marie because she answered correctly. Yet she didn't know either, for knowing involves more than having the right answer. It also involves the realization that you have it.

The answer, of course, may not always be as simple as the spelling of a word. It may require understanding of numerous details or complex principles or steps in a process. (it may also involve a skill – knowing how to do something. But that is a slightly different use of the word than concerns us here.)

Knowing usually implies something else, too – the ability to express what is known and how we came to know it. This, however, is not always so. We may not be able to express our knowledge in words. The best we may be able to say is "I just know, that's all" or "I know because I know." Yet these replies are feeble and hardly satisfy those who wish to verify our knowledge or share it.

ASSUMING, GUESSING, SPECULATING

Three mental processes that are sometimes confused with knowing are assuming, guessing, and speculating. Yet they are quite different. Assuming is taking something for granted – that is, unconsciously holding an idea about something without ever trying to verify it, sometimes being unaware we have the idea.

Many people, for example, never give much thought to the daily life of fish. They may have their curiosity aroused as they walk through a discount store, stop at the pet section, and stare for a few minutes at the tank of goldfish. They may even spend an occasional half four studying they've never really pondered the social roles and relationships of a community of fish. As a matter of fact, they assume that fish have no such roles and relationships. Yet the fact is in the words of underwater sociologist C. Lavett Smith, "There are fish equivalents of barbers, policemen, and farmers. Some are always on the move and others are sedentary. Some work at night and some by day."[ Herbert Kupferberg, "Why Scientists Prowl the Sea Floor." Parade, July 29, 1073, pp.12ff.]

Most people who are familiar with the Catholic church's official opposition to abortion assume that this opposition has always existed. The great majority of Catholics share this assumption. Yet at various times in history there have been dramatic shifts in the church's position. Before the end of the sixteenth century, Catholic ethical practice was to allow abortion during the first eighty days of pregnancy. At the end of that century, one pope (Sixtus V) decided that practice was wrong and declared that abortion was sinful at any stage of pregnancy. Then the next pope (Gregory XIV) decided that abortion was permissible any time before the fetus showed signs of movement in the womb. In 1869 still another pop (Pius IX) returned to the view that abortion was always wrong.[ Louis Lasagna, Special Subjects in Human Experimentation," Daedalus, Spring 1969, p.459.]

Guessing is offering a judgment on a hunch or taking a chance on an answer without any confidence that it is correct. It's a common, everyday activity. For students who don't do their studying for exams, it's a last-ditch survival technique. For an example of guessing, though, let's take a more pleasant subject – drinking beer. Some time ago a professor of behavioral science at a California college conducted a beer taste test among his students. The question was whether they could really tell a good beer form a bad one or their favorites form others. Many students would guess they could. A number of participants in the test guessed that way. However, the test showed that when the labels were removed from the cans, not one student could identify a single brand.[ "Beer Test," Parade, May 13, 1973, p.4.]

Speculating is making an "educated" guess, selecting an answer without any confidence that it is correct but with some evidence for believing it is probably correct. It is commonly used in matters that resist close observation. Science offers numerous examples. The traditional scientific idea of the surface of the planet Venus is one. Because that planet is usually covered with dense clouds, scientists until recently were unable to observe its surface. On the basis of their calculations of erosion rates, they speculated it was quite smooth. But with the development of new radar-mapping techniques, they learned that their speculation was incorrect – Venus is heavily pockmarked with craters.[ "Venus Is Pockmarked," Binghamton press, Auguest 5, 1973, p.2A.]

Each of the above examples of assuming, guessing, and speculating concerns ideas that were incorrect. It is possible of course, for the ideas to be correct. But even when they are, it is wrong to say the people knew the truth, for as noted previously, to know means not only to have the correct answer but to be aware that we have it.

ACTIVE AND PASSIVE KNOWING

We can achieve knowledge either actively or passively. We achieve it actively by direct experience, by testing and proving an idea (as in a scientific experiment), or by reasoning. When we do it by reasoning, we analyze a problem, consider all the facts and possible interpretations, and draw the logical conclusion.

We achieve knowledge passively by being told by someone else. Much of our learning comes passively. Most of the learning that happens in the classroom and the kind that happens when we watch TV news reports or read newspapers or magazines is passive. Conditioned as we are to passive learning, it's not surprising that we depend on it in our everyday communication with friends and co-workers.

Unfortunately, passive learning has a serious defect. It makes us tend to accept uncritically what we are told. Of course, much that we are told is little more than hearsay and rumor.

Did you every play the game "Rumor"? it begins with one person's writing down a message but not showing it to anyone. Then the person whispers it, word for word, to another person. That person, in turn, whispers it to still another, and so on, through all the people playing the game. The last person writes down the message word for word as he or she hears it. Then the two written statements are compared. What is usually discovered? The original message has changed, often dramatically, by passing from person to person.

That's what happens in daily life. No two words have precisely the same shades of meaning. Therefore, the simple fact that people repeat a story in their own words rather than in exact quotation changes the story. Then, too, most people listen imperfectly. And many enjoy adding their own creative touch to a story, trying to improve on it, stamping it with their own personal style. This tendency may be conscious or unconscious. Yet the effect is the same in either case – those who hear it think they know.

THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFECT KNOWLEDGE

Even the most vigorous active learning and the most critical approach to passive learning, of course, will not bring us complete and perfect knowledge. One reason is that old unanswered questions continue to resist solution, questions like what causes cancer, what approach to education is best for children, and how can we prevent crime without compromising individual rights.

Another reason is that everyday situations arise for which there are no precedents. When the brain operation known as frontal lobotomy was developed to calm raging violence in people, it raised the question of the morality of a "cure" that robbed the patient of human sensibilities. When the heart transplant and the artificial heart became realities, the issue of which patients should be given priority was created, as well as the question of how donors were be obtained. When smoking was definitely determined to be a causative factor in numerous fatal diseases, we were forced to examine the wisdom of allowing cigarette commercials to mislead TV viewers and entice them into harming themselves. More recently, when smoking in public places was shown to harm the nonsmoker as well as the smoker, a debate arose concerning the rights of smokers and nonsmokers.

Still another reason why perfect knowledge is beyond our grasp is that as generation passes to generation, knowledge is often forgotten or unwisely rejected. Some ancient Greeks knew that whales have lungs instead of gills and are therefore mammals. But later the Romans thought whales were fish, and that false notion persisted in Western minds until the seventeenth century. In that century one man suggested whales are really mammals, and another later established it as fact. The West rediscovered an item of knowledge.[ Karl-Erick Fichtelius and Sverre Sjolander, Smarter Than Man? Intelligence in Whales, Dolphins and Humans, translated by Thomas Teal (New York: Random House, 1972), p.147.]
In our time the ideas of "sin" and "guilt" have come to be regarded as useless and even harmful holdovers from Puritan times. The "new morality" urged people to put aside such old-fashioned notions are obstacles to happiness and fulfillment. Then Karl Menninger, one of America's leading psychiatrists, wrote a book called Whatever Became of Sin?[ New York: Hawthorne Books, 1973, p.4.] in which he argues that the notion of "sin" and "guilt" are good and necessary in civilized society. He says, in other words, that our age rejected those concepts too quickly and quite unwisely.

Knowledge is often thought of as dead matter stored on dusty shelves in dull libraries. Unfortunately, the hushed atmosphere of a library can suggest a funeral chapel or a cemetery. But the appearance is deceiving. The ideas on those shelves are very much alive – and often fighting furiously with one another. Consider the following cases.

The idea that Columbus was the first person from Europe, Africa, or Asia to land on the shores of North or South America hangs on tenaciously. The opposite idea challenges this again and again. (The evidence against the Columbus theory continues to mount: the discovery of ancient Japanese pottery in Ecuador, traces of visits by seafarers form Sidon in 541 B.C., as well as by the Greeks and Hebrews in A.D. 200 and by the Vikings in A.D. 874.[ Thomas Fleming, "Who Really Discovered America?" Reader's Digest, March 1973, pp. 145ff.] The most recent evidence suggests the Chinese may have discovered America by 2500 B.C.)[ "Scientists Say Chinese 'Discovered' America," The (Oneota) Star, October 31, 1981 p.2.]

The idea that a history of slavery and deprivation have caused black Americans to have less self-esteem than whites was well established. Then it was challenged by two University of Connecticut sociologists, Jerold Heiss and Susan Owens. Their studies indicate that the self-esteem of middle-class blacks is almost identical to that of middle-class whites and that the self-esteem of lower-class is higher than that of lower-class whites.[ "Shibboleth Bites Dust," Intellectual Digest, July, 1973, p.68.] The experience of many educators and social workers, it should be noted, runs counter to this finding.

The notion that when the youngest child leaves home, middle-aged parents, especially mothers, become deeply depressed and feel that life is over for them has many believers. Yet at least one study attacks that notion. It shows that many, perhaps most, parents are not depressed at all; rather, they look forward to a simpler, less demanding life.[ "Empty Nests," Intellectual Digest, July, 1973, p.68.]

Similarly, until recently most scientists were satisfied that senility is a result of the physical deterioration of the brain and is both progressive and irreversible. Then experimenters in an Alabama veterans hospital found that in many cases the symptoms of senility – confusion, disorientation, and withdrawal from reality – can be halted and even reversed by "a simple program of keeping the aged constantly in touch with the surrounding environment."[ "Psychic Senility," Intellectual Digest, May, 1973, p.68.]

Books and articles referring to athletes' "second wind" abound in every library. Yet Nyles Humphrey and Robert Ruhling of the University of Utah have presented evidence that there really is no second wind at all and that the sensation of it experienced by many athletes is merely psychological.[  Time, August 20, 1973, p.67.]

To summarize, we can feel confident we know and yet not know. We may be assuming or guessing or speculating instead. We may be confusing erroneous hearsay and rumor with fact. Even when your evidence is solid, it may be incomplete. For these reasons, we should be cautious in asserting that we know something. Only when we have examined the idea critically, verified our evidence, and thoughtfully considered other possible interpretations are we entitled to say, "I know." There is no shame in admitting we do not know something – in saying "I think" or "It seems to me." To make that admission when it is appropriate shows good sense, restraint, and intellectual honesty. These are not intellectual weaknesses, but strengths.

APPLICATIONS

In each of the following cases someone believes he or she knows something. In light of what you learned in this chapter, discuss whether the person really does.
Ted reads in the morning newspaper that a close friend of his has been arrested and charged with having burglarized a number of stores. Ted is shocked. "It's impossible, the police have made a mistake," he tells his mother. "Bob and I have been as close as brothers. I just know he's not guilty."
Ralph: Here, Harry, try my deodorant. It really stops wetness.Harry: No thanks. I'm suspicious of antiperspirants. It seems to me that anything designed to block a normal body function may do a lot of harm. I wouldn't be surprised if it caused cancer.Ralph: Don't be foolish. I know it doesn't cause cancer. Products like these are carefully tested before they're allowed to be sold. If it caused cancer, it would be banned.
Jane: I just read there's some evidence that aspirin can prevent heart attacks.Jenny: That's a lot of nonsense. I know it can't. My uncle took lots of aspirin and he died of a heart attack last year.
"Man Is Released in Wrong Rape Charges," "Traditional Idea Debunked," "Ex-Page Admits Lying About Lawmakers" – daily newspapers contain numerous stories like these, stories showing how what was "known" a week, a month, or years ago has been found to be false. Find at least three examples of such stories in current or recent newspapers.
"It ain't what a man doesn't know that makes him a fool, but what he does know that ain't so," wrote Josh Billings, the nineteenth-century American humorist. Recall as many occasions as you can in which your experience has verified his words.
A court case pitting the U.S. government against the American Indian Movement was conducted quietly in South Dakota in late 1982. the government sought to end the Indian group's twenty-month occupation of public land in the Black Hills National Forest. The Indians claimed the area is a holy land to them – their birthplace, the graveyard of their ancestors, and the center of their universe – and therefore should be turned into a permanent, religion-based Indian community.[ David Egner, "Sioux Fight to Keep Black Hills Holy Land," Binghamton Press, December 7, 1982, p.5A.] The government maintained the Indians have no legal claim to the land. What factors do you think should be considered in a case like this, and what solution would best serve the interests of justice? In answering, be sure to distinguish carefully between what you know and what you assume, guess, or speculate. If your knowledge is very limited, you may wish to do some research.
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) failed to gain the legislative support necessary to be passed into law. Its opponents believe that wisdom prevailed. Its sponsors, however, attribute its defeat to apathy and ignorance. What is your position? Do you believe the ERA is a worthy addition to the U.S. Constitution? In answering, be sure to distinguish carefully between what you know and what you assume, guess, or speculate. If your knowledge is very limited, you may wish to do some research.
In recent years there has been much discussion of the insanity plea as a legal defense. Many believe it should be abolished, but many others regard it as an essential part of any reasonable criminal justice system. What is your position? In answering, be sure to distinguish carefully between what you know and what you assume, guess, or speculate. If your knowledge is very limited, you may wish to do some research.
Group discussion exercise: Decide whether you know the answer to each of the following questions. Discuss your decisions with two or three classmates. Be sure to distinguish knowing from guessing or assuming.
Most criminals come from lower economic backgrounds.
Black propel are victims of crimes more often than white people.
The U.S. Constitution guarantees every citizen the right to own a handgun.
Violence in the media is responsible for real-life violence.

夜的黑

Opinion is a word that is often used carelessly today. It is used to refer to matters of taste, belief, and judgment. This casual use would probably cause little confusion if people didn't attach too much importance to opinion. Unfortunately, most do attach great importance to it. "I have as much right to my opinion as you to yours" and "Everyone's entitled to his or her opinion" are common expressions. In fact, anyone who would challenge another's opinion is likely to be branded intolerant.

Is that label accurate? Is it intolerant to challenge another's opinion? It depends on what definition of opinion you have in mind. For example, you may ask a friend, "What do you think of the new Buicks?" And he may reply, "In my opinion, they're ugly." In this case, it would not only be intolerant to challenge his statement but foolish, for it's obvious that by opinion he means his personal preference, a matter of taste. And as the old saying goes, "It's pointless to argue about matters of taste."

However, consider this very different use of the term. A newspaper reports that the Supreme Court has delivered its opinion in a controversial case. Obviously the justices did not state their personal preferences, their mere likes and dislikes. They stated their considered judgment, painstakingly arrived at after thorough inquiry and deliberation.

Most of what is referred to as opinion falls somewhere between these two extremes. It is not an expression of taste. Nor is it careful judgment. Yet it may contain elements of both. It is a view or belief more or less casually arrived at, with or without examination of the evidence.

Is everyone entitled to his or her opinion? In a few country this is not only permitted but guaranteed. In Great Britain, for example, there is still a Flat Earth Society. As the name implies, the members of this organization believe that the earth is not spherical but flat. In this country, too, each of us is free to take as bizarre a position as we please about any matter we choose. When the telephone operator announces, "That'll be ninety-five cents for the first three minutes," you may respond, "No, it won't – it'll be twenty-eight cents." When the service station attendant notifies you, "Your oil is down a quart," you may reply, "Wrong – it's up three."

Being free to hold an opinion and express it does not, of course guarantee favorable consequences. The operator may hang up on you. The service station attendant may threaten you with violence.

Acting on our opinions carries even less assurance. Consider the case of the California couple who took their eleven-year-old diabetic son to a faith healer. Secure in their opinion that the man had cured the boy, they threw away his insulin. Three days later the boy died. They remained unshaken in their belief, expressing the opinion that God would raise the boy from the dead. The police arrested them, charging them with manslaughter.[ "Couple Awaits Resurrection of Their Son," Binghamton Press, August 27, 1973, p.11A. Also, "Two Arrested in Son's ;Faith Heal" Death," Binghamton Press, August 30, 1973, p.8A.] The law in such matters is both clear and reasonable. We are free to act on our opinions only so long as, in doing so, we do not harm others.

OPINIONS CAN BE MISTAKEN

It is tempting to conclude that, if we are free to believe something, it must have some validity. That, however, is not the case. Free societies are based on the wise observation that people have an inalienable right to think their own thoughts and make their own choices. But this fact in no way suggests that the thoughts they think and the choices they make will be reasonable.

Evidence that opinions can be mistaken is all around us. The weekend drinker often has the opinion that as long as he doesn't drink during the week, he is not an alcoholic. The person who continues driving with the oil light flashing on the dashboard may have the opinion that the problem being signaled can wait until  next month's service appointment. The student who quits school at age sixteen may have the opinion that an early entry into the job market ultimately improves job security. Yet however deeply and sincerely such opinions are held, the are wrong.

Research shows that people can be mistaken even when they are making a special effort to judge objectively. Sometimes their errors are caused by considerations to subtle they are unaware of them. For example, before Taster's Choice coffee was introduced, it was tested and sampled with three different labels – brown, yellow, and red. People who sampled the coffee in the container with the brown label reported that it was too strong and kept them awake at night. People who sampled the yellow-labeled coffee found it weak and watery. Those who sampled the red-labeled coffee judged it just the right strength and delicious. All this even though the coffee in all the jars was exactly the same. The people had been subconsciously influenced by the color of the label![ "20/20," ABC News, July 22, 1982]

EVEN EXPERTS CAN BE WRONG

History records numerous occasions when the expert opinion has been the wrong opinion. In ancient times the standard medical opinion was that headaches were caused by demons inside the skull. The accepted treatment ranged opening the skull to let the demons out to giving medicines derived from cow's brain and goat dung. (The American Indians preferred beaver testicles.)[ "Aid for Aching Heads," Time, June 5, 1972, p.51.]

When the idea of inoculating people against such diseases as smallpox first arrived in the colonies in the early 1900s, most authorities regarded it as nonsense. Among them were Benjamin Franklin and a number of the men who later founded Harvard Medical School. Against the authorities stood a relatively unknown man who didn't even have a medical degree, Zabdiel Boylston, whose opinion was proved right? Not the experts' but Zabdiel Boylston's.[ Francis D. Moore, "Therapeutic Innovation: Ethical Boundaries…," Daedalus, Spring 1969, pp.504-05]

In 1890 a Nobel prize-winning bacteriologist, Dr. Robert Koch, reported that he had found a substance that would cure tuberculosis. When it was injected into patients, though, it was found to cause further illness and even death.

In 1904 psychologist G. Stanley Hall expressed his professional opinion that when women engage in strenuous mental activity, particularly with men, they experience a loss of mammary function and interest in motherhood, as well as decreased fertility. If they subsequently have children, the children will tend to be sickly.[ Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Sociology, Sex, Crim, Religion, and Education, Volumes 1 and 2 (New York: Appleton, 1904).]

Between 1919 and 1922 the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City bought seventeen gold vessels that experts determined were authentic treasures from a 3,500-year-old Egyptian tomb. In 1982 they were discovered to be twentieth-century fakes.[ "Egyptian Artifacts Termed Fakes," The (Oneonta) Star, June 16, 1982, p.2.]

In 1928 a drug called thorotrast was developed and used to outline certain organs of the body so that clearer X rays could be taken. Nineteen years later, doctors learned that even small doses of the drug caused cancer.

In 1959 a sedative called thalidomide was placed on the market. Many physicians prescribed it for pregnant women. Then, when a large number of babies were born deformed, medical authorities realized that thalidomide was to blame.

Psychiatrists often agree on the symptoms of particular mental disorders and have little difficulty reaching very similar professional opinions about particular cases. In some cases, however, those opinions may not be completely trustworthy. One man, Garrett Trapnell, has committed numerous crimes without ever spending a day in prison. His secret? He learned how to fool psychiatrists by playing the role of a paranoid schizophrenic, getting judged incompetent and assigned to mental institution, and then escaping. When he revealed his trickery, of course, some psychiatrist claimed he really was insane and his story merely sounded believable. But soon afterward the possibility that he was correct was underlined when three men and five women conducted an experiment to determine whether the sane could be distinguished form the insane in psychiatric hospitals. They succeeded in faking symptoms of mental disorders and were admitted to a number of mental hospitals in five eastern and western states.[ "Which Psychiatrist Can a Jury Believe?" New York Times, January 21, 1973, Sec. 4, p.7.]

KINDS OF ERROR

There are four general kinds of error that can corrupt anyone's opinions. Francis Bacon classified them as follows: (1) errors or tendencies to error common among all people by virtue of their being human, (2) errors that come from human communication and the limitations of language, (3) errors in the general fashion or attitude of an age, (4) errors posed to an individual by a particular situation.[ Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, Book I, 1620. For further discussion of these errors, see The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Book I (New York: Macmillan, 1967), pp.237-38.]

Some people, of course, are more prone to errors than others. John Locke observed that these people fall into three groups. He described them as follows:
Those who seldom reason at all, but think and act as those around them do – parents, neighbors, the clergy, or anyone else they admire and respect. Such people want to avoid the difficulty that accompanies thinking of themselves.
Those who are determined to let passion rather than reason govern their lives. Those people are influenced only by reasoning that supports their prejudices.
Those who sincerely follow reason, but lack sound, overall good sense, and so do not look at all sides of an issue. They tend to talk with one type of person, read one type of book, and so are exposed to only one viewpoint.[ John Lock, The Conduct of the Understanding, part 3.]

To Locke's list we should add one more type – people who never bother to reexamine an opinion once it has been formed. These people are often the most error-prone of all, for they forfeit all opportunity to correct mistaken opinions when new evidence arises.

INFORMED VERSUS UNINFORMED OPINION

If experts can, like the rest of us, be wrong, why are their views more highly valued than the views of nonexperts? Many people wonder about this, and some conclude that it is a waste of time to consult the experts. Let's look at some situation and see if this conclusion is reasonable.

What are the effects of hashish on those who smoke it? We could ask a person who never saw or smelled it, let alone smoked it. It would, of course, make better sense to get the opinion of a smoker or to take a poll of a large number of smokers. Better still would be the opinion of one or more trained observers, research scientists who have conducted studies of the effects of hashish smoking. (At least one such group, a team of army doctors, has found that heavy use of hashish leads to severe lung damage. Also, if the smoker is predisposed to schizophrenia, it can cause long-lasting episodes of that disorder.)[ "Hashaholics," Time, July 24, 1972, p.53.]

A giant quasar is positioned on what may be the edge of our universe, 10 billion light years away from us.[ Walter Sullivan, "New Object Seen on Universe Edge," New York Times, June 10, 1973, p.76] (To calculate the distance in miles, just multiply the speed of light, 186,000 miles per second, times the number of seconds in a day, 86,400; net, multiply that answer times the number of days in a year, 365; finally, multiply that answer by 10,000,000,000.) The pinpoint of light viewed by the astronomers has been streaking through space for all those years and has just reached us. The quasar may very well have ceased to exist millions and millions of years ago. Did it? It may take millions and millions of years before we can say. If we wanted to find out more about this quasar or about quasars in general, we could stop someone on a street corner and ask about it, and that person would be free to offer an opinion. But it would be more sensible to ask an astronomer.

Can a whale communicate with another whale? If so, how far can he transmit his message? Would our auto mechanic have an opinion on this matter? Perhaps. And so might our grocer, dentist, banker. But no matter how intelligent these people are, chances are their opinions about whales are not very well informed. The people whose opinions would be valuable would be those who have done some research with whales. (They would tell us that the humpback whales can make a variety of sounds. In addition to clicking noises, they make creaking and ganging and squeaking noises. They've been found to make these sounds for as long as several minutes at a time, at an intensity of 100 to 110 decibels, and for a distance of 25,000 miles.)[ Karl-Erick Fichtelius and Svere Sjolander, Smarter Than Man? Intelligence in Whales, Dophins and humans, translated by Thomas Teal (New York: Random House, 1972), pp. 135-36.]

Similar examples could be cited from every field of knowledge: from antique collecting to ethics, from art to criminology. All would support the same view: that by examining the opinions of informed people before making up our minds, we broaden our perspective, see details we might not see by ourselves, and consider facts we would otherwise be unaware of. No one can know everything about everything; there is simply not enough time to learn. Consulting those who have given their special attention to the field of knowledge in question is therefore not a mark of dependence or irresponsibility but of efficiency and good sense.

FORMING SOUND OPINIONS

It's natural for us to form opinions. We are constantly receiving sensory impressions and responding to them, first on the level of feelings, then on the level of thought. Even if we wanted to escape having opinions, we couldn't. nor should we want to. One of the things that makes human beings vastly more complex and interesting than trees or cows is their ability to form opinions.

This ability has two sides, however, it can either lift us to wisdom or topple us to absurdity. Here are three helpful tips to ensure that your opinions will be sound:

Base your opinions on careful observation rather than on habit or impulse. In particular, use your critical thinking skills in forming them.
From time to time, reexamine old opinions in the light of new knowledge. If you find that an opinion is no longer reasonable, modify it accordingly.
Do not mistake familiarity for soundness. Once you've formed an opinion, it's bound to seem solid to you – the very act of forming it shapes it to your outlook. The test to apply is not how comfortable you feel having the opinion but how well it fits the reality it is supposed to represent.

APPLICATIONS

Read the following dialogue carefully. Then decide whether anything said violates the ideas in the chapter. Identify any erroneous notions and explain in your own words how they are in error:
Fred: There was this discussion in class today that really bugged me.
Art: Yeah? What was it about?
Fred: Teenage sex. The question was whether having sex whenever we please with whomever we please is harmful to teenagers. Some people said yes. Others said it depends on the circumstances.
Art: What did you day?
Fred: I said it doesn't do any harm to anybody, that parents use that story to scare us. Then the teacher asked me what evidence I had to back up my idea.
Art: What did you tell him?
Fred: I said I didn't need any evidence because it's my opinion. Sex is a personal matter, I said, and I've got a right to think anything I want about it. My opinions are as good as anybody else's.
Think of an instance in which you or someone you know formed an opinion that later proved incorrect. State the opinion and explain in what way it was incorrect.
Each of the following issues is controversial – that is, it tends to excite strong disagreement among people. State and support your opinion about each issue, applying what you learned in this chapter.
In divorce cases, what guidelines should the courts use in deciding which parent gets custody of the children?
Until what age should children be spanked (if indeed they should be spanked at all)?
Should the minimum drinking age be sixteen in all states?
In what situation, if any, should the United States make the first strike with nuclear weapons?
Do evil spirits exist? If so, can they influence people's actions?
Does the end ever justify the means?
A high school junior invited his thirty-five-year-old neighbor, the mother of four children, to his prom. The woman was married and her husband approved of the date. However, the school board ruled that the boy would be denied admission to the dance if he took her.[ "A Current Affair," Fox TV, April 28, 1989.] What your opinion of the board's decision?
Group discussion exercise: Read the following dialogue carefully. Then discuss it with two or three of your classmates. Determine which opinion of the issue is more reasonable. Be sure to base your decision on evidence rather than mere preference.
Background Note: A Rochester, New York Lawyer has issued a court challenge to the practice of charging women half-price for drinks during "ladies' nights" at bars. He argues that the practice is a form of ex discrimination against men.[ "Bars' Ladies' Nights Called Reverse Sexism," Binghamton Press, January 12, 1983, p.5B.]
Henrietta: That lawyer must be making a joke against feminism. He can't be serious.
Burt: Why not? It's clearly a case of discrimination.
Henrietta: Look, we both know why ladies' nights are scheduled in bars: as a gimmick to attract customers. The women flock to the bars to get cheap drinks, and the men flock there because the women are there. It's no different from other gimmicks, such as mud-wrestling contests and "two for the price of one" cocktail hours.
Burt: Sorry, Hank. It's very different from two-for-one cocktail hours, where a person of either sex can buy a cocktail at the same price. Ladies' nights set a double standard based on sex and that's sex discrimination, pure and simple.
Henrietta: so now you're a great foe of discrimination. How come you're not complaining that men haven't got an equal opportunity to participate half-naked in mud-wrestling contest? And why aren't you protesting the fact that women are paid less for doing the same jobs men do? You're a phony, Burt, and you make me sick.
Burt: Name calling is not a sign of a strong intellect. And why you should get so emotional over some lawyer's protest, I can't imagine. I guess it goes to show that women are more emotional than men.

夜的黑

这是书的第一部分，剩下的，就不挨个发出来了。自己下。

annsong

刚读了一小段，不错。全部读完后再跟贴。谢谢啦！

ilovemaya

下了慢慢看。谢谢楼主！