# Should we be educating kids in logical fallacies and biases in middle/high schools? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 8, 2013, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732 "2013-02-08T20:25:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![pungi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/71c47a/32.png) [@pungi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pungi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/81 "2013-02-10T01:57:34Z")
> [@Crane](#): > > pungi, > > I have not read The Descent of Man - I will when I have the opportunity. > > Crane Crane, I’m not sure if you think I’m singling you out or something, because I’m not. I intended to post this to the thread for anyone’s edification. I’m not really interested in debating here… of course the liberal arts (grammar, logic, rhetoric) should be taught from the earliest age - that’s just self evident to me. I read things that bother me and have to say something. cheers Thumbs up on the list of cognitive biases! ---
**Author:** ![huck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@huck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/huck)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/82 "2013-02-10T02:07:57Z")
> [@Crane](#): > > Huck, > > “… but want to prevent religious distortions from being imposed on any students” > > Would critical analysis constitute ‘religious distortions’? > > Crane No, why? When I said “religious distortions” I meant claptrap like “creation science,” or recasting history to remove or gloss over wrongs that came about as a result of or in the guise of religion. I am strenuously in favor of keeping church and state, hence religion and public education, separate. And I am also of course opposed to teaching religion instead of science, or instead of any other subject. Also, I said above that I am 100% in favor of teaching (and encouraging) critical thinking and logic for and from all students. ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/83 "2013-02-10T02:47:56Z")
Agreed. Crane ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/84 "2013-02-10T04:01:38Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > Ok, I avoided this the first time, because the irony of such a naked _argumentum ad verecundium_ (appeal from authority) . . . [Not always a fallacy.](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_verecundiam) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/85 "2013-02-10T04:14:30Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Religious people think that their religion is logical or rational. That’s why they believe in it. . . . No, I don’t think so. That is not psychologically true. Some will make logical arguments for points of doctrine, but no one ever was converted by such. In the words of the Reverend Dr. Dr. Mr. M.D. David N. Meyer III, Pope of All New York City and the Great Pacific Northwest, "You do not use your **mind** to think about your **religion!"** ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/86 "2013-02-10T04:20:27Z")
> [@pungi](#): > > Also check out his follow up, The Descent of Man (1871), where he ranks races according to their likeness to gorillas. Then, proposes the extermination of races he “scientifically” defined as inferior. AND, If this was not done those races, having higher birthrates than “superior” races, would exhaust the resources needed for the survival of superior people, eventually ruining “civilization". > > I have 2 things to say: 1. Darwin was a charlatan eugenicist. 2. Hopefully you’re not Irish Darwin was the **first** theorist of biological evolution, or very nearly so. Of course he made some mistakes. And Isaac Newton was an alchemist and a writer of religious tracts; doesn’t invalidate his work in physics. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/87 "2013-02-10T04:51:39Z")
Teens are sassy enough without learning that their elders are full of shit bad thinkers. I say this should wait until college like when I was a kid. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/88 "2013-02-10T05:00:26Z")
> [@pungi](#): > > Also check out his follow up, The Descent of Man (1871), where he ranks races according to their likeness to gorillas. Then, proposes the extermination of races he “scientifically” defined as inferior. AND, If this was not done those races, having higher birthrates than “superior” races, would exhaust the resources needed for the survival of superior people, eventually ruining “civilization". > > I have 2 things to say: 1. Darwin was a charlatan eugenicist. 2. Hopefully you’re not Irish Pungi, did Darwin actually call for the extermination of inferior races in The Descent of Man? Could you quote some passages from the book where he does. ---
**Author:** ![pungi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/71c47a/32.png) [@pungi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pungi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2013, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/89 "2013-02-10T19:21:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Darwin was the **first** theorist of biological evolution, or very nearly so. Of course he made some mistakes. And Isaac Newton was an alchemist and a writer of religious tracts; doesn’t invalidate his work in physics. I do agree that Newton had tried to scientifically argue for supernatural pseudo-entities such “Absolute” space/time which were based on religious beliefs. But, I’m not sure if your comparison works here - you have to really stretch. I also agree that even the best scientist make mistakes (usually corrected through further experimentation though). Darwin simply codified what was already known to even ancient people through selective breeding (evolution) of animals and plants with a eugenicist agenda which should be taken into account when evaluating his “contributions”. I also think it’s worth noting, although it is conjecture, that religions were initially opposed to the eugenics aspect of his work which was the quickly re-routed via the Hegelian dialectic into “science” vs. “dogma”. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2013, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/90 "2013-02-11T04:00:27Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Yes. I think we should teach another thing that 99% of the students will forget before they graduate. It won’t do any good, but it will make a lot of us feel better. This. I was writing a check (I’ve repeatedly asked my bank to send me one of them new-fangled debit cards they have, but no dice. Nor card.) at WallyWorld. They have a machine that reads the routing and account numbers and prints the check, but if you ask for cash back the cashier has to manually put in the new total. My subtotal was $18.20 and I asked for $20 over. The cashier, a grown-ass man in his twenties who probably has a high school diploma, his face blank, laid his head on the register, and asked, “So how much will that be?” I said, “Thirty-eight-twenty,” and the purchase continued. Maybe before we expect students to understand logic we should make sure they understand adding by tens, which he should’ve learned in first grade. Just seems logical. ---
**Author:** ![pungi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/71c47a/32.png) [@pungi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pungi)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2013, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/91 "2013-02-11T05:18:30Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Pungi, did Darwin actually call for the extermination of inferior races in The Descent of Man? > > Could you quote some passages from the book where he does. “A most important obstacle in civilised countries to an increase in the number of men of a superior class has been strongly insisted on by Mr. Greg and Mr. Galton, namely, the fact that the very poor and reckless, who are often degraded by vice, almost invariably marry early, whilst the careful and frugal, who are generally otherwise virtuous, marry late in life, so that they may be able to support themselves and their children in comfort. . .Those who marry early produce within a given period not only a greater number of generations, but, as shewn by Dr. Duncan they produce many more children. Thus the reckless, degraded, and often vicious members of society, tend to increase at a quicker rate than the provident and generally virtuous members. Or as Mr. Greg puts the case: 'The careless, squalid, unaspiring Irishman multiplies like rabbits…”(Descent, Chapter Five: On the Development of the Intellectual and Moral Faculties During Primeval and Civilised Times: Natural selection as affecting civilised nations.) "Man scans with scrupulous care the character and pedigree of his horses, cattle, and dogs before he matches them; but when he comes to his own marriage he rarely, or never, takes any such care. . .Yet he might by selection do something not only for the bodily constitution and frame of his offspring, but for their intellectual and moral qualities. Both sexes ought to refrain from marriage if they are in any marked degree inferior in body or mind; but such hopes are Utopian and will never be even partially realised until the laws of inheritance are thoroughly known. Everyone does good service, who aids towards this end. When the principles of breeding and inheritance are better understood, we shall not hear ignorant members of our legislature rejecting with scorn a plan for ascertaining whether or not consanguineous marriages are injurious to man. . . .The advancement of the welfare of mankind is a most intricate problem: all ought to refrain from marriage who cannot avoid abject poverty for their children; for poverty is not only a great evil, but tends to its own increase by leading to recklessness in marriage. On the other hand, as Mr. Galton has remarked, if the prudent avoid marriage, whilst the reckless marry, the inferior members tend to supplant the better members of society. Man, like every other animal, has no doubt advanced to his present high condition through a struggle for existence consequent on his rapid multiplication; and if he is to advance still higher, it is to be feared that he must remain subject to a severe struggle. Otherwise he would sink into indolence, and the more gifted men would not be more successful in the battle of life than the less gifted. Hence our natural rate of increase, though leading to many and obvious evils, must not be greatly diminished by any means. There should be open competition for all men; and the most able should not be prevented by laws or customs from succeeding best and rearing the largest number of offspring. (Darwin, Descent of Man, Conclusion) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2013, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/92 "2013-02-11T06:36:08Z")
[OTOH,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_of_man#Human_races) considering the prejudices of his time, and the ["scienfic racism’](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racist) which **predated** his theories, most of what Darwin had to say about “race” in _The Descent of Man_ was extremely [Fair For Its Day.](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FairForItsDay) > [@](#): > > **Human races** > > His encounters with the natives of the Tierra del Fuego on his Beagle voyage made Darwin believe that civilization had evolved over time from a more primitive state. > The questions of what “race” was, how many human races there were, and whether they could be “mixed”, were key debates in the nascent field of anthropology in Darwin’s time. After the American Civil War (1861–1865), the questions of race and slavery were brought to the forefront in anthropology in the United States and Europe. Some scientists from the Southern U.S. published long monographs on “Why the Negro is inferior” and would soon be driven to extinction by newfound freedom, with an implication that slavery had been not only “beneficial” but “natural.”[citation needed] Darwin was a long-time abolitionist who had been horrified by slavery when he first came into contact with it in Brazil while touring the world on the Beagle voyage many years before (slavery had been illegal in the British Empire since 1833). He considered the “race question” one of the most important of his day. > > Darwin opposed the polygenism theory, developed by scientific racist discourse, which postulated that the different human races were distinct species (“polygenism”) and were likely separately “created”. To the contrary, Darwin considered that all human beings were of the same species, and that races, if they were useful markers at all, were simply “sub-species” or “variants.” This view (known as “monogenism”) was in stark contrast with the majority view in anthropology at the time. Polygeny was supported by thinkers of many backgrounds, such as the zoologist, glaciologist, and geologist Louis Agassiz, and by later thinkers who interpreted Darwin’s theory to imply that races evolved at different times or stages. Darwin viewed the differences between human races as superficial (he discusses them only in terms of skin color and hair type). Aside from the aforementioned encounter with slavery on the Beagle, Darwin also was perplexed by the “savage races” he saw in South America at Tierra del Fuego, which he saw as evidence of man’s more primitive state of civilization. During his years in London, his private notebooks were riddled with speculations and thoughts on the nature of the human races, many decades before he published Origin and Descent. > > When making his case that human races were all closely related and that the apparent gap between humans and other animals was due to closely related forms being extinct, Darwin drew on his experiences on the voyage showing that “savages” were being wiped out by “civilized” peoples. As he wrote in Descent,[3] > > > [@](#): > > > > The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, convinced by general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks incessantly occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies—between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridæ—between the elephant and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and other mammals. But all these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms that have become extinct. At some future point, not distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.[4] > > When Darwin referred to “civilised races” he was almost always describing European cultures, and apparently drew no clear distinction between biological races and cultural races in humans. Few made that distinction at the time, an exception being Alfred Russel Wallace.[3] > > Darwin also emphasized the similarities of the human races, stating: > > > [@](#): > > > > Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, &c., yet if their whole organisation be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these points are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate.[5] > > \ > > **The race debate** > > Darwin lastly applied his theory to one of the more controversial scientific questions of his day: whether the different races of human beings were of the same species or not: > > > [@](#): > > > > “The question whether mankind consists of one or several species has of late years been much agitated by anthropologists, who are divided into two schools of monogenists and polygenists. Those who do not admit the principle of evolution, must look at species either as separate creations or as in some manner distinct entities; and they must decide what forms to rank as species by the analogy of other organic beings which are commonly thus received.”[11] > > Darwin reasoned that most of the visual differences between human races were superficial—issues of skin color and hair type—and that most of the mental differences were merely cases of “civilization” or a lack of it. It was important to Darwin to relay the arguments of whether or not all races were of the same species—he had spent much of the preceding book tracing humans back to the Paleolithic age, and now he had to bring them back to the present time again. If the “savages” like those he met while on his Beagle voyage were not of the same species as civilized Englishmen, he would not be able to draw the complete continuum he felt necessary. Darwin concluded that the visual differences between races were not adaptive to any significant degree, and were more likely simply caused by sexual selection—different standards of beauty and mating amongst different people—and that all of humankind was one single species. > > He concludes that “…when the principle of evolution is generally accepted, as it surely will be before long, the dispute between the monogenists and the polygenists will die a silent and unobserved death.”[12] ---
**Author:** ![Critical1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Critical1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Critical1)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2013, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/93 "2013-02-11T08:45:43Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > This. I was writing a check (I’ve repeatedly asked my bank to send me one of them new-fangled debit cards they have, but no dice. Nor card.) at WallyWorld. They have a machine that reads the routing and account numbers and prints the check, but if you ask for cash back the cashier has to manually put in the new total. My subtotal was $18.20 and I asked for $20 over. The cashier, a grown-ass man in his twenties who probably has a high school diploma, his face blank, laid his head on the register, and asked, “So how much will that be?” I said, “Thirty-eight-twenty,” and the purchase continued. > > Maybe before we expect students to understand logic we should make sure they understand adding by tens, which he should’ve learned in first grade. Just seems logical. Dude you were at wallmart. You might as well order your steak medium rare at McDonalds. There are pleeeeeeeenty of kids who are more than smart enough to understand these concepts. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2013, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/94 "2013-02-11T17:40:44Z")
Let’s see how this will work… Liberals insist that we need a Critical Thinking Course in high schools. Conservatives angrily rejet the idea, saying this is obviously a ploy to get anti-Republican and anti-Christian propaganda taught in schools. And they’ll be right- the SDMB’s liberals don’t even TRY to pretend otherwise! Most of the posters on this thread are enthusiastic about Critical Thinking precisely BECAUSE they think it’s a great way to undermine their political opponents! ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2013, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/95 "2013-02-11T18:26:32Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Most of the posters on this thread are enthusiastic about Critical Thinking precisely BECAUSE they think it’s a great way to undermine their political opponents! You say that like it’s a bad thing. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2013, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/96 "2013-02-11T20:01:49Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > OK, this is a good point. Some of the essays should specifically be rebuttals to persuasive texts offered as prompts. This would also serve the purpose of driving home the point that texts are not simply to be consumed or memorized or regurgitated back on a test, but are meant to be engaged, challenged, and refuted or supported as warrants. I think you’ve made a lot of sense in this thread, **Kimmy**. Understanding what fallacies and cognitive biases are is great (especially if one’s goal is to understand human psychology), but a person who thinks critically should be able to spot a faulty conclusion or assertion without knowing the difference between fallacy X and fallacy Y. Intuitively it seems like the most efficient way to teach kids to think critically is to get them in the habit of arguing and describing ideas. This can be taught in English, social studies, and even math. You don’t need to have a special class set aside for this. Move the focus away from logic theory and place it on actual application. The ability to think critically should be an outcome of a curriculum that balances memorization with deductive reasoning. My wish is that people would be smart enough to formulate cogent, well-supported arguments for their positions. Progress doesn’t come from knocking down other’s ideas; it comes from creating new ones. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2013, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732/97 "2013-02-16T23:53:15Z")
Something to keep in mind, though. A logical fallacy means that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is not NECESSARILY true because of whatever particular fallacy that is mentioned. It doesn’t mean that the conclusion is absolutely false. For example, The “Appeal to Authority” fallacy: “A world famous doctor, Dr. Iknoweverything says that smoking is harmful to your health. Therefore, you should not smoke.” Now, just because the good doctor says it doesn’t necessarily make it true. But other research supports his position and makes the argument sound. People seem to misunderstand and somehow say that if there is a logical fallacy in your argument that the argument MUST be false. If there is extrinsic evidence, the logically unsound argument can be used with the extrinsic evidence to support the proposition. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-be-educating-kids-in-logical-fallacies-and-biases-in-middle-high-schools/649732.md?page=4)