The morning after my last post, I woke up with this song in my head:

“Right and Wrong”
by Joe Jackson

Stop everything
I think I hear the President
The pied piper of the TV screen
Is gonna make it simple
And he’s got it all mapped out
And illustrated with cartoons
Too hard for clever folks to understand
They’re more used to words like:
Ideology…
But they say it’s not the issue
Ideology…
They’re not talkin’ ’bout right and left
They’re talkin’ ’bout

Right and wrong – do you know the difference
Right and wrong – do you know the difference
‘tween the right and the left and the east and the west
What you know and the things that you’ll never see

So whatcha think
You like the Yankees or the Mets this year?
And what about this latest war of words
And what about the Commies
I saw the news last night
All illustrated with cartoons
So when they come with that opinion poll
They better not use words like
Ideology…
Or try to tell me ’bout the issues
Ideology…
Whose side are you on
‘Cause we’re talkin’ ’bout

Right and wrong – do you know the difference
Right and wrong – do you know the difference
‘tween the right and the left and the east and the west
What you know and the things that you’ll never see

Right and wrong – do you know the difference
Right and wrong – do you know the difference
‘tween the right and the left and the east and the west
What you know and the things that you’ll never see

The lack of focus on critical thinking skills is possibly the greatest deficiency in our educational system. Over the course of the next year or so, with a mind to the political process, I’m going to write a few pieces about critical thinking. This is the first one.

I was watching a movie today on the topic of media bias. There was a man-on-the street interview where a gentleman expressed his feeling that the media is, in general, fair. He said, “You get both sides of the stories, the liberal side and the conservative side.”

I found this very curious. Why are there only two sides? And why are those the two sides? Who decided that, and why do we accept it?

Consider this simplified example. Six co-workers decide to go out to lunch together. One of them asks, “What kind of food should we eat?” Responses vary from sandwiches to Chinese to vegetarian to burgers. Which one is liberal and which is conservative? Of course, none of them is either. Nor should they be. It’s just what is.

But if someone says that vegetarian is the liberal choice, does that make it so? As soon as we accept someone else’s characterization of “sides,” or even that the very nature of the question involves some sort of dichotomy, we’re letting that person set the framework for the topic under discussion, even if such a framework really isn’t appropriate. Not every question is consistent with, or indicative of, an ideological determination.

Here’s another silly example. Let’s say somebody asks you the question, “How many legs does a spider have?” What’s the liberal answer and what’s the conservative one? The very supposition that there is a liberal or conservative answer to that question is nonsensical. In some cases, there’s just truth. You could look it up and find that a spider has eight legs.

If you happen to be of a particular ideology, and everyone who shares that ideology believes that spiders have six legs, does that mean they have six legs? Again, of course not. It just means that people in a large group can be wrong. You can share many of their beliefs and disagree about this one because you know that spiders have eight legs.

The point is, truth and ideology are not the same thing. In fact, they’re often incompatible, because very act of accepting an ideology as truth closes us off to ever learning the real truth.

In the cases where truth and ideology are in direct conflict, truth is always the higher goal, for in the end, it is the only one which is defensible. If you act based on truth, no matter the result, your actions can be deemed reasonable. But if you act based on ideology, without regard for truth, history may rightfully judge your actions as immoral. And that means that if you’re going to take any action which affects others, you have a responsibility to seek the truth.

Question everything. Seek truth.

Has anyone been watching the debates for the Presidential primaries? I’ve been pleasantly surprised to see candidates like Mike Gravel and Ron Paul getting air time, shaping the debate, and hopefully, making some voters think about the bigger issues at stake in this election. Comments?