If we see ourselves as promoting critical thinking skills about the world, then how will you use the most wonderful opportunity for critical analysis, namely Paul Ryan's speech from this past week.
Will you start out with Romney's spokesman Neil Newhouse statement that "We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers." See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/23/mitt-romney-_n_1836139.html What kind of discussion and discourse can one have if "facts" don't matter or that they can be what ever you want them to be? If one accepts that facts don't matter or only mean what one wants them to mean, what kind of "knowledge" can we have of the world? What role does science play in such a world if "scientific facts" can be whatever we want them to be? Back to Ryan's speech, what source can one use to illustrate its problems? Will it be this: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/30/paul-ryans-speech-in-three-words/ Or this: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-30/ryan-accused-of-falsities-in-speech-by-obama-team-fact-checkers Or this: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/08/30/factually-challenged-paul-ryan-accused-over-errors-and-half-truths-in-rnc-speech/ Or this: http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120901/Complaints-grow-about-assertions-in-Ryans-speech.aspx Or are we in a "Post Truth" politics era; see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-truth-cmon-this-is-a-political-convention/2012/08/31/88550120-f3c0-11e1-892d-bc92fee603a7_blog.html Or have we accepted lying as an integral component of politics and that in the "game" (sports metaphor) of politics, whatever allows you to win is fair (remember, if the referee didn't see it, it never happened; if the referee got the call wrong, well, them's the breaks)? No one points out the lie because, like the apathetic bystander who does nothing to help someone in apparent distress, one is more concerned about their own well-being than the well-being of others or the truth. So, how best to make this into a "teachable moment"? NOTE: I'd post this over on PSYCHTEACHER but members of APA have already been warned by APA about not being "political" (i.e., promoting particular candidates/position, criticizing politicians, etc.) because that could endanger it, quoting from one of their emails: |Under the law, Divisions and their officers, as part of a charitable organization |that enjoys the benefits of 501(c) (3) status, are prohibited from engaging in |any action that could be construed as endorsement of or opposition to a |candidate for public office by the Division. Well, I guess that's the final nail in APA's scientific coffin. I wonder if they got 30 pieces of silver to cover the costs of emailing the notices. -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=20147 or send a blank email to leave-20147-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
