By playing the "doubting game," you can come to realize your own opinions and positions by reacting against those of another writer, by engaging in what Elbow calls a "dialectic of propositions" Elbow's article is a plea for a more balanced approach that also includes the "believing game.
You intentionally believe everything--taking in a text, as Elbow says, the way an owl eats a mouse--and trust your "organism" eventually to sort out the useful from the unuseful Ultimately, the philosophy of the believing game sees ideas not as inherently true or false, but as tools: "By believing an assertion," writes Elbow, "we can get farther and farther into it, see more and more things in terms of it or "through" it, use it as a hypothesis to climb higher and higher to a point from which more can be seen and understood" The Believing and Doubting Games In his book Writing Without Teachers , Peter Elbow introduces the concept of the "believing" and "doubting" games--complementary methods of approaching texts which he claims are both vital to the "intellectual enterprise" Work Cited Elbow, Peter.
Play it when a student offers a view that others find peculiar or even stupid. The teacher can interrupt the session for ten minutes' worth of believing.
What does the student feel and see? Am I sure I understand? What values underlie this view? Which do I acknowledge as valid, as important? How can this point of view possibly be right? Entering into and really experiencing unfamiliar or irritating points of view takes time and effort. But it invites listening, instead of arguing; it fosters empathy rather than antagonisms. It encourages an understanding that there can be competing truths, each of which has some value; that, as Elbow writes, "Certainty is rarely if ever possible and we increase the likelihood of getting things wrong if we succumb to the hunger for it.
We understand nothing except in so far as we understand the questions behind it. A necessary complement to the believing game is the doubting game. Just as the former asks for a systematic, disciplined effort to believe a point of view no matter how unfamiliar or ridiculous it may seem, so the latter invites students to engage in a systematic, disciplined effort to inquire into or doubt a point of view no matter how familiar and reasonable it may seem.
The doubting game begins with learning how to ask and to analyze questions. The subject may be an issue discussed in a history text, a bill being debated in Congress, any controversial issue, but in this case will be the excerpt from "Civil Disobedience. The teacher can begin by inviting student questions about it, questions, which if answered well, might lead to a better understanding of civil disobedience, questions that will test its worth. Some sample questions students might ask:.
What would happen to our society if everyone who thought a law was unjust broke it? The next step is to analyze the questions to help students understand that: 1 clarity is vital; 2 questions are instruments of perception; the nature of a question helps to determine the nature of an answer; 3 some questions are better than others "better," in this context, meaning more helpful in leading one to a fuller understanding of civil disobedience.
The class should analyze their questions using the following criteria:. Do any questions require a strictly factual answer? Can you get information that enables you to answer with reasonable certainty? How do you know? Do any questions contain assumptions c, e If so, are these assumptions reasonable to make? If they are not, how might the question be reworded? Rigor in the process of question analysis is essential. For example, question e makes a triple set of assumptions: that government officials are aware of unjust laws; that they eventually remedy them; that they take too much time doing so.
Once students recognize such a set of assumptions they can be helped to develop other questions that might lead to worthwhile inquiry. For example: Is there any law you know of that at least some US officials regard as unjust? If so, which officials and what law? Students might know that Senators McCain and Feingold have sponsored legislation to correct what they regard as unjust campaign finance laws.
Have such officials done anything to remedy this situation? If so, what? If not, why not? What are some of the reasons they have not yet succeeded in changing the law? Obviously, pursuing answers to such questions will take time. Some of the answers will be factual; others will require facts and opinions, perhaps opinions of experts who know what it takes to get a law passed on campaign finance reform.
That, in turn, raises questions about experts and expertness: What makes a person an expert on a subject? How can you know if the person has these qualifications? How can you know if the person has any bias you should take into consideration as you examine the person's views?
Having clarified the questions and determined which are most useful, the students can begin an inquiry. The teacher has several choices about how to proceed. One might be to assign common class readings bearing on the questions to be answered and then to discuss them with the class.
A second could be to divide the class into groups, assigning each certain questions to be answered in a presentation to the class. Still another would be to assign questions to individual students. In any of these assignments an important consideration will be the amount and difficulty of work required.
These, too, can be worth further examination and discussion; 3 The teacher will also note what class work is necessary on a number of critical thinking skills. Are they clear about assumptions? How well do they identify central issues? What help might they need in determining the relevance and reliability of evidence? Like the believing game, the doubting game requires repeated experiences if students are to become good questioners and inquirers.
Experience with the two games need not focus only on current or historical issues. An English class can play the games with poems and novels; science classes can believe and doubt competing points of view on environmental issues; a mathematics class can do the same on the use of statistics to support differing opinions. Having believed, doubted, and investigated further, students can now work at integrating their thinking.
Have the students' experiences opened possibilities for finding some common ground on an issue? Are they feeling and thinking somewhat differently than they were originally? What does this mean for one's actions in a world where most social issues are complex and certainty about them is "rarely if ever possible"? Following a discussion of such questions and as a conclusion to their work, students can subject themselves and the issue they have examined to some written analysis.
What was their opinion before they began the study? Have students take another look at what they wrote earlier. Are their answers to the questions any different now? Introduction: Are the men incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay prisoners of war? An answer depends upon how one defines "prisoners of war," and people can and do disagree about them.
So what is the "real definition"? Since people are the only sources of word meanings, there is no "real meaning" to be found. This is true not only for such potentially controversial terms as "terrorist" and "freedom fighter" but also for such seemingly innocent words as "girl. It is not words that have meanings but we who give them meanings. Ask students to read the following definitions of "friend" and then to determine into which of the categories below them each falls.
If you want to know what a friend is, read the Biblical story of David and Jonathan. Definition by synonym e Definition by "word as word" d, f Definition by attitude a, b, c Definition by operation or by what is happening c. Help students to understand that there are multiple ways of defining words, that each serves a different purpose. It was six men of Indostan To learning much inclined, Who went to see the Elephant Though all of them were blind , That each by observation Might satisfy his mind.
The First approached the Elephant, And happening to fall Against his broad and sturdy side, At once began to bawl: "God bless me! The Second, feeling of the tusk, Cried, "Ho! To me 'tis very clear This wonder of an Elephant Is very like a spear!
The Third approached the animal, And happening to take The squirming trunk within his hands, Thus boldly up and spake: "I see," quoth he, " the Elephant Is very like a snake! The Fourth reached out an eager hand, And felt above the knee: "What most this wondrous beast is like Is mighty plain," quoth he; "'Tis clear enough the Elephant Is very like a tree!
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said, "E'en the blindest man Can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can, This marvel of an Elephant Is very like a fan! The Sixth no sooner had begun About the beast to grope, Then, seizing on the swinging tail That fell within his scope, "I see," quoth he, "the Elephant Is very like a rope! And so these men of Indostan Disputed loud and long, Each in his own opinion Exceeding stiff and strong. Though each was partly in the right They all were in the wrong!
For discussion: How does the poem suggest any problems of defining? Like the men of Indostan, each of us by our individuality is limited in what we can see. What is "partly in the right" about each of the definitions of "friend" even if none is "in the wrong"?
Divide students into groups. Ask them to share their definitions and then to pick what they think is the best one. Have each of the definitions chosen read to the class and the best one selected. Students need to recognize that the chosen definition is not the final word, that it limits the group in certain ways but at least allows them to talk about an "unjust law" from the point of view of a shared definition.
Apply the class definition to one or more of the following laws that at least some people have regarded as unjust: the British tax on tea and other items in colonial days; the law allowing only white men to vote; the fugitive slave law; current laws on abortion, marijuana, the income tax.
Keeping in mind the definition the class has agreed upon, answer the following question in one well-developed paragraph: If you regarded a law as unjust, would you break that law?
In "Civil Disobedience" Thoreau states his belief that some laws are unjust. He tells his readers to break the law if it requires one to be "an agent of injustice.
Reading the essay verifies that these are his views. Of course Thoreau's statements themselves are judgmental. The words "unjust" in the first sentence and "injustice" in the second as well as his advice about breaking the law are judgmental. So we have factual statements that include Thoreau's opinions.
But what about such statements as, "Thoreau published 'Civil Disobedience' in He is also the author of 'Self Reliance'"? These sentences are factual in form but are inaccurate. It is therefore useful to use instead the term "report," which may be defined as a verifiable statement that excludes judgmental language but that may or may not be factually accurate. The following sentences raise still other issues: "Thoreau was jailed for opposing the war with Mexico. Thoreau's famous comment that "any man more right than his neighbor constitutes a majority of one already" includes a judgmental term, "more right," and what looks like a report, "a majority of one," but is a rather subtly stated opinion.
Students need to discuss such matters and gain sophistication in distinguishing among different kinds of statements, an essential critical thinking ability. To help students understand the distinctions between reports accurate, partially accurate and false and judgments, the teacher might have them analyze readings and use such exercises as the following. There are nine hundred and ninety-nine patrons of virtue to one virtuous man. Note to Teacher: The first five sentences are from "Civil Disobedience, " the next three from "Walden," the last two invented.
Directions : Write five reports and five judgments about "Civil Disobedience. Directions : Write a short paragraph beginning with a judgmental statement about "Civil Disobedience" with which you agree and support it with three reports. Then write another short paragraph, beginning this time with a judgmental statement about the essay with which you disagree but support with three reports. This lesson was written for TeachableMoment.
July 23, Alan Shapiro. SEL and RP. Teaching Strategies. From Civil Disobedience "Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?
0コメント