Curiosity and Fair-Mindedness

Curiosity and Commitment to Learning

A lack of curiosity is a common trait among ignorant people. In fact, that’s why they’re ignorant. They aren’t interested in ways of thinking different from their own, or in learning about new realms of knowledge. The result is that they don’t learn much. And that’s a problem, because if you want to think clearly about most topics, you have to have a certain level of background knowledge. If I want to have an informed opinion on monetary policy, for example, it isn’t enough for me to know the general skills of good reasoning. I also need to know some actual facts about monetary policy. You can’t have an informed opinion if you aren’t informed. 

Unfortunately, I’m not curious about monetary policy, which shows that curiosity can’t get you everywhere. Some fields are both important AND boring, and that means that if you want to think clearly about them, you have to commit yourself to learning about them. That can be about as much fun as eating sawdust, but such is life.

Fair-Mindedness

Have you ever seen a social media debate that goes something like this?:

Ed: “You gun nuts must think it’s just fine for school kids to be gunned down!!”

Fred: “You idiot! You gun grabbers just want to take away everyone’s guns to pave the way for communism!”

Neither Ed nor Fred seem to be at their most reasonable there, but the fact is, neither is likely to believe what the other accuses him of believing. Fred is probably not a psychopath who thinks school shootings are OK, and Ed is most likely not interested in outlawing all guns, or in living in a communist regime. Both are committing the straw man fallacy. They ignore whatever real arguments the other might have, and replace them with ridiculous caricatures that are easier to attack. It’s called the “straw man” fallacy because it’s easier to knock over a straw man than a real one. And it might even impress the audience, who may not see the difference. But nothing is really gained in this exchange. It’s like watching the Three Stooges hooting and slapping each other. It can admittedly be entertaining, but it’s definitely not educational.

If Ed and Fred listened to each others’ actual points of view, instead of attacking the straw man versions, they might have a more productive discussion. And if one of them really does have a better point than the other, he won’t be able to demonstrate it by knocking over straw men. He’ll need to knock over the other guy’s real arguments, and that’s a lot harder. That’s one reason critical thinkers need to be fair-minded (another is that most people really aren’t evil and crazy). Philosophers talk about using the principle of charity, which means that if someone makes a claim, you should interpret it in the most charitable light. Don’t assume they have bad intentions, or that their argument is weaker than it really is. If you aren’t sure what they mean, ask for clarification. Restate it in the strongest firm you can. Then, if you can refute the strong version of their argument (sometimes called a steel man), you’ve really done something. And if you can’t, you’ve encountered a strong argument that needs to be taken seriously.