Cultural Heroes in Difficult Times

Cultural Heroes in Difficult Times

Thank you to those who told me that they missed my columns during the last few months. [Summer, 2012, ed.] We were getting into the last convulsions of some very bitter political campaigns. I felt strongly tempted to respond to the upwelling of political partisanship by fighting a battle of ideas in print. Lord, some of those letters to the editor got me steamed. Instead, I put a bumper sticker on my car that said: “You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.”

I almost got sucked into arguing with the undoubting faithful from the other side. That has variously been compared to “confronting a shadow in a knife fight,” “grabbing the ears of an angry dog” and “throwing pearls before swine.” Nothing good can come of it.

On the other hand, I believe we should persistently doubt our own assumptions, opinions and preconceived notions. It’s like I used to tell my boys, “It’s okay to talk to yourself and it’s even okay to argue with yourself, but when you start to lose those arguments, it’s time to start asking new questions.”

Essay: Accurate thinking

Information and comments on the essay:

Accurate thinking

From the book: Chum for Thought: Throwing Ideas into Dangerous Waters by David Satterlee

Find out more, including where to buy books and ebooks

Read or download this essay as a PDF file at: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4eNv8KtePyKMV95WDFkc3I0YjQ/edit?usp=sharing

Heinrich #Scholz Walter R. #Fuchs, #Cybernetics for the Modern Mind

Chum For Thought:
Throwing Ideas into Dangerous Waters

Accurate thinking

I’ve been carrying this hand-written note around with me since high school. Note to parents: What is YOUR impressionable young boy or girl reading when they think you’re not looking?

“There are people who think in a way which I would simply call “accurate” thinking. They are people with persistent, highly controlled intellectual habits. These people can be recognized by four characteristics:

“They remain inexorably silent if they have nothing to say which is at least formulated in such a way that it could be tested.

“They only make assertions about something when whatever this may be will stand up to a possible subsequent test; with the reservation, however, that sometime in the distant future something could be discovered that might lead to a revaluation of their statement.

“They distinguish precisely in what they say between that which they can prove and that which they cannot prove.

“They object relentlessly to something being said in such a way that it cannot be tested, or if it can be tested it will not stand up to a rigorous repeat-test.”

Heinrich Scholz; mathematician, theologian

Quoted in:
Walter R. Fuchs, Cybernetics for the Modern Mind, p. 47, Rupert Hart-Davis Educational Publications and The Macmillan Company , 1971 (Translation)