|
Makale Özeti:
|
The study argues for the claim that a correct argumentation, i.e. a non-fallacious or good reasoning, should be the essential part of the education process, which is not always the case. The bad argumentation makes human standards and interpersonal relationships worse, and leads to the growth of social conflicts and an instable society. If the legislature, executive and judiciary branches of power did not listen to good arguments, our lives would not be as good as they are since the state might pass bad, dangerous and unjust laws. A person trained in critical thinking starting in their youth would be able to tell a difference between good and bad arguments and recognize the fact that accepting the former and dropping the latter is the only way to avoid the above mentioned negative characteristics of a society. By teaching pupils how to employ the prescribed standards of a correct argumentation using everyday examples helps them to avoid adopting certain views on the ground of their popularity, affections produced in observers, their popularity etc., which are classic examples of logical fallacies. An early training in critical thinking could make obvious the fact that, a democracy consisting among other things also in a social, racial and gender equality, after all, does not mean that sometimes left arguments win and sometimes the right ones, and that there is no difference between them in the long run.
|