The Dangers of Dogmatic Thinking in the Information Age
Written on
Chapter 1: Understanding Ideology and Its Impact
It is a hallmark of contemporary arrogance to believe that, due to our extensive knowledge of natural events, we are somehow less gullible than those who came before us. — John Randall, Psychokinesis
When people encounter the word "ideology," they often associate it with political beliefs or frameworks for understanding the world. A synonymous term, "dogma," refers to a rigid set of beliefs, often of a religious nature, that individuals are expected to accept without question. This is the connotation I will use here, employing "ideology" interchangeably with "dogma."
Ideology is particularly adept at solidifying one’s mindset, rendering thoughts inflexible and formulaic. In today's information-driven society, such rigidity is not just unwise, but perilous.
Why is this the case? With the internet at our fingertips, we have access to an overwhelming amount of information and diverse viewpoints—more than anyone could ever hope to fully comprehend or critically assess. The vastness of what we don't know is a constant reminder of our limitations.
We are continuously bombarded with new data, and the variety of perspectives now available is unprecedented. In any specialized field, knowledge is growing at a pace that no individual can keep up with, and this wealth of information is almost instantaneously shared online.
Imagine life before the digital revolution. In 1886, often seen as the dawn of the modern automobile, ideological thinking was more understandable. Information was not as readily available; it traveled slowly through outdated means, like steam engines and horse-drawn carts, making diverse perspectives scarce.
Access to various viewpoints was limited, and communication took weeks instead of seconds. Today, we can effortlessly send a link regarding the latest research on health issues via text, all while multitasking through emails and searching for new recipes.
What relevance does this hold for dogmatic thinking? Dogmatic thought resists change—an unnatural resistance, if you will. It often aligns with religious fundamentalism, a mindset that feels outdated in the context of the 21st century, often dubbed the "information age."
When fundamentalist thinking dominates one’s mental landscape, adaptability and logical reasoning based on evidence become increasingly difficult. This entrenched mindset can lead to axiomatic thinking and other cognitive fallacies.
In essence, dogma and ideology constrict intelligence, leading individuals to make themselves less intellectually capable than necessary. The choice to adopt such limiting beliefs is often subconscious; self-awareness is generally not a strong suit of dogmatists.
The Misuse of Science
How often have we encountered assertions from certain groups proclaiming that "the science is settled" on contentious topics? Far too frequently. What they are essentially expressing is, "My mind is made up, and I am unwilling to consider any new information unless it reinforces my existing views."
Fundamentalists have historically shunned dissenting opinions. They desire status and fear losing face; they crave belonging and the validation of being "right." This often leads to extreme actions, from torture to coercive medical interventions, all in the name of “saving” others from their ignorance.
The hubris that accompanies such thinking is staggering. Under the right conditions, ideology can morph from mere inflexibility into elitism and even atrocities against humanity. Totalitarian governments have frequently attempted to rationalize their brutality by invoking the "greater good."
However, those with critical thinking skills can see through such rhetoric. They recognize it as self-serving language designed to suppress rational thought and amplify emotional reactions.
So, avoid becoming an ideologue who believes they have all the answers. The pursuit of knowledge is never complete; science thrives on inquiry, verification, and refinement. It is an ongoing process, not a fixed endpoint.
If a group of monkeys were given a day to construct a treehouse with human tools, would we accept their first attempt as the pinnacle of construction? Likely not.
In a 1989 lecture at the University of Southwestern Louisiana, biologist Ian Stevenson remarked, "What [history] has taught me is the transience of our material accomplishments and our understanding of humanity... Knowledge in science, as Whitehead said, keeps like fish. Everything believed by scientists is open to question."
The Process of Change
To cure dogmatism, one must actively seek transformation and be willing to adapt. Life often presents challenges that disrupt established thought patterns, promoting growth and openness to new ideas—perhaps those once staunchly opposed.
Here are steps to combat ideology and dogmatism:
- Explore spiritual experiences beyond the confines of your ego, such as meditation or breathwork.
- Disengage from your ego, recognizing that your beliefs are not your identity; they are merely constructs of your mind.
- Acknowledge that your views are subjective and not absolute truths.
- Seek out information that challenges your beliefs and be open to the possibility of being wrong.
- Avoid forming strong opinions on subjects you have not thoroughly studied from multiple angles.
- Recognize that the field of science is often plagued by flawed studies and biases; always scrutinize the underlying motives and methodologies behind research findings.
Remember, knowledge is a constantly evolving landscape, not a static entity. Align yourself with growth and change.
Conclusion
Truth seekers can easily detect stagnant, formulaic thinking. It has a distinctly stale quality. We should strive to be more curious, measured, and original, as ideology does little to enhance our intelligence, despite the confidence it may instill.
A breakdown of the 2019 AP Statistics FRQ #4, highlighting key concepts and problem-solving techniques.
A comprehensive solution to the 2019 AP Statistics FRQ #3, focusing on Probability and Binomial distributions.