"All generalizations are false, including this one."
- Mark Twain
There's a potentially dangerous beast lurking among us. It often disguises itself as Fact, and quite easily slips past even the most astute and defensive observer. In fact, this monster is so subversive it's currently spawning in every household, inflicting every parent, and consequently every child the world over.
Today I came face to face with this seething, certainty-breeding giant, witnessing firsthand its potential for harm. To make matters worse, I happen to know that it dwells deep in all of our minds. It's even right here, in my writing, in the last sentence. It can't be escaped. That's right, I'm talking about Generalization.
My first period class is called Current Topics in Science. The focus of the course is to arrive at a better understanding of what constitutes (and does not constitute) science, and how our lives are influenced by science in myriad ways. There are only five students enrolled, but our conversations are some of the most inventive and exploratory in which I've ever participated.
Over the past few days we've been discussing some of the philosophical origins of science. In particular, we've discussed David Hume's famous problem of induction, and Sir Karl Popper's defining criterion of science as lying in its capacity to disprove or falsify hypotheses.
Learning about these philosophies shines a light on the many problematic "all" or "every" statements that surround us. Scientific thinking, in theory, teaches us to be aware of the doubt in many of our conjectures.
Of course, in popular culture we don't often practice scientific thinking, and we are often too certain about what we claim to know. To find examples, one need only peruse the comments on any number of news websites. They are full of the unchecked assumptions and hazardous conviction espoused with Generalization. Instead of pursuing respectful dialogue with a sense of caution and a will to listen and learn, both sides of an issue seem to further cement their respective stance on the issue, becoming more isolated and further polarized. If we're not careful, generalizations can make us make enemy-types of one another.
We could never do away with our capacity to generalize. And I don't think we want to. The philosopher Hegel suggested that generalization underscores the process of thinking. We don't have to kill the beast. We just need to learn about it so that we may tame it, and come to live peacefully with it. Like an exotic pet.
As a homework assignment in out CTS class, I invited students to find several articles in the science news section of the local paper, or on the Internet. Their task was to scrutinize the evidence presented in the popular media, and to think about ways to test the evidence in their own experiments.
As we discussed our findings the conversation flowed wonderfully; the students bought into the process. There were a lot of brilliant ideas being discussed, and a lot of creative thought experiments. Then, and I'm not sure how it came about exactly, but somehow Generalization reared its ugly head, taking one of the students hostage.
One student raised her hand in response to another. I don't even remember the context. But I remember what she said: "All gays are girly sinners. I just try to stay away from anyone I can tell is gay."
Somehow this usually sweet student found her tongue dripping with spite. My heart endured a hairline fracture as she sat back in her chair, proud and sure, grinning from ear to ear. She couldn't have known that her words were so cutting, not with the smile she sported. It was so pure.
I didn't even have time to take up my negotiating post. The others in the class swooped in to collect our hostage from Generalization's tranquilizing grip.
"Hey! You can't say that!" piped one fellow at the side of the class. "You can't generalize people like that. And how is someone else's sexuality going to harm you?" His voice was growing flammable.
"He's right," chimed in another girl, "you're being unfair. And tell me what it means to be 'girly'? Don't you realize you've just made and 'all' statement." My heart smiled softly.
The girl who made the comment looked sheepish. "I guess I did." She mumbled, recoiling a bit from the outbursts of her peers.
For the rest of class we discussed the labels we create for one another, and the judgments we associate with those labels, both positive AND negative. We talked about considering one another as a fellow human being before anything else be it "gay", or "black", or "Christian". I suggested that being able to question the assumptions that anchor our labels is an act of courage, because it means you might have to admit you're wrong. And doing so regularly means getting comfortable with being wrong. I shared my opinion that perhaps this is a small price to pay if it helped us learn to get along.
The girl confessed that she hadn't really thought about what she said before she said it. She also didn't realize that her words could be hurtful.
Just before we finished the discussion, the first boy to challenge her now reached out to her. "You know, I used to think similar thoughts. I think we hear these ideas from our families and friends and society and I just always accepted these ideas until I found out that one of my best friends was gay. At first I freaked out a little, then I realized he's still the same best friend." When class finished they all left together, getting along.
It's a nice break to have the students teach themselves, defending one another from the throes of inductive reasoning.
What would this place look like if more of us recognized the dangers of our generalizations?
