In class on Wednesday, we discussed the possibility that dialogue could be the key to relieving the tension between critical pedagogy and critical thinking. However, I believe that a free-flowing, non-judgmental dialogue would be difficult to achieve.
Most people are convinced that they hold correct beliefs and that it is their duty to convince others of the validity of their arguments. Should two philosophers, one of critical pedagogy and one of critical thinking, be placed into a room and asked to have a dialogue concerning their beliefs, this "dialogue" will likely turn into a heated debate in which both people leave with their ideals reinforced rather than questioned. Like the creationism/evolution controversies, sometimes open-minded dialogues are too difficult to achieve.
So my question would be this: Are there alternatives to dialogue? If not, then how can this dialogue be approached so as to avoid the confrontational nature of debate?
No comments:
Post a Comment