We evolved reason not to understand the true nature of reality but to win arguments for our side right and we're pretty good at that yeah. We just need to shift the context to less win lose zero sum games in politics, he says. The important thing too is you're having a conversation with the other personright so you're going to argue your side vociferously they's going to argue their side vociferous and then the idea is you will yield to whoever has the better argument. It goes back to that question do you think you're right about everything and if you're not then you need to maybe listen to what the other side is saying and assess your own Argument.
The democratic ideal demands that the citizenry think critically about matters of public import. Yet many Democrats and Republicans in the United States have fallen short of that standard because political tribalism motivates them to acquire, perceive and evaluate political information in a biased manner. The result is an electorate that is more extreme, hostile and willing to reject unfavorable democratic outcomes.
Shermer and Redmond discuss: why we have political duopoly (Duverger’s law) • parties vs. policies • Are we living in a post-truth, fake-news, alternative facts world? • How do we know political polarization is worse now than in the past? • acquiring, perceiving, and evaluating political information • evaluating: false political information, political numbers and arguments, claims of rigged election • whataboutism • cognitive responsibilities of citizenship • cognitive biases • political polarization • myside bias • numeracy vs. innumeracy • solutions to the polarization problem.
Timothy J. Redmond received his PhD in political science from the University at Buffalo. He is an award-winning educator and author of over one hundred articles on critical thinking and politics. He is a professor at Daemen University where he teaches a political science and history course for education students.