I’ve noticed in the current media that there are a number of be-moaners lamenting the lack of critical thinking apparent in today’s world. There are widespread claims that everyone from journalists to management lack critical thinking. Over the past couple of weeks, one particular topic has stood out to me that reeks of an astounding lack in critical thinking from the government – the emissions trading scheme.
It’s hard to pick up a news paper or turn on the TV at the moment and not see something about this subject. The vast opposition and varied opinion about the value of the ETS in its current form shows how far the legislation is from reaching resolution. However, it has been nice to see an engineer in the headlines recently, actually asking some fundamental questions about the assumptions that all this is based on.
Senator Steve Fielding (trained as an engineer) has drawn fire recently for challenging the science that climate change is based upon. Fielding drew some interesting parallels to Galileo and Copernicus who challenged the indisputable science of the day – that the Earth was flat, the centre of the universe and that the Sun and all other planets revolved around it. The backlash felt by Galileo was so severe that he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. While such harsh physical persecution is unlikely today, there is no doubt that anyone who is prepared to offer a counter view on climate science is rapidly made subject to a wide ranging character assassination.
Regardless of what is eventually proved, congratulations to Senator Fielding for being prepared to stand up, take the heat and actually show the use of critical thinking.
Have you ever heard of the phenomenon called group think? Group think is a type of thought exhibited by members of a group who try to minimise conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analysing, and evaluating ideas. Individual creativity, uniqueness, and independent thinking are lost in the pursuit of group cohesiveness, as are the advantages of reasonable balance in choice and thought that might normally be obtained by making decisions as a group. During group think, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking. A variety of motives for this may exist such as a desire to avoid being seen as foolish, or a desire to avoid embarrassing or angering other members of the group.
Doesn’t all this sound familiar in the context of climate change science? Engineers are inherently taught to question facts and examine evidence. In fact, these skills are critical to success in industry and it often pays to be sceptical. As the total proportion of students enrolling in Science and Engineering disciplines continues to decline, those graduates who are able to express alternative views, show innovation and ask questions will become more valuable employers. Given that we tend to work in multi-discipline groups, never underestimate the power you can bring to the table by taking a contrary angle to those around you.
Comments