Tag Archives: questioning

Honing Observation Skills with Questions

Leave a reply

I love this quote by James Clear:

“Observation is a skill, and like any skill, it can be trained and honed.

Even if you’re not a negative person, you may be skilled at noticing negative things. Sometimes people are good at noticing the reason things won’t work out or have a tendency to fixate on the latest distressing story.

But you can train your eye toward the opportunities each day quietly presents. You can become competent at noticing your good luck: the little moments of joy, the stranger who helped, the small things that went right, the opportunity in front of you right now.

What are you competent in observing? And which types of observations seem to serve your life best?” ~ James Clear

I’d add one more question, and that is, ‘What questions are you asking to ensure you are making the right observations?‘

‘Why don’t things work out for me?’ …is a very different question from, ‘I wonder what good will come of this?’

‘What else could go wrong?’ …is a very different question from, ‘What opportunities will present themselves now?’

James Clear makes a great point about needing to observe opportunities, I just think the path to get there is giving our brains, which are massive answering machines, the right questions to ask and then answer.

Promptism – A flat earth metaphor

5 Replies

I read an interesting article by Sune Selsbæk-Reitz, on a word he sort of invented for asking and believing what AI shares, Promptism. The article, The Earth Is Flat, defines this new word: “Promptism is the quiet belief that if I just ask my question clearly enough, I’ll get something true in return. Maybe even something wise.”

And the article describes how promptism is killing curiosity, and providing ‘truths’ that may not be truthful, and yet are being taken as so at face value without questioning.

From the article:

“The ritual is the same every time:

Ask the machine. Get the word.

Move on.

We don’t think of it as belief, because there’s no incense, no robes, no temple. But there’s authority. And there’s trust. And there’s something deeply seductive about being given something that feels final. Even when it isn’t. Even when the certainty is a performance.

Because the thing is: the more fluent the answer, the more invisible the framing becomes. And if we don’t pause to notice that… we’ll mistake fluency for truth, and coherence for proof.”

The article continues:

“But with ChatGPT or Gemini, the answer arrives fully dressed.

Paragraphs. Polished tone. No seams. No links. Just a voice that sounds sure of itself.

That’s not just convenience. It’s a design choice. And it’s flattening how we think. Because friction – the pause, the doubt, the need to look something up – isn’t a flaw in the process of knowing. It is the process. That little jolt of uncertainty that sends you looking deeper?

That’s what makes knowledge stick.

That’s how you learn.”

…“And the more we do this, the more we forget that knowledge was never meant to arrive fully formed.”

I’ve noticed how this has affected me. I don’t go two or three pages into Google anymore. I don’t find tangent, related, and interesting ideas and connections. I ask an LLM, I get an answer, or I refine my question and ask again. I seek an immediate answer, and I accept that answer.

No more new tabs, no clicking links, just a single conversation, and a sort of final answer. The internet is getting flatter. The depth of search shallower. Promptism is the new search… and I wonder what the consequences are, what the price is, in finding convenient ‘truths’ that we just accept, and don’t bother researching or questioning?

Changing Our Opinions…

I recently wrote Certainty Versus Evidence, and concluded with, “Seek out wise people who are smart enough to be humble, and uncertain, and as curious as you are… And don’t let yourself get stuck in concrete thinking.”

It really comes down to the idea that we need to be willing to change our opinions and our point of view when more information comes our way.

This means:

  • We need to respectfully listen to alternative points of view.
  • We need to ask clarifying questions.
  • We need to challenge our own assumptions.
  • We need to be humble enough to recognize that we don’t know everything.
  • We need to keep learning.

It always surprises me the that changing of one’s opinion is seen as weak. To me it’s a sign of strength. Openly admitting that you’ve changed your mind based on new evidence is a superpower. It means you don’t have a fixed mindset.

The difference between this and being gullible is that you aren’t easily persuaded, but rather data driven. You aren’t blindly believing new information, you are discerning, measuring, calculating, and being inquisitive.

We aren’t having our minds changed, we are changing our minds.

It’s not hard to do this when your new opinion fits with the views of those around you, but if that’s not the case, a simple change of opinion could be very challenging. I think both Copernicus and Galileo would agree with me.

It’s a big step to openly change your mind on a challenging topic. It takes strength of mind and will to do so, and it is a sign that you are willing to learn and grow. Certainty is the enemy of understanding, compassion, and growth. Ultimately if we are willing to change our opinions, we are willing to change and grow.

Certainty Versus Evidence

We are living through an epidemic of certainly at the expense of evidence.

Selectively chosen facts are sprinkled on emboldened ideas that sit like concrete, embedded deep in the minds of people who are certain they are right. Contrary evidence is tossed aside. If it doesn’t fit my truth or my world view then, it’s wrong, it’s misinterpreted, it’s fake news.

When scientists discover galaxies that are too large for the age that they are, considering when they were born, early in the development of the universe… it makes them ponder the theories they hold. Scientists are excited by this puzzle. What’s at play here? Is it a challenge of our evidence collection or are there other theories that may be better? This is the thrill of being at the forefront of science. It’s the idea that we continue to learn and reformulate our theories and make them better.

But to certainty focused, evidence lacking, non-scientific ‘experts’ (in their own minds), this new data is a chance to mock scientists; To emphasize that ‘they don’t know anything’ about the universe. This new evidence isn’t scientific evidence but rather proof that all science is wrong. These new galaxies are evidence of a higher power, or worse, a flat world.

We have people selling water bottles that make hydrogen water that’s somehow supposed to be better than just drinking water. Every commercial for supplements or diets or exercise plans tell you how the evidence is clear and this is the product that will transform your life.

I recently saw this fascinating video about a bug that shoots acid from its butt as a defensive mechanism. It was a totally interesting and engaging video for over 2 minutes, then it started into an unexpected conclusion of Intelligent Design and became an anti-evolution propaganda video that I had to stop watching. But I did wonder how many people bought into this, and I peeked at the comments which were filled with comments like, ‘God is amazing’.

‘Follow your own Truth’, with a capital ‘T’. Cherry pick your evidence and strengthen your certainty. That’s what it seems more and more people are doing these days. The certainty epidemic is growing and it’s getting harder and harder to sift through the BS, and actually know what evidence to follow.

The only anecdote is to stay curious and ask questions. Seek out wise people who are smart enough to be humble, and uncertain, and as curious as you are… And don’t let yourself get stuck in concrete thinking.

Problemize the learning

Yesterday I heard Warren Woytuck from The Critical Thinking Consortium present at the ACE Conference. Here is one of his slides about problematizing a question:

Note how by adding value descriptors, by specifying the intention of the question, the question changes to one where students need to compare and contrast, to qualify, make judgements, and/or explain their answers. And more than that, students need to ask more questions to come to an answer.

To me, that’s the key to a problemizing a question… How can you change a question so that it provokes more questions? If you ask a question and either:

A) Google can answer it; or

B) You already know the answer students will come up with; or

C) All students come to the same conclusion…

Then you didn’t really pose a good problem. You didn’t promote critical thinking.

When your questions are problematized, students need to interact with the question in a more meaningful and engaged way.

What’s on your home screen?

I think it is interesting to see what people put on their phone’s home screen. It is a little peek into their personality. Where do they spend their digital time? What social media do they use? What do they do for entertainment?

I think I want to start a little informal research and ask people about their home screen preferences. What will I learn from that? Will it change what I keep on my home screen?

What do you keep on your home screen, and why are those things important enough to take up that space?

The Socratic Process ~ 6 Steps of Questioning

20131016-183432.jpg

…And on that note:
Truly Questioning Everything
How much of what we do at school is done because TTWWADI (That’s The Way We Always Do It)?
What ‘norm’ can you question and challenge in school? What ‘practice’ bugs you about the way things are done, that you have the courage to change?
The questions in the image above are great for students… And if we are honest with ourselves, for us too!