Lies Your Teacher Told You

You know how teachers always say, "There are no stupid questions"? Well, we're lying. There are stupid questions--eye-rollingly obtuse questions that make us want to smack our hands against our heads or our heads against walls. We're not talking about intentional provocations or snotty questions lobbed by aspiring class clowns. Those are at worst minor annoyances and often kind of entertaining. No, when we speak of stupid questions, we are speaking of inquiries of an inanely specific, can't-see-the-forest-for-the-trees type.

A hypothetical example:

Picture a math class. (Longtime Sloppists will recall that YNSHC is a writing teacher, so this is meant for illustration purposes only and does not portray an actual occurrence). Let's say we're trying to explain a basic algebra operation:

2X + 3 = 29

Now, we would presumably explain to the class that we want to "isolate the variable," i.e., get 'X' by itself, and that the first step would be to subtract 3 from both sides of the equation:

2X + 3 = 29

- 3 -3

2X = 26

Then, we would explain that you next divide both sides by 2 to solve for 'X.'

X = 13

At this point, there are any number of reasonable questions. "Why don't you divide by 2 first?" "CAN we divide by 2 first?" "Why did you subtract 3?" "Couldn't we have added 3?" Even the eminently reasonable, "I'm confused, can we do that again?" Seriously, the number of non-stupid questions is infinite! The stupid question, however, is a very specific animal.

It usually begins with something like, "So, just so I understand. . . ." Longtime educators have a visceral reaction to this preface and its ilk. Because invariably what's coming next is a statement that shows that, not only does the student NOT understand, but he has probably drawn some conclusion from the evidence presented that defies any concept of logic as propounded by any philosopher of any school at any time.

"So, just so I understand, you subtracted 3 because the number was 29?"

"Uh. . . no. The problem was (pointing slowly at the problem on the board) '2X plus 3 equals 29.'

"Right."

"So, I subtracted 3 because I'm trying to figure out what 'X' is, so I want to get the variable, 'X,' by itself."

"OK."

"And whatever I do to one side of the equation, I have to do to the other side of the equation."

"Right, because it equals 29."

"Well, here it does, but. . . . Wait, let's try another problem. Maybe that will make this clearer."

"OK."

"OK. How about this: 3y + 4 = 49."

"What happened to 29?"

"This is a different problem."

"Oh, OK! So, you added '15' to '29' to get '49.'"

"What? Well, no. . . . I mean, it would be '20,' but that's not. . . . "

At this point, the Solipsist will usually tell the class to take a five-minute break.

The thing that gets us is not that the student doesn't understand. That, after all, is what teachers are there for: to educate. What's exasperating about this kind of question is the underlying arrogance--"Just so I understand." In other words, "I've got this, but I'm going to show you how I have processed it, which is invariably going to display my superior grasp of this subject." These students think they have stumbled on to the fundamental truth underlying whatever subject you are trying to explain. They think that a basic memorization of a few basic facts (like the "fact" that 2X + 3 = 29) will allow them to understand everything they need to know. And they want to force this simplification onto the actual meaning you are trying to explain--onto reality, if you will.

And think about it: Someone who tries to adjust reality to fit his or her own worldview. To say, for example, that there are weapons of mass destruction or alliances with terrorists where none, in fact, exist. Does that sound familiar?

Is it any wonder the Solipsist gets angry?

(You may be thinking, "Gosh, Solipsist, aren't you worried that your students will read this?" Frankly, no. Any students who read this and "get it" are well beyond the impulse to force reality to conform to their expectations. They're not the ones asking stupid questions.)