Critical Thinking – Until You Disagree?

Leave a comment

Every field has its buzzwords. Education is no different. One that you’ll hear frequently is ‘critical thinking.’ Indeed, in a downloadable poster explaining the 2026 Standards for the Teaching Profession,  the Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand, expects teachers to “Enable learners to be active participants in their learning” so that they can develop critical thinking. At Manukau Christian School, we seek to train up responsible and courageous disciples of Christ who seek to apply his kingship to all of life. So for us, it’s obvious that the end product of 13 years of education should be a young man or woman capable of self-governance who is able to discern wisely how to act and think.

But how are we to train up our students in this essential skill if teachers risk professional consequences for engaging in critical thinking themselves?

Let me share with you a somewhat disturbing insight into how viewpoint discrimination occurs in New Zealand education. Earlier this year, before we had received our final ERO report, I took a phone call from a woman (whom I choose not to name) who works in the Education Review Office. The call left me wondering how much room there really is for critical thinking in our profession.

As part of its review of our school, ERO had checked out our website. A couple of articles I had authored apparently concerned them. One questioned whether students expressing conservative views about politics and family should be labelled extremists. The other challenged the place of Treaty obligations in school governance and supported the Government’s proposed changes.

The woman told me that ERO had concerns about these articles and had consulted the Teaching Council about them. The Teaching Council had apparently told her that in the absence of a complaint they would take no action. Nevertheless, she pointed out that these articles placed me at risk. References to professional standards and registration were made as well as broader risks to the school.

Naturally, I wanted to know exactly what the problem was. Which parts of the articles were concerning? What, specifically, had I written that might put my professional standing at risk? The articles in my mind seemed tame and non-inflammatory – to be sure they went against the majority view in education circles, but we believe in critical thinking in education, right? She declined to explain. I also asked whether the people expressing the opposing views who I was responding to would raise the same concerns from ERO. She declined to comment on that too.

Now, I am quite happy for someone to challenge what I write. I believe that iron sharpens iron. Show me where my facts are wrong. Challenge my argument. Explain why my conclusions don’t follow. That is how discussion should work. That is called critical thinking, and I’m all for it.  

But that was not what happened in this conversation. No particular error or breach of a professional standard was identified. Instead, I was left with the impression that expressing these views could put my livelihood, and the school, at risk.

It was not an explicit instruction to take the articles down. But it came across to me as a veiled threat. And it left me asking: how many teachers, receiving a call like that, would simply decide it was wiser to keep their heads down and toe the majority line.

I immediately contacted the Free Speech Union, setting out what had happened and asking whether this was normal or appropriate. Their assessment was that signalling professional risk over lawful speech, without identifying a specific breach or explaining the concern, was an inappropriate use of regulatory authority. They also considered that my account raised significant concerns about freedom of expression and possible viewpoint discrimination. Their advice was to document the conversation and leave the articles up.

This matters to me because I want our students to be critical thinkers. I want them to question the status quo. I want them to have the courage to challenge bad ideas and promote what is good and true and will benefit our communities and nation. I want them to live in a country where they have the freedom to express their opinion without the threat of losing their livelihoods.

I have the joy of teaching our Year 12 students a course in which we examine the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Section 13 protects freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief; section 14 protects freedom of expression; and section 19 protects against discrimination on the grounds set out in the Human Rights Act 1993, including religious belief and political opinion. These freedoms are supposed to have real implications for how public authorities treat people.

We need to resist the creeping intolerance that turns professional registration into a tool for enforcing approved opinions. Thankfully it appears this problem has not gone unnoticed. The Free Speech Union is campaigning for legislative reform in this area, supporting a proposed Regulated Professions Neutrality Bill. This would aim at stopping professional bodies from disciplining people simply for expressing lawful opinions and require regulators to remain neutral on contentious political and ideological issues. This is exactly the sort of protection we need.

At MCS, we walk quite a different path to much of the educational establishment. Yet our results speak for themselves, and parents are often desperate to secure a place for their children. We think that part of the reason for our success is because we think critically about education. We are not interested in simply following the latest educational fashions or adopting prevailing ideological positions without questioning them. We believe that education should prioritise the pursuit of truth and the development of young people who can think and act wisely. We are willing to question educational orthodoxies and pursue what we believe is best for our students, even when that goes against the grain.

And this brings me back to where I began. We want to develop responsible and courageous disciples of Christ who are prepared to stand up for what is true and good. But that requires us, as teachers and educational leaders, to demonstrate the same responsibility and courage. We must be willing to question accepted thinking, defend our convictions and engage openly with those who disagree. That is the sort of education we want to provide, and the sort of freedom we ought to defend.

Easter and the Death of Death: Our Hope Springs Eternal

Bluejay perched on a gravestone.
Bluejay perched on a gravestone. by Michelle Frechette is licensed under CC-CC0 1.0


“But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.”

1 Corinthians 15:20–26

Storytelling is at the heart of Christianity. God is a storyteller. We are either enraptured by and absorbed into this story, or we reckon it repugnant and run from the “Once upon a time”. Adam and Eve ate the fruit, bringing death into the world. Yet, in the primordial darkness, the first note of a grand symphony rang: Eve’s offspring would crush the serpent’s head. And two millennia before our time, a baby was born in Bethlehem. He would die and rise again, and in rising, as Paul notes in the passage above, He would secure our resurrection from the dead. In Christ was the death of death and the guarantee of life after death. For this reason, as the hymn says, “our hope springs eternal”. In this article, I seek to focus on one part of this story, namely our eternal hope.

We will begin our brief journey by contemplating what heaven is. It is where God “will wipe away every tear from [his people’s] eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away” (Revelation 21:4). Heaven is a great city with “no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb.” (Revelation 21:9-23). “By its light will the nations walk, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it, its gates shall never be shut by day”, and “there will be no night there” (Revelation 21:24-26). There shall be a “river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” and the “tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month.” (Revelation 21:1-2). We shall behold “[God’s] face” and “reign forever and ever” (Revelation 22:4-5).

Read More

The Cross, Conversion Therapy, and the Countries Down Under

flag of australia
Photo by Hugo Heimendinger on Pexels.com

“And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked…”

Ephesians 2:1-2A

Introduction

Recently, Australian news sources have been abuzz with plans for a bill outlawing conversion therapy to be passed in New South Wales. Though I do not think that we have any direct access to what the Australian bill contains, looking at our (New Zealand’s) conversion therapy act passed in 2022 will surely do some good.1 I will briefly provide an overview of the bill in this section, list two objections against our bill in the second section, and then address a deeper issue, namely the fundamental conflict of the Christian Gospel and conversion therapy bills.2

The explicit aim of the New Zealand conversion therapy bill is twofold: to “recognise and prevent harm caused by conversion practices” and to “promote respectful and open discussions regarding sexuality and gender.” A conversion practice is defined as a “practice, sustained effort, or treatment” that “is directed towards an individual because of the individual’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression” and which is performed “with the intention of changing or suppressing the individual’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.”

Read More

Abortion and Peter Singer: Singing out of Tune

2 Comments
ultrasound of an unborn child
Photo by Pavel Danilyuk on Pexels.com

“For you formed my inward parts;
you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.”

Psalm 139:13

It is not a controversial fact that life begins at fertilization.1 For instance, a Princeton University webpage lists fifteen academic sources that support this point. One of the quoted sources clearly states that “fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed”.2 An article from PubMed states that “Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions… assessed survey items on when a human’s life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view [human life begins at fertilization]”.3 I could go on.

So, the abortion debate is now centred on philosophical considerations. One case study will do. Peter Singer, Emeritus Professor of Bioethics at Princeton, answers whether he would save a mouse or human being from a fire: in “almost all cases [he] would save the human being”. Interestingly, the reason for this saving is “not because the human being is human” but because “it matters whether a being is the kind of being who can see that he or she actually has a life — that is, can see that he or she is the same being who exists now, who existed in the past, and who will exist in the future”. Singer’s criteria for something that is worth saving involves some kind of temporal awareness. To explicitly connect this answer to abortion, “no newborn baby is a person” because newborn babies do not have “a sense of the future”.4

Read More

Of Toolsheds, Marsh-Wiggles, Atheism, and the New Year

gray storage shed on brown sand
Photo by Guillaume Hankenne on Pexels.com

“…in your light do we see light.”

-Psalm 36:9

Of Toolsheds and Marsh-Wiggles

A few minutes before the dawn of the New Year, I found myself on a steep and crowded street that overlooked most of the Auckland skyline. Most people (I included) aimed phones at the skyline in anticipation. A vague countdown began, and then the vast horizon blossomed with fireworks. I was struck by the sheer number of people fixated on recording, swaying their phones to and fro like wands by which memory and atmosphere could be captured.

The aim of this article is an indictment of modernity. As Michael Ward states: “The incessant spiritual orchestration that accompanies [the universe], that actually constitutes it, and that is normally inaudible, is now also considered incredible. The cosmos therefore comes to be regarded as nothing more than a very elaborate machine when in reality it is tingling with life…'”1 Ward claims that the medieval conception of the universe as a “festival not a machine” is now beyond belief.2 Our world has become disenchanted. In the words of Saturn by Sleeping at Last, we have lost the reality of, “How rare and beautiful it is to even exist”.

Read More

On the New Year: Reflections on Eternity

fireworks display in the dark night sky
Photo by BreWoodsy on Pexels.com

Audio reading of this post

“But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”

2 Peter 3:8

“The future is something which everyone reaches at the rate of sixty minutes an hour, whatever he does, whoever he is.”

C. S. Lewis

On the New Year: Reflections on Eternity1

Human recollection is a fickle thing. We quickly lose memories. For an event that occurred recently, we can recall more. But for an event that was further away, our minds hold blurred memories; mere snapshots and vague remembrances of atmosphere. For instance, in my first year of high school, our class went on an overnight tramp to Waitawheta. I can now remember snapshots of verdure, glimpses of swift rivers, chiaroscuros cast by swaying trees, a starry multitude residing in the night sky, glowworms nestled in rocks, the excitement of playing tag outside the hut, and an inordinate amount of tomato sauce ordered at a fast food joint. I still remember small details, like an elderly stranger advising me to roll up my sleeping bag because it would damage the seams less. But most of my memories have been consumed by time. Think of similar examples for yourself. How much could you remember right after the event occurred, and how much can you remember now? Perhaps there is a nostalgic veil over the entire thing, and you cannot remember much more.

Though human memory swiftly evanesces like a firework, God is different. The Scriptures tell us in bewildering, fascinating, and terrifying fashion that “from everlasting to everlasting [He is] God” (Ps. 90:2). “[W]ith the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day (2 Pet. 3:8). God “inhabits eternity” (Isa. 57:15). Traditional Christianity has interpreted these passages, along with a multitude of other passages, as teaching the eternity of God. Geerhardus Vos, the great Reformed Dutch theologian, described the eternity of God as the “attribute of God whereby He is exalted above all limitations of time and all succession of time, and in a single indivisible present possesses the content of His life perfectly (and as such is the cause of time)”.2 What I want to centrally focus on here is the phrase “in a single indivisible present”. This concept, upon further reflection, is mind-boggling. Let me explain.

Read More

Christian Reflections on the Barbie Movie – Part Two

Barbie doll, blond beauty toy

“In him was life, and the life was the light of men.”

John 1:4

Articles in this Series

Christian Reflections on the Barbie Movie – Part One

Christian Reflections on the Barbie Movie – Part Two

Feminism

In this section, I aim at a twofold goal: to provide commentary on the opening scene of the Barbie Movie, thereby leading to a discussion of demeaning children and abortion, and to present a Biblical case for the role of men and women.

The trailer or first scene of the movie begins with a landscape shot, shifting to depicting little girls playing with dolls and prams. The girls sit on a barren, rocky landscape. “Since the beginning of time, since the first little girl ever existed, there have been dolls.” says the narrator dramatically. Richard Strauss’ Also sprach Zarathustra, a symphonic poem named after Nietzsche’s nihilistic philosophical work Thus Spoke Zarathustra, begins to play and continues in the background. The narrator continues: “But the dolls were always and forever baby dolls until…”. The music crescendos. A giant Barbie dressed in a black-and-white swimsuit appears. She lowers her sunglasses, smiles at the girls, and winks. The next shot immediately depicts a girl shattering a doll with a different doll. Another doll is thrown into the air.1

Read More

Christian Reflections on the Barbie Movie – Part One

Polaroid Barbie camera (camera)

“And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years,”

-Revelation 20:2

Articles in this Series

Christian Reflections on the Barbie Movie – Part One

Christian Reflections on the Barbie Movie – Part Two

Introduction

A few weeks ago, I had the unfortunate time watching the Barbie Movie in cinemas. It was an experience roughly analogous to having a wet cat dragged slowly over the nape of your neck, given that the cat was also brandishing its claws. However, in writing this review (mainly consisting of theological and philosophical reflection), I do not seek to lament or explore the psychological intricacies of this feline sensation. I fully recognise that in writing a review for a movie as especially pink, vibrant, and tongue-in-cheek as this one, I risk the labels of “Puritanical”, “bigot”, “fun-hater”, or other fallacious bullets contained in the liberal barrage. I will gladly accept the first: the Puritans were excellent theologians. I will deny the second and third while simultaneously wondering if those who utilise these terms have taken an elementary class in informal logical fallacies.

In the first section, I will briefly summarise of the plot of the movie (from my memory, so incomplete and perhaps inaccurate) and hopefully not risk the breach of any copyright laws. In the second section, I will seek to provide a theological framework from which we ought to approach our viewing of media.

The third and fourth sections will be in the next article. In the third section, I will critique the feminism permeating the Barbie movie, showing how it is perhaps more nuanced than expected, and provide some Biblical teaching against feminism. In the fourth section, I will evaluate the existentialism in the movie and provide the only alternative, namely the Biblical alternative. The conclusion, as the name suggests, will conclude. Let us proceed.

Read More

Why The Left Hates Private Wealth

1 Comment

Much of the hostility toward private wealth comes from the same impulse: hatred of its ability to insulate the citizen from the will of the state. Money empowers resistance; it gives one the ability to buy some gold coins, for example, and thereby hold a measure of independence from the monetary monopoly of the state; to send children to a private school and avoid the brainwashing of the public education monopoly; to open a foreign bank account and provide oneself with protection against legal confiscation schemes. Propaganda alleging the immorality of inherited wealth is also a reflection of the assault on the family. Before he dropped into noumenal oblivion, Charles Reich wrote that private property “guards the troubled boundary between individual man and the state,” but that there is a new wealth that has replaced it, one dispensed in myriad forms by the state. Increasingly, therefore, “Americans live on government largesse – allocated by government on its own terms, and held by recipients subject to conditions which express ‘the public interest.’ ” People who are thus described are more likely to be compliant servants of the authorities than are those who earn their living by giving value to private citizens who prize what they have to offer.

Idols for Destruction – Herbert Schlossberg