3 Chapter 3 – How Good Questions Lead To Answers
3.1 – Well-Formed Questions and Context
A well-formed question should have well defined terms, unambiguous construction, and clear context. A well-formed question is like the one which we looked at in section 1.3. We need to have each word mean exactly what we intend it to mean, we need to be clear about what the question is referring to, and the question should be unambiguous.
When we ask a question, we should also have a clear context. A “context” is the setting in which a question is asked.
Example – When we find the average of a group of numbers, we need to know what the numbers represent. If the numbers represent test scores, then the context of finding the average is the particular test (quiz? midterm? final exam?).
Example – If we’re doing quality control, we need to know what product or service we’re doing it for. That product or service is the context for the quality control.
3.2 – To Get The Answer, Ask The Right Questions
We’ve all heard reports about how some food or supplement helps some medical condition only to hear, sometimes only a few weeks later, that it’s a waste of money or bad for one’s health. Why does this happen? For the most part, preliminary studies are conducted with small groups and are not rigorous studies. This makes these types of studies vulnerable to inaccurate results. However, these preliminary studies are necessary in order to get some idea of whether the food or supplement might have some benefit. So, when we read about these foods or supplements in advertisements we must ask ourselves if this product has been thoroughly evaluated by an independent team of well trained professionals. Just believing what we’re told without asking good questions is a recipe for disaster. This doesn’t mean that we should reject good scientific evidence, only that we should learn to ask clarifying questions.
As an example, covid-19 vaccines have proven to be one of the biggest scientific and engineering successes in human history. That doesn’t mean there’s no room to question the safety of these vaccines. We can ask questions about the data produced in the preliminary studies for these vaccines, and the follow-up data that resulted. We can also ask a question like “What are the chances that the vaccine will produce some dangerous effect years after it’s administered?” This is a harder question to answer than those about the current effects of the vaccine, but we can break down this question into smaller, easier to answer, questions that together can help us answer the main question.
To do this we think about related events such as how long have vaccines been in use, how have other vaccines played out over time, and how is this vaccine different from other vaccines. Answering these simpler questions we see that vaccines have been in use since at least the late 18th century, they have been enormously successful in eradicating disease, and new techniques and formulations of vaccines, including RNA vaccines, are essentially based on the same principles as earlier vaccines. This helps us understand that the newer vaccines are very likely to be safe and effective in the long term. There’s a balance between caution and pragmatism. Understanding the difference between what’s likely to help, and what constitutes a significant danger requires that we continually ask clarifying questions.
Good decisions happen more often when we learn to ask the right questions. As another example of this, consider a used car purchase. If you’ve ever purchased a used car you probably know to ask about the mechanical issues and any repair receipts, whether the car has been in an accident or has been flooded, does the car have a clear title, and many other pertinent questions. The more questions one asks, the more likely one is to establish the true condition of the car and know whether the asked price is a reasonable one (assuming the salesperson doesn’t lie or falsify documents).
In the following exercise we will practice asking questions that lead to answers.
To start, we will examine an issue that concerns racism. There are many instances of racism at all levels here in the U.S., but this issue occurs in Australia. To address this, we will develop questions that lead us to evidence of racism in a manner that would be admissible in a court of law. This is very different than our emotional response, and for those who feel that such an approach is offensive to their understanding and well-being, you are excused from this assignment. However, I must point out, that injustice is never fully vanquished by anger or by vengeance. A clear rationale that exhibits evidence supporting a claim will ultimately win the battle.
In Alice Springs, in the Northern Territories of Australia, from 2007 until 2022, there was a ban on consuming alcohol for any indigenous person living in a “prescribed area” of an Aboriginal community. The liquor restrictions prohibited anyone who lived in Aboriginal town camps on the outskirts of Alice Springs, as well as those in more remote Indigenous communities, from buying takeaway alcohol. The town itself was not included in the ban, though Aboriginal people there often faced more scrutiny in trying to buy liquor.
The ban ended in 2022, but was reinstated in 2023.
According to the 3/12/2023 New York Times article (link to article) “Authorities Reinstate Alcohol Ban for Aboriginal Australians”:
“The roots of the 15-year alcohol ban were a national media firestorm that erupted in 2006 over a handful of graphic and highly publicized allegations of child sexual abuse in the Northern Territory. Many of the allegations were later found to be baseless. But just months before a federal election, the conservative prime minister at the time used them to justify a draconian set of race-based measures. Among them were the alcohol restrictions, along with mandatory income management for welfare recipients and restrictions on Indigenous people’s rights to manage land that they owned.”
Once the ban ended in 2022, and before it was reinstated, the following data is reported by the New York Times in the same article cited above:
“According to the Northern Territory police, commercial breaks-ins, property damage, assaults related to domestic violence and alcohol-related assaults all rose by about or by more than 50 percent from 2021 to 2022. Australia does not break down crime data by race, but politicians and Aboriginal groups themselves have attributed the increase largely to Indigenous people.”
For this exercise, we will create three well-formed questions that we will post in Canvas Discussions which will help us answer the question “Is the ban for Aboriginal people in Alice Springs justified?”. The goal is to ask questions which will lead to answers that will shed light on the situation. Please remember, that we are asking questions that should help us find a way to resolve the question. Just posting an answer is not what we want to do here, we want to ask questions. This is a different approach that we might be used to, but it will, hopefully, be a productive approach.
Once everyone has contributed their questions in Canvas Discussions, each of us will select at least one question that someone else posted which you feel is a good question. In our response to this chosen question, we will say why we feel the question we chose to comment on works well.
So, please post your questions in Canvas Discussions, and we will revisit these questions later in this course.
