The believing and doubting game was invented by Peter Elbow (‘Writing Without Teachers’, Oxford University Press, 1974). I’ve used it many times in an adapted way for P4C and in other educational contexts.

IN GROUP DIALOGUE

1. A view is advanced by pupils or the teacher. First, all members of a group work together to support the view. They try to come up with the best justifications they can. The are ‘believers’. Then they all switch perspective and turn into ‘doubters’. They try to list the best reasons to doubt the view in question.

2. After the whole group has worked together, individuals can then consider the points raised and seek clarification and understanding by asking questions. Then put forward their own judgements and give
reasons. Those reasons often involve an explanation of which justifications, doubts and criticisms were most important to them.

ADVANTAGES

1. Finding a worthy rival. Many facilitators of group dialogue will say: “Imagine what someone who disagreed with you might say”. This is a good move but rarely one that is taken seriously enough. It’s a worthwhile challenge to make the best argument you can against your own. The believers and doubters game is a structured activity to make sure rival ideas are explored.

2. Delaying the influence on the outcome of the most dominant, respected or articulate members on the group. Those members begin by putting their influence and abilities to use trying to support arguments other than their own.

3. Taking the pressure off one member of the group who is might otherwise be arguing alone for a point of view.

The believing and doubting game is a simple and effective activity that can be used for small-group breakouts or in whole-group discussions.

IN READING

When reading texts, students can be encouraged to read first as 'believers' (wanting to understand fully what a writer has to say) and then as 'doubters' (with their own flow of critical questions in response to the text).

IN WRITING

Writers can be encouraged to read their own writing as they would read texts written by others – first, by making their own arguments and perspectives as strong as possible and second, by doubting and
questioning what they write in order to uncover weaknesses and imagine responses from other readers with different perspectives.

Steve Williams