A good buddy of mine tried to use the recent cold snap to make a claim that global warming is a liberal hoax. He got annoyed with me when I pointed out that the data showing that the Earth is warming is based on many numerical averages taken from around the world.

You can’t make a conclusion based on a very small data set. All it takes is a few weeks of hot summer weather to offset the effect that frigid winter temperatures might have on the average temperature of the earth.

No one really likes to be fact checked. But I learned early in my teaching career that I was going to make mistakes on the chalkboard and kids were going to notice. I never wanted a student to think that they couldn’t point out a mistake that I had made. And I certainly didn’t want them to think that the irritation that I had with myself for a miscalculation was directed at the scholar who pointed it out. So I used humor to ease my self loathing and to encourage students to carefully follow and check my work. I started most school years by telling my students that I sometimes made mistakes “on purpose” to see if they were paying attention. I encouraged kids to call me on my blunders. When they got me, I would playfully reply, “Just checking”. And I enjoyed students’ high spirited responses of “Sure, Mr. Ludwig!”

I think most students appreciated a teacher who could admit when they made a mistake and joke about it. And sometimes the mistakes actually were made on purpose to show a common procedural error that learners would make.

And sometimes I would make outrageous statements to get a rise out of a group of kids. I love all students and I especially love students that respectfully question authority. Isn’t that the most important lesson that we can teach kids in a democracy? To pay attention. To fact check and to respectfully question authority when necessary.

A math professor wrote to point out that some of the logic I used in a previous column was technically not mathematically correct. The mathematical negation of the statement ” All Democrats are wrong” is actually “There exists at least one Democrat who is not wrong”. The mathematical negation of the statement “All Republicans are bad” is actually “There exists at least one Republican who is not bad”. The math professor did point out that my final conclusion that Democrats and Republicans have some things in common was mathematically correct. I thank the professor for pointing out the error in my negations. I feel like I showed my work, got the correct answer and earned a passing grade in the mathematician’s eyes.

Believe it or not, I do know the proper mathematical negations of “All Statements”. In my attempt to write a persuasive essay to individuals who are not mathematically inclined, I just felt that using the phrase “There exists at least one” was less compelling than stating that some are and some are not. For the math purists, I was “just checking”. And I encourage any math teacher to use my statements in their logic lessons as teachable moments for kids. And not just in logic lessons but also the lesson that the all or nothing political culture that we are living in is counterproductive and just plain wrong.

Even though Pete Howard is back from his writing hiatus, the OBSERVER is agreeable to allowing me to continue writing in this space. Months ago my good friends Father Dan Walsh and Father Bob Owczarczak encouraged me to write as a form of therapy as I recover from leukemia and am limited physically. I have to admit, writing has been cathartic for me. So I will continue to write these columns at least until the weather turns and I can get outside and be more active. In the meantime, every weekend, readers will get to enjoy columns by both Pedro’ and Andre’. I do predict that OBSERVER subscriptions will increase dramatically as a result.

I encourage readers to fact check my articles. I just might be making mistakes on purpose to see who is paying attention and who is close reading. Ask me questions of all kinds. Good teachers answer all their students’ questions. Good teachers tell their kids that there are no stupid questions. I will always answer students’ and readers’ questions. I would never refuse to answer a question or tell a student or anyone else with a question to “Shut up, piggy”. I would never refuse to take questions or tell a student who respectfully questions authority that they are “nasty” or a “horrible person”.

I don’t think that any parent would tolerate a teacher who stifled discussion or who refused to answer students’ questions. Parents would be outraged if an instructor called their daughter “piggy” when she asked a question. It does beg these questions though. If we wouldn’t tolerate a teacher who refuses to answer students’ questions, why are so many willing to tolerate elected local officials who stifle public comment and refuse to answer questions? If parents wouldn’t tolerate a teacher telling their inquisitive daughter that they were “ugly on the outside and on the inside,” why are so many willing to wholeheartedly support a president who does say such things?

Andrew Ludwig is a retired math teacher and a retired public school and Catholic school administrator. He currently works as a substitute teacher in Chautauqua County.