Dr. Charles M. Russo / Navy Intelligence. Doctor of Philosophy. Author

Dr. Charles M. Russo has spent decades inside the U.S. Intelligence Community learning how to think clearly when the stakes are high—and certainty is impossible.

From Desert Storm to post-9/11 intelligence work, Russo has lived inside environments where bad thinking costs lives. In this conversation, he breaks down what critical thinking actually means, why truth is often confused with perspective, how bias distorts decision-making, and why AI makes disciplined reasoning more important—not less.

This episode is a masterclass in analytical integrity, ethical reasoning, and making better decisions in a world designed to make you reactive.

--

Bio: Dr. Charles M. Russo is a retired FBI Intelligence Analyst, national security expert, and professor who has dedicated over 30 years to the intersection of intelligence analysis, critical thinking, and ethical decision-making. A U.S. Navy veteran who served during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm aboard the USS Wisconsin, Dr. Russo's career has spanned multiple federal agencies including the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, Defense Intelligence Agency, CIA, FBI, and Department of Homeland Security. He holds a Ph.D. in Public Safety Leadership with a concentration in Criminal Justice, along with degrees in Intelligence Studies from American Military University. Now a full-time instructor at Columbia Southern University, Dr. Russo teaches intelligence analysis, homeland security, counterterrorism, and research methodology at the graduate level. He is the author of "Precision in Perspective: Critical Thinking for Analytical Minds" and "Safeguarding Analytical Integrity: Why Political Ideology Must be Excluded From Intelligence Analysis." As a nationally recognized keynote speaker and Substack writer, Dr. Russo champions critical thinking as a survival skill for navigating today's complex information environment, blending philosophical inquiry with practical analytic techniques to help individuals and organizations make better decisions under uncertainty.

LINKS:

Follow and Subscribe to https://www.skool.com/the-analytical-edge-3643

Substack: https://drcharlesmrusso.substack.com/

Book: Precision in Perspective: Critical Thinking for Analytical Minds: The Art of Critical Thinking to Transform Your Analytical Mindset

Paul Povolni (Voppa) is the founder of Voppa Creative and a creative leader with over 30 years of experience in brand strategy and design. Based in Jackson, Mississippi, he has worked with clients internationally, leading teams in award-winning branding while serving as a coach and speaker. Paul delivers workshops and keynotes on brand strategy, creative thinking, and organizational culture, and hosts The Headsmack Podcast: Conversations with Misfits. His work centers on helping organizations lead with Clarity, Creativity, and Culture.

Headsmack Website

Voppa Creative Website

Transcript

Paul Povolni (04:27.83)
Hey, welcome to the Headsmack podcast. name is Paul Povolni and I am excited to have another best fit with me. I have Dr. Charles Russo with me. He is a veteran U.S. intelligence community practitioner, educator, and author focused on analytic tradecraft, critical thinking, and the ethics of intelligence. His work emphasizes discipline reasoning under uncertainty, resistance to politicization. That's quite a word to get out and manipulation.

and enforceable standards for analytic integrity. Wow, that's amazing. So welcome, Dr. Russo. Thank you. I'm looking forward to this conversation. Looking forward to diving into some of those things and talking about that. What I like to do before I get started, though, is I like to kind of hear a little bit about your backstory, just share a little bit about your origin story, you know, you know, what got you to the place that you're at.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (05:03.566)
Thank you.

Paul Povolni (05:25.164)
and you can go as far back as you want, just whatever you feel is relevant. So tell me, me, tell me your story, Dr. Russo. Okay. Wow. Uh, it really, I gotta say my story started in 1990. And the reason I go back 35 years is the fact that I was flailing in college.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (05:33.172)
Okay, wow. Really, I gotta say my story started in 1990. And the reason I go back 35 years is the fact that I was flailing in college. And I didn't know what to do with direction of life. I ended up joining the Navy and absolutely loved it.

Paul Povolni (05:53.874)
I didn't know what to do direction of life. I ended up joining the Navy and absolutely loved it. I came in right in the middle of actually our Desert Shield Desert Storm operation. And that was my first touch with intelligence because I see that at that time I didn't know anything.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (06:03.022)
I came in right in the middle of actually our Desert Shield Desert Storm operation. And that was my first touch with intelligence because I see that at that time I didn't know anything. I don't think that public school, that even college, prepared me for what I had to learn throughout life.

Paul Povolni (06:23.436)
I don't think that public school, that even college, prepared me for what I had to learn throughout life, right? You didn't get to see life. And so finally I ended up going to intelligence school.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (06:32.108)
Right? You didn't get to see life. And so finally I ended up going to intelligence school.

My very first duty station was Naval Criminal Investigation Service. You know, no one would have known 20 years later that NCIS would have been really famous. It just was the beginning of having some very good mentors that would tell me how to really understand the information we're taking in.

Paul Povolni (06:42.014)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (07:11.232)
and synthesizing it to make better decisions. Now I look back here from today and what I write about, what I educate others, and even including continuing to educate myself, really is about that. wish 35 years ago somebody would have said, pick up a critical thinking book, philosophy.

Paul Povolni (07:11.486)
and synthesizing it to make better decisions. Now I look back here from today and what I write about, what I educate others, and even including continuing to educate myself, really is about that I wish 35 years ago somebody would have said, pick up a critical thinking book, philosophy.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (07:39.096)
pick up something from Plato, Aristotle, you some way to really view the world very differently and ask better questions because that's exactly what they were doing. I spent the next, you know, of course, 15 years in the U.S. Navy. I did a lot of counterterrorism at the time.

Paul Povolni (07:39.34)
pick up something from Plato, Aristotle, some way to really view the world very differently and ask better questions because that's exactly what they were doing. I spent the next, of course, 15 years in the US Navy. I did a lot of counterterrorism at the time.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (08:03.298)
That's a difference than what the Cold War was. We kind of knew who our adversary was. This was a new way of having to think about who your enemy is and where the next threat is around the corner. I ended up retiring from the Navy and became a defense contractor with various Department of Defense intelligence like

Paul Povolni (08:03.552)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (08:27.66)
Defense Intelligence Agency after 9-11, I was recalled to active duty with the FBI and ended up at DHS. mean, so my life kind of snowballed into having experiences and building on the skills within the different agencies. Cause each one has a different culture.

Paul Povolni (08:27.892)
Defense Intelligence Agency after 9-11, I was recalled to active duty with the FBI and ended up at DHS. mean, so my life kind of snowballed into having experiences and building on the skills within the different agencies. Now, did you have family members that served? I mean, I appreciate your service. Did you have family?

Members that serve like what drew you to, to service? Um, my dad, uh, was a Vietnam veteran, um, in the army. Oh, wow. how did he feel? How did he feel about you not joining the army? Well, he always said you're not joining the army. I had, uh, uncles that had been in the Marine Corps.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (08:59.758)
My dad was a Vietnam veteran in the army. What drew me to Sagan?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (09:14.55)
Well, he always said, you're not joining the Army. I had uncles that had been in the Marine Corps. He said no, and even my mom said no to the Marine Corps. A grandfather who had served in the Navy in the 1930s, so prior to World War II and after World War I.

Paul Povolni (09:25.162)
He said no, and even my mom said no to the Marine Corps, a grandfather who had served in the Navy in the 1930s. wow. So prior to World War II and after World War I.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (09:43.564)
So he was very proud that I had joined the Navy. I mean, my first ship was the USS Wisconsin, a battleship from the 1940s, which is now a museum. But that actually made them even feel safer that you're on this huge battle wagon during the Desert Shield Desert Storm.

Paul Povolni (09:43.82)
So he was very proud that I had joined the Navy. I mean, my first ship was the USS Wisconsin, a battleship from the 1940s, is now a museum. But that actually made them even feel safer that you're on this huge battle wagon during the Desert Shield Desert Storm. Now, what did you study in college then? it in the same area or was it something totally different?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (10:13.934)
My beginnings of college, junior college in 1988 through 90, was actually music. I grew up playing the piano, violin, cello, and the double string bass. So very, very different approach when I said I wanted to do intelligence work.

Paul Povolni (10:14.156)
My beginnings of college, junior college in 1988 through 90 was actually music. I grew up playing the piano, violin, cello, and the double string bass. So very, very different approach when I said I wanted to do intelligence work.

So what drew you to intelligence? What was the thing that kind of set you on that path?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (10:47.406)
One evening while standing a watch with another US Navy member, senior Navy member, he was an intelligence specialist. I, I mean, you have four hours to sit there and kill. We were talking and I became inquisitive of what is it that you do? And we got past the click day of I can't tell you or I have.

Paul Povolni (10:47.756)
One evening while standing a watch with another US Navy member, senior Navy member, he was an intelligence specialist. I, I mean, you have four hours to sit there and kill. We were talking and I became inquisitive of what is it that you do? And we got past the fourth day of I can't tell you or I have to tell you. But he did, he kind of pulled me what

Dr. Charles M. Russo (11:13.858)
But he did, he kind of pulled me what it was that they on a daily basis, mean, truthful and raw. And that is exactly what drew me to saying, want to do that. And so that's what I did. I went through the channels and put in the paperwork to do that. And I did, I got into intelligence school.

Paul Povolni (11:16.914)
It was on a daily basis, mean, truthful and raw. And that is exactly what drew me to saying, want to do that. And so that's what I did. I went through the channels and put in the paperwork to do that. And I did. got into intelligence school and then went on to various commands throughout my career.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (11:41.42)
and then went on to various commands throughout my career. But that I think also set me up for where the rest of my career, I mean, that was, would say is the first 50 % of my career started. And now here we are today.

Paul Povolni (11:46.784)
But that I think also set me up for where the rest of my career, I that was, would say is the first 50 % of my career started. And now here we are today. Yeah. So when it comes to intelligence and going into that field, I'm sure there were some things that for you were quite the, the head smack moments or quite the, the change of thinking about things.

So what were some of those first things when you started studying, when you started learning, when you started being trained in this area? What were some of the things that surprised you maybe about yourself or about some of the things that you were studying?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (12:30.978)
It was at the very beginning of my PhD program. And that was one of the very first in my face was a class about theoretical framework. We call it philosophy.

Paul Povolni (12:31.21)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (12:47.712)
And it was about the problem, formulating your problem for research that I had to keep struggling with.

Paul Povolni (12:47.966)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (12:57.516)
What do I know? What do I not know? It wasn't as easy as saying, this is a problem I see and I need to research it because you're not asking the right questions. You're making assumptions. I brought my bias in. I everything that is wrong with critical thinking. wasn't thinking critically. already had a master's and I thought, and I'm one of those that I thought my ego was, I have an advanced degree. I know everything. This was probably,

Paul Povolni (12:57.792)
What do I know? What do I not know? It was as easy as saying, this is a problem I see and I need to research it because you're not asking the right questions. You're making assumptions. I brought my bias in. I everything that is wrong with critical thinking. I wasn't thinking critically. I already had a master's and I thought, and I'm one of those that I thought my ego was, I have an advanced degree. I know everything. This was probably,

Dr. Charles M. Russo (13:27.466)
One of the class that I was taking really was an epiphany moment. I remember sitting there reading and going, wow, I don't know what I don't know.

Paul Povolni (13:27.72)
One of the, the, the class that I was taking really was an epiphany moment. remember sitting there reading and going, wow, I don't know what I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. And what was one of those first things that, that you learned that started changing the way you thought about critical thinking and started changing the way you thought about analytics.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (13:57.152)
in reading other people's work because, well, within the academic aspect, having to read other fellow.

Paul Povolni (13:57.384)
in reading other people's work because well within the academic aspect having to read other fellow

Dr. Charles M. Russo (14:09.26)
student work, I really started to challenge them, but I was challenging myself, really. I mean, I think that's where individuals who take offense to, well, why are you questioning me? That it's not necessarily me questioning you, it is also me questioning myself and how well I think.

Paul Povolni (14:09.516)
student work, I really started to challenge them, but I was challenging myself really. I mean, I think that's where individuals who take offense to, well, why are you questioning me? That it's not necessarily me questioning you. It is also me questioning myself. And how well I think. I started to read and branch out.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (14:36.48)
I started to read and branch out to other books like As a Man Thinketh by James Allen, The Intellectual Life. Gosh, those were written in the early 1900s, well before really the mid 1900s. And a lot of it was about thinking and confidence and courage, the courage to question. That is where I think my analytics really changed as well.

Paul Povolni (14:38.912)
to other books like As a Man Thinketh by James Allen, The Intellectual Life. Gosh, those were written in the early 1900s, well before really the mid 1900s. And a lot of it was about thinking and confidence and courage, the courage to question. That is where I think my analytics really changed as well.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (15:07.143)
as an intelligence individual.

Paul Povolni (15:07.398)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (15:12.47)
saying what are the outliers? Why am I thinking this way? Why is somebody else? Because we have to critique each other's work.

Paul Povolni (15:12.724)
saying what are the outliers? Why am I thinking this way? Why is somebody else? Because we have to critique each other's work. Yeah, yeah. So when we use and I want to make sure we're starting with the right understanding of terminology and things, when you talk about the term critical thinking for somebody that might not understand what that means, maybe they've heard it before, maybe they have somewhat an idea of what that means. What does critical thinking mean?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (15:42.614)
It is thinking about your thinking while thinking.

Paul Povolni (15:42.846)
It is thinking about your thinking while thinking. Wow. Okay. So how do I do that? How do you, what are some things, you know, because w know, we're in an age where people are doing a lot of talking. Sometimes it seems like they're not doing a lot of thinking. they're reactionary. you know, we've got social media, we've got, you know, ways to.

put forth our thoughts very quickly and very easily to a lot of people. sometimes it feels like we're not doing a whole lot of critical thinking. We're not doing a whole lot of thinking. We're doing a lot of reacting. So talk to somebody that is kind of in that stage. How do they reel it in? How do they start being a better thinker instead of a reactor?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (16:39.448)
Being an active listener is probably 80 % of being a critical thinker. What does that mean? It means, you know, processing what somebody's saying and understanding their perspective. And I'm not saying a tolerance of their perspective. You have to listen to what they are saying. To me, words have consequences. It's our choice of words.

Paul Povolni (16:39.702)
Being an active listener is probably 80 % of being a critical thinker. What does that mean? It means processing what somebody's and understanding their perspective. And I'm not saying a tolerance of their perspective. You have to listen to what they are saying. To me, words have consequences. It's our choice of words.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (17:09.632)
It's our picking apart. What does that word mean? What did that sentence mean? What did that statement or claim mean? That is to me, the most significant aspect of learning to critically think. You have to start, it's not about what you're saying. It's about what others are saying and you accepting the process by which you get to make that determination.

Paul Povolni (17:09.886)
It's our picking apart. What does that word mean? What did that sentence mean? What did that statement or claim mean? That is to me the most significant aspect of learning to critically think. have to start, it's not about what you're saying. It's about what others are saying and you accepting the process by which you get to make that determination.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (17:38.136)
whether you agree with it or not, because there's many times that I will not agree with somebody, but knowing that, okay, I'm not gonna win and it's not about a competition. It's not about winning a discussion.

Paul Povolni (17:38.39)
whether you agree with it or not, because there's many times that I will not agree with somebody, but knowing that, okay, I'm not gonna win, and it's not about a competition, it's not about winning a discussion.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (17:57.162)
It is understanding what their choice of their words and you going, is this person open to a dialogue based on their choice of words? That's the significance of critical thinking is really understanding of at what point can we have a discussion.

Paul Povolni (17:57.406)
It is understanding what their choice of their words and you going, is this person open to a dialogue? Based on their choice of words. That's the significance of critical thinking is really understanding of at what point can we have a discussion? Not a debate, not an argument.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (18:19.956)
not a debate, not an argument. Because if you think about, know, discussions are really based in fact, whereas a debate or argument is based in ignorance. And it's ignorance of details, it's ignorance of facts and truths. And you have to, there's a big difference of what is a fact and what is the truth. Because somebody's truth is their reality.

Paul Povolni (18:23.274)
because if you think about discussions are really based in fact, whereas a debate or argument is based in ignorance. And it's ignorance of details, it's ignorance of facts and truths. And you have to, it's a big difference of what is a fact and what is the truth. Because somebody's truth is their reality may not necessarily be your reality.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (18:48.834)
may not necessarily be your reality. It's coming to an understanding of what somebody's facts are. That's the listening part of if they're expousing facts, do you agree with that? Can you support that as a fact? Not that they have to support that as a fact. Yes, you can ask for that. That is part of why I have such passion for learning, understanding, and also teaching critical thinking.

Paul Povolni (18:51.338)
It's coming to an understanding of what somebody's facts are. That's the listening part of if they're expousing facts, do you agree with that? Can you support that as a fact? Not that they have to support that as a fact. Yes, you can ask for that. That is part of why I have such passion for learning, understanding, and also teaching critical thinking. There's mathematical formulas.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (19:17.506)
There's mathematical formulas and I'm not a mathematician. hate math. But I think having somebody

Paul Povolni (19:20.692)
And I'm not a mathematician. But I think having somebody.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (19:28.994)
really question themselves and say, am I thinking about what, like you had said, we're just inundated with soundbites and information that, you know, and we see it all day long on social media. When someone posts something and they say this is the truth, this is the fact, this is their perspective, we're not, we're not going, that's your perspective. That if you look at a picture,

Paul Povolni (19:29.214)
really question themselves and say, I thinking about what, like you had said, we're just inundated with soundbites and information that, you know, and we see it all day long on social media. When someone posts something and they say this is the truth, this is the fact, this is their perspective, we're not going, that's your perspective. That if you look at a picture,

Dr. Charles M. Russo (19:59.554)
picture doesn't paint the actual truth. It can be taken out of context. That's you as a critical thinker have to be able to go, I'm not going to trust that picture just yet. It's appalling what I'm seeing or it's victory in what I'm seeing, but

Paul Povolni (19:59.668)
A picture doesn't paint the actual truth. It can be taken out of context. That's you as a critical thinker have to be able to go, I'm not going to trust that picture just yet. It's appalling what I'm seeing or it's victory in what I'm seeing.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (20:20.48)
until I know what happens before, after, and knowing more, I'm going to reserve the right to make a decision. See, is about critical thinking. Ultimately, it's about making better decisions, better judgment.

Paul Povolni (20:20.734)
Until I know what happens before, after, and knowing more, I'm going to reserve the right to make a decision. See, is about critical thinking. Ultimately is about making better decisions, better judgments. Right. So you mentioned the mathematical formula. Is that something you could share or is it too complex or takes too much time for you to be able to share that? Not at all. Not at all. And this is where I try to break down for.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (20:42.956)
Not at all, not at all. And this is where I try to break down for everybody. I just don't look at advanced degrees or what people see as intelligence analysts, these intelligence ushers as we sit on high, we're all knowing. No, let's take argumentation because that always starts everything, right?

Paul Povolni (20:50.29)
Everybody I just don't look at advanced degrees or you know what people see as intelligence Analysts these intelligence officers as we sit on high We're all knowing no Let's take argumentation Because that always starts everything right? right the debate of a discussion is an argument an argument is just you take

Dr. Charles M. Russo (21:11.062)
of a debate, of a discussion is an argument. An argument is just you take the mathematical equation of number one, here's your argument, and you list the argument. But arguments have to have premises. Why are we arguing this? And you can have, usually it's nice to have three or four premises of almost kind of like a hypothesis.

Paul Povolni (21:17.578)
the mathematical equation of number one, here's your argument, and list the argument. But arguments have to have premises. Why are we arguing this? And you can have, usually it's nice to have three or four premises of almost kind of like a hypothesis. The premise of this argument is that A is true, that B is true, that C is true.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (21:38.862)
The premise of this argument is that A is true, that B is true, that C is true. Now if you follow mathematics like algebraic calculations, so you have argument and then you have P1, P2, P3. Premise 1, premise 2, premise 3. A line, which we usually we say is division, correct? And so that's the therefore line.

Paul Povolni (21:46.73)
Now, if you follow mathematics like algebraic calculations, you have argument, and then you have P1, P2, P3, premise one, premise two, premise three, a line, which we usually we say is division, correct? And so that's the therefore line. And under that is the conclusion.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (22:08.522)
and under that is the conclusion. So the argument is argument one plus or minus P1, P2, P3. Therefore, the conclusion is, and you have to go, it true? Is the argument true based off of these premise? Therefore, the conclusion should be true.

Paul Povolni (22:14.944)
The argument is argument one plus or minus P1, P2, P3. Therefore, the conclusion is, and you have to go, it true? Is the argument true based off of these premise? Therefore, the conclusion should be true. You can't have the opposite. can't say, here's the argument, here's all the true premise. Therefore, the conclusion is false.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (22:34.86)
You can't have the opposite. You can't say, here's the argument, here's all the true premise, therefore the conclusion is false. Now you can have that flipped. You can say, here's the argument, premise one, premise two, premise three is false, therefore the conclusion could be false. So you see the probability, the possibility. That's why I say it's kind of the mathematical equations.

Paul Povolni (22:43.508)
Now you can have that flipped. Yeah. You can say, here's the argument. Premise one, premise two, premise three is false. Therefore the conclusion could be false. So you see the probability, the possibility. That's why I say it's kind of the mathematical equation. Can you, do you have maybe a real world example for somebody that's listening that they're still not quite grasping it that you can.

share where that formula might have been used in the past or is currently being used in current culture that is a way to kind of look at it in a real use case type scenario. I can. Matter of fact, I just published last night on my sub stack an article about argument mapping.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (23:26.894)
matter of fact, just published last night on my sub stack an article about argument mapping, argumentation mapping in modern intelligence. And so as I can go back to, and I put a lot of real world.

Paul Povolni (23:37.578)
argumentation mapping in modern intelligence. And so, I can go back to, and I put a lot of real world.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (23:49.832)
scenarios in there. And I tried. I'm just trying to look for it now. Okay, so here's the argument is that departments should standardize weekly low-stake quizzes across curriculum. This is more say towards academia.

Paul Povolni (23:50.16)
Scenarios in there and I tried That's okay. Okay, so here's The argument is that departments should standardize Weekly low-state quizzes across curriculum. This is more say towards academia that

Dr. Charles M. Russo (24:16.568)
when we look at the extract explicit premises. So these are would be truce. And premise one is that frequent formative assessments increase timely feedback to the student. That number two is timely feedback improves student learning outcomes. Premise three, weekly low stakes

Paul Povolni (24:16.874)
when we look at the extract explicit premises. So these would be truce. And premise one is that frequent formative assessments increase timely feedback to the student. That number two is timely feedback improves student learning outcomes. Premise three, weekly low stakes

Dr. Charles M. Russo (24:45.23)
Quizzes are a form of frequent formative assessment. And then the fourth premise is that departments that adopt weekly quizzes will likely see higher pass rates and improved retention. So when we reveal the structure of P1, P2, P3, are we going to actually come out with the conclusion that weekly quizzes improve learning outcomes?

Paul Povolni (24:45.448)
quizzes are a form of frequent formative assessment and then the fourth premise is that departments that adopt weekly quizzes will likely see higher pass rates and improved retention. So when we reveal the structure of P1, P2, P3, are we going to actually come out with the conclusion that weekly quizzes improve learning outcomes?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (25:16.61)
We can say that there's a primary argument that P1, P2, P3 are a chain argument, if you go back through those three. There's a sub argument and that is P4, that it supports the conclusion, pass rates and retention and improvement. therefore standardizing

Paul Povolni (25:16.877)
We can say that there's a primary argument that P1, P2, P3 are a chain argument, if you go back through those three. There's a sub-argument, and that is P4, that it supports the conclusion, pass rates, retention, and improvement, so therefore standardizing

Dr. Charles M. Russo (25:44.61)
What we say is low stakes meaning they're weighted at maybe 1 or 2 % of your grade. But it makes students teach themselves to retain information, not just regurgitate it.

Paul Povolni (25:44.938)
What we say is low stakes meaning they're weighted at maybe one or 2 % of your grade. But it makes students teach themselves to retain information, not just regurgitate it. Yeah. Okay. So, you know, that's a good real world. Yeah. Yeah. So, so let me, so, you know, you mentioned the word truth and kind of starting from a point of argument and, and, you know, that is

Dr. Charles M. Russo (26:01.262)
I hope that hits our good real world.

Paul Povolni (26:11.84)
you know, somebody's truth, something that we hear in today's culture quite a bit is my truth. My truth is different to your truth. Are we, are we using that correctly? Is there such a thing as my truth or your truth, or is it my perspective, your perspective, or is there some other word that would be more accurate to use? Like, how would you, how would you approach that discussion?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (26:38.914)
That's exactly, I mean, you are the perfect example that you stated that very correctly. When someone says the truth is, it's their truth. It is their perspective. And you have to, as the receiver, you have to take that with the grain of salt that it is. It is their reality. Not saying that the reality is off. You get to make that judgment. That's why, you know, we have

Paul Povolni (26:39.232)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (27:09.92)
Unfortunately, in our society, we no longer have this quid pro quo. You get to say your truth and I get to either accept or reject it. And if I reject it, it should start a dialogue of, please enlighten me on how your truth is fact.

Paul Povolni (27:10.26)
Unfortunately in our society, we no longer have this quid pro quo. You get to say your truth and I get to either accept or reject it. And if I reject it, it should start a dialogue of, please enlighten me on how your truth is fact. Yeah. The truth is not fact. And unfortunately, that's some of the issues we have in our modern civility is that

Dr. Charles M. Russo (27:31.554)
The truth is not fact. And unfortunately, that's some of the issues we have in our modern civility is that so many people want to say this is the truth. And you're going, but that's not fact. Fact is indisputable. It is empirical. It has supporting evidence that cannot be picked apart. If it can be picked apart,

Paul Povolni (27:41.202)
So many people want to say this is the truth and you're going, but that's not flat. Right. is indisputable. It is empirical. has supporting evidence that cannot be picked apart. If it can be picked apart, then it is no longer fact. is theoretical. It is conceptual. Yeah.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (27:59.938)
then it is no longer fact, it is theoretical, it is conceptual.

Paul Povolni (28:06.304)
Yeah. And I, you know, and I think that's kind of where we are as a culture. We, we use such a strong term as truth and truth is a, it is a very strong term. And so we use the term, you know, this is my truth and it almost seems like it's inarguable. cannot criticize it because it's my truth as opposed to saying this is my perspective. and it's, and it's a lot easier to

I talk about a perspective than it is to talk about a truth because in my mind, you know, truth, like you said, is based in fact. And the more you look at truth, the truth here it gets like you can't look at a truth so deep that it becomes not a truth. Like a truth is a truth, right? Yeah. Well, I'm going to agree with you, but I think the truth really, if you keep digging.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (28:54.06)
Yes. Well, I'm going to agree with you, but I think the truth really, if you keep digging and that truth, as you said, becomes truth, it really becomes fact.

Paul Povolni (29:05.426)
And that truth, as you said, becomes truth. really becomes fact. Yeah. That if it's totally, without dispute, then it becomes, it morphs into what, is a fact. Right. Right. And, perspective of course is something that is changeable. mean, we, you know, I've, throughout my life, I've changed my perspective on things.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (29:11.01)
that if it's totally without dispute, then it becomes, it morphs into what is a fact.

Paul Povolni (29:32.46)
Um, as I've matured, as I've gotten more facts, as I've gotten more experience, as I've gotten more insights, as I've lived, as I've, I've challenged those perspectives, you know, I've, I've changed. So perspectives can change, but truth cannot change. Right. Am I, am I totally wrong in that or am I right in that? Your truth can change. Again, that to me is just like a opinion or a belief. Those are emotional.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (29:53.746)
Your truth can change. Again, that to me is just like a opinion or a belief. Those are emotional based. Whereas when we start talking facts, it's empirical. It's undisputable because you have done so much or there has been so much done in supporting and having the evidence to support that.

Paul Povolni (30:01.824)
based. Whereas when we start talking facts, it's empirical. It's undisputable. Yeah. Because you have done so much or there has been so much done in supporting and having the evidence to support that it cannot be explained any other way. Therefore, the perspective is not looked at any other way.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (30:24.027)
it cannot be explained any other way. Therefore, the perspective is not looked at any other way.

Paul Povolni (30:32.544)
Yeah. And so, you know, one of the other things that, you know, and, and, you know, we're talking critical thinking and, and how do the analytic about our thinking. I think it was Ricky Gervais that was talking about comedy and he was talking about that. So many people are offended by things and they like to call those things that they're offended by as offensive. And he said, it's not, it might not necessarily be,

an offensive statement, it just offends you. so, you know, how, when it comes to, you know, dealing, you know, going back to the whole social media, going back to what, you know, this, this influx of information that we get on, on television, on, you know, streaming services, on social media, when it comes to being, you know, critical, know, having critical thinking and analytical thinking about some of those things, how do you respond? Do you respond the same way as Ricky Gervais did that?

You are not something that might not be offensive. It's just that you yourself are offended. totally agree with that statement. And that's you get you. That's the nice thing about being a human. Yeah, we get choice. We can choose our thinking. Yeah. Our frame of mind. And I will support and defend somebody's perspective.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (31:36.652)
I totally agree with that statement. that's you get you, that's the nice thing about being a human. We get choice. We can choose our thinking, our frame of mind. And I will support and defend somebody's perspective, whether I agree with it or not, because I think having that ability to voice

Paul Povolni (31:58.656)
whether I agree with it or not, because I think having that ability to voice a perspective allows somebody else to voice their perspective, whether for or against, or it's just an alternative analysis. Right, right. So, I mean, I see within the criminal justice realm, police officers, detectives, analysts will always say that,

Dr. Charles M. Russo (32:06.72)
A perspective allows somebody else to voice their perspective, whether for or against, or it's just an alternative analysis. So, I mean, I see within the criminal justice realm, police officers, detectives, analysts will always say that, you know, eyewitness accounts are never trustworthy. Because you and I,

Paul Povolni (32:28.764)
eyewitness accounts are never trustworthy. Because you and I could stand right next to each other, view the same event, but when questioned, come up with completely different viewpoints, details, who or what happened, colors, shapes. And yet we were standing shoulder to shoulder and watched the same event unfold. Right.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (32:35.278)
could stand right next to each other, view the same event, but when questioned, come up with completely different viewpoints, details, who or what happened, colors, shapes, and yet we were standing shoulder to shoulder and watched the same event unfold. That's just the human mind. That is the thinking of the human mind.

Paul Povolni (32:58.252)
That's just the human mind. That is the thinking of the human mind. Right. And also, you know, if we have a bias, I mean, we're seeing this happen, you know, with the reporting of things. We have a lot of turmoil going on in different areas of the country. And, you know, we'll see, you know, one news organization cover one thing and the another news organization cover the exact same thing. And they come out with totally different stories.

because they have a bias towards and a lean towards a certain perspective that kind of makes them create things that aren't necessarily truth. They're a perspective. They're a bias. They're a point of view that they share that taints what they put out there. And, you know, we see it all the time, right? We do. And that is unfortunately the politicalization.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (33:51.544)
We do. And that is unfortunately the politicalization. We as a society here in the United States, well, I would say around the world now, for the most part, the Western world has become so polarized, everything revolves around the politicalization of thought. And we can no longer have discussions about say agriculture.

Paul Povolni (33:57.376)
We as a society here in the United States, well, I would say around the world now, for the most part, the Western world has become so polarized, everything revolves around the politicalization of thought. And we can no longer have discussions about say agriculture because somebody inevitably will bring it to a political point.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (34:19.17)
because somebody inevitably will bring it to a political point. And that's not what we're wanting to talk about. Maybe we're wanting to talk about self-gardening and self-sustainment of having your own vegetable garden. But there are people out there that will fight against that. This is, you all know, then there's the political protections and...

Paul Povolni (34:27.018)
That's not what we're wanting to talk about. Maybe we're wanting to talk about self Gardening and and self-sustainment of having your own vegetable garden But there are people out there that will fight against that because you all know then there's the political protections and We we see it we we call them like ho8 karen's and right But that to me is part of that significant lack

Dr. Charles M. Russo (34:45.388)
We see it, we call them like HOA parents and such. But that to me is part of that significant lack of critical thinking. We have glommed onto the social media, to media at large and not open to two different sides, like let's watch CNN and let's watch Fox News. And you can see how very different they will report. And you got to...

Paul Povolni (34:55.038)
of critical thinking. have glommed onto the social media, to media at large, and not open to two different sides, like let's watch CNN and let's watch Fox News. And you can see how very different they will report. And you've got to have that perspective of neither one of them is correct.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (35:14.264)
have that perspective of neither one of them is correct. So let me do my own research. See, that's the problem. Nobody wants to. They'd just rather scroll and go to the next. And they're confirmation biased because they'll hear it from several different sources, if you will, or influencers, and it becomes their truth.

Paul Povolni (35:20.308)
So let me do my own research. See, that's the problem. Nobody wants to, they'd just rather scroll and go to the next and their confirmation bias, because they'll hear it from several different sources, if you will, or influencers and they become their truth. Yeah. Yeah. Right. And we see that that happened quite a bit because we have this bubble of stuff and sadly the algorithm,

does a disservice to us because it feeds it. We pause long enough on a post, we pause long enough on an opinion, and suddenly we're fed more of that perspective. then we're, like you said, it's confirmation bias. We start seeing more and more of it. It aligns with what I was thinking exactly, but the algorithm is actually training you to lean into a certain bias.

and perspective because it monitors your scrolling and monitors what you pause on.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (36:24.726)
Yes. And this is where I like to pull the pin and drop the hand grenade. discussions is then you bring up the algorithm, the use of artificial intelligence, deep fakes. That's going to even muddy the waters even more. And I think have a whole new generation of, well, I mean, just the other day I was watching.

Paul Povolni (36:25.044)
Yes. And this is where I like to pull the pin and drop that hand grenade. and discussions is then you bring up the algorithm, the use of artificial intelligence, fakes. That's going to even muddy the waters even more. Yeah. And I think have a whole new generation of, well, I mean, just the other day I was watching.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (36:53.472)
Yep. Scrolling through. there was a picture of, is it Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mondami and his mother. And that people around the internet were taking that as, my gosh, here's all these people. This is the cabal we're talking about. And this is the right wing side doing this.

Paul Povolni (36:53.772)
scrolling through and there was a picture of, is it Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mondami and his mother and that people around the internet were taking that as, my gosh, here's all these people. This is the cabal we're talking about and this is the right wing side doing this.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (37:23.086)
And even I had to go, wait, no, you got to look at the picture. There's shadows or there's brightness where somebody else, and I did find someone who picked it apart and was able to go find where the original pictures of each one of these individuals, Jeffrey Epstein as well, was in there. And it said, here, this picture was specifically taken from this conference in this year.

Paul Povolni (37:23.34)
And even I had to go wait, no, you got to look at the picture. There's shadows or there's brightness where somebody else and I did find someone who picked it apart and was able to go find where the original pictures of each one of these individuals, Jeffrey Epstein as well was in there. And it said, here's this picture was specifically taken from this conference in this year.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (37:51.828)
Somebody just did AI, Photoshopped it. But you see how many comments there are about, we tell you these are all bad people. And it's like, okay, you can't take it that all these people are in the same spot at the same time. And so therefore it proves your point. It really just proved my point that you have to think critically about like really

Paul Povolni (37:52.146)
Somebody just did AI, Photoshopped it. you see how many comments there are about, we tell you these are all bad people and you're just like, okay, you can't take it that all these people are in the same spot at the same time. And so therefore it proves your point. It really just proved my point that you have to think critically about like really

Dr. Charles M. Russo (38:21.672)
somehow all that these people were together in the same room at the same time. Yeah.

Paul Povolni (38:21.968)
Somehow all of these people were together in the same room at the same time. Yeah. Right. Right. And I think we are in a, a dangerous place and it's only going to get worse because we can no longer trust our eyes. You know, we can no longer trust what we're hearing because now you can, you know, create somebody's voice very easily and mimic their voice. can quickly create a video.

and a photograph of a certain situation that we now have tools available to us that we can create a reality that never happened, never existed. And we're going to have to learn critical thinking. That's why this discussion I think is so important, because we're going to have to learn those critical thinking skills. We're going to have to learn how to be more analytical with what we're absorbing and what we're letting set.

in our hearts and minds as truth, because we can be deceived so easily these days and AI is not helping and the algorithm's not helping. Exactly. And that's where my passion is taking me now. I, you know, as an academic, I am trying to get in more of the universities I teach for several universities, but, at the graduate and the doctoral level.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (39:30.958)
Exactly. And that's where my passion has taken me now. I, you know, as an academic, I am trying to get in more of the universities I teach for several universities, but, and at the graduate and the doctoral level. And we do see, of course, the AI being used. Some universities are still having a problem with academic integrity and

Paul Povolni (39:50.132)
And we do see, of course, the AI being used. Some universities are still having a problem with academic integrity. But none of the AI checkers, they don't work anymore. Because whether we use Cheminai or Claude or ChapGPT or Copilot, there's tons of them out there. Hallucinations by AI.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (39:59.96)
But none of the AI checkers, they don't work anymore. Because whether we use Cheminai or Claude or ChatGPT or Copilot, you know, there's tons of them out there. Hallucinations by AI is significantly down, almost completely wiped off. It doesn't make up anything anymore. Maybe one or 2%.

Paul Povolni (40:19.992)
is significantly down, almost completely wiped off. It doesn't make up anything anymore. Maybe one or two percent. But then you look at the Stink-A-Fancy that it still has, and that's its core brain of its API that was created. It still is a generalist. It cannot do analysis. That's the critical thinking. You still have to, as the human...

Dr. Charles M. Russo (40:30.114)
But then you look at the stinker fancy that it still has, and that's its core brain of its API that was created. It still is a generalist. cannot do analysis. That's the critical thinking. You still have to, as the human, ask it for all this information. There's great prompts you can do. You can learn AI. could become a consultant in AI, but ultimately it still just aggregates information.

Paul Povolni (40:48.828)
Ask it for all this information. There's great prompts you can do. You can learn AI. can become a consultant in AI. But ultimately, it still just aggregates information. This is where I try to tell students, practitioners, analysts, leadership, use AI. But you still have to question the so what for. Give it the conclusion.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (40:59.98)
This is where I try to tell students, practitioners, analysts, leadership, use AI. But you still have to question the so what for. Give it the conclusion. You can't ask AI to give it a conclusion. All it'll do is it'll wrap up the main points. But you have to say whether or not that this is potential, possible, probable,

Paul Povolni (41:16.384)
You can't ask AI to give it a conclusion. All it'll do is it'll wrap up the main points. You have to say whether or not that this is potential, possible, probable, or if it at almost that quantitative statistics. The AI in academia needs to be embraced, but that means curriculum has to be changed. And using that of

Dr. Charles M. Russo (41:28.27)
if it back almost that quantitative statistics, the AI in academia needs to be embraced, but that means curriculum has to be changed and using that of we have to go from how does this work to I have to show how this works in analysis and critical thinking, because that's the only way we're to get people to come back.

Paul Povolni (41:45.802)
We have to go from, how does this work to, I have to show how this works in analysis and critical thinking. Because that's the only way we're to get people to come back to thinking rather than just typing in the direction prompted to AI saying, write this essay on this topic. And it'll do a great job. It's a great research assistant.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (41:57.932)
thinking rather than just typing in the direction prompted to AI saying, write this essay on this topic and it'll do a great job. It's a great research assistant, but as academics, as curriculum developers, and this again is where I've had in the last year, the, well, head smack, like

Paul Povolni (42:11.04)
But as academics, as curriculum developers, and this again is where I've had in the last year, the, well, head smack. Like, why are we not thinking when universities say, if you use AI, you're an academic violation. Whereas other universities have completely embraced it and said, you will use nothing.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (42:26.798)
Why are we not thinking when universities say, if you use AI, you're an academic violation, whereas other universities have completely embraced it and said, you will use nothing but AI because now you are going to have to tell us how you arrived to that. Not, you know, here's all the stuff I read and here's what it says. How did you arrive to that?

Paul Povolni (42:40.832)
but AI, because now you are going to have to tell us how you arrived to that. Here's all the stuff I read, and here's what it says. How did you arrive to that? That's bringing in that critical thinking aspect. And I think it's the same with when we start talking about analytical integrity within the intelligence community, same thing.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (42:57.516)
That's bringing in that critical thinking aspect. And I think it's the same with when we start talking about analytical integrity within the intelligence community. Same thing. Tell us how you arrived to that, not that you arrived to, and again, the scandal left and right. I appalled at both of them. I've lived through some of them as an intelligence analyst, as an academic.

Paul Povolni (43:11.052)
Tell us how you arrived to that, not that you arrived to, and again, the scandal left and right, I appalled at both of them. I've lived through some of them as an intelligence analyst, as an academic, I've picked it apart. And you still have to ask, how did you arrive at that conclusion? Not the why you arrived, because that unfortunately brings in that I truth.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (43:27.372)
I've picked it apart. And you still have to ask, how did you arrive at that conclusion? Not the why you arrived, because that unfortunately brings in that high truth. That bias comes in.

Paul Povolni (43:41.202)
Right, That bias come dead. Yeah. So in, trying to help people think more critically or be a better thinker when it comes to a, a decision maker, what are some tools that somebody can take away from this conversation that could help them in being a better decision maker or a better thinker? And maybe those are two different, frameworks or two different ways of thinking about stuff.

Let's talk about some really practical down to earth. How do I become a better decision maker or better thinker?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (44:16.728)
I would say first and foremost, you have to be more reflective. You have to ask yourself the harder questions that maybe you don't even know what those harder questions are just yet. But asking yourself the questions of, here's my decision, but now I need to, how did I arrive to my decision? Why did I arrive at that decision using what logic?

Paul Povolni (44:17.002)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (44:45.068)
That to me is first and foremost your own tool. But how do you develop that tool? It is reading. It's going back to the basics of reading philosophy. We stopped teaching philosophy in grade school back in the 1960s. This is where you can see the education levels really dip down that we move

Paul Povolni (44:45.342)
That to me is first and foremost your own tool. How do you develop that tool? It is reading. It's going back to the basics of reading philosophy. We stopped teaching philosophy in grade school back in the 1960s. This is where you can see the education levels really dip down that we move.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (45:13.752)
from second and third in the world in mathematics and these assessments and competencies to where we're 49th out of 193 countries or depending on the day, 210. But reading is a significant part. And I actually have some reading lists on my website of where to start.

Paul Povolni (45:24.22)
, 193 countries or depending on the day, know 210. But reading is a significant part and I actually have some reading lists on my website of very weird as art.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (45:43.566)
It's logic, it's learning logic. You need to learn that through philosophy. And I don't care where you start. You can start at Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, or you can go to the Stoics, Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, Epictetus. Or do you just go to...

Paul Povolni (45:43.884)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (46:02.862)
Paul Povolni (46:03.258)
Dr. Charles M. Russo (46:05.39)
Russell Bertrand or we go to Nietzsche. So it's like, it doesn't matter because philosophers try to explain the world by giving their thought, which are really supposed to be thought provoking. And that's what gets those critical thinking to me, critical thinking juices that fuel. Start have the third one I say is start having conversations like

Paul Povolni (46:05.676)
Russell Bertrand or we go to Nietzsche so it's like it doesn't matter because Philosophers try to explain the world By giving their thought Which are really supposed to be thought-provoking Yeah, that's what gets those critical thinking to me critical thinking juices that you'll Start have the third one. I say is start having conversations like

Dr. Charles M. Russo (46:35.084)
I'm a big cigar aficionado. I love sitting at the cigar lounge. I don't want to turn the clock back to the, you know, 19th century, but there was reason that we had gentlemen's clubs.

Paul Povolni (46:35.38)
I'm a big cigar fish, I love sitting at the cigar lounge. I don't want to turn the clock back to the, know, 19th century, but there was reason that we had gentlemen's clubs. was that was where yes, gentlemen, men could actually have conversations that at times were crafts. The women were not interested at that time in those. So do we have

Dr. Charles M. Russo (46:49.428)
It was that was where yes, gentlemen, men could actually have conversations that at times were crafts. they, women were not interested at that time in those. do we have conversational clubs? And I'm not talking about just gender. If you want to come here, here's this table and that's what cigar lounges really have become is this sit back.

Paul Povolni (47:04.78)
Conversational clubs and I'm not talking about just gender If you want to come here, here's this table and that's what cigar lounges really have become is this Sit back enjoy a cigar because it's slow burning But so is the conversation. Yeah. Yeah, we can have deeper conversations But that's a problem here. I think in our society in the 21st century is

Dr. Charles M. Russo (47:18.55)
enjoy a cigar because it's slow burning, but so is the conversation. And we can have deeper conversations, but that's a problem here, I think, in our society in the 21st century is because of social media, because of the lack of critical thinking, education. We no longer have the ability to do conversations.

Paul Povolni (47:33.418)
because of social media, because of the lack of critical thinking, education, we no longer have the ability to do conversations. Yeah. Well, well, and the Bible talks about iron sharpening iron, and I don't think we get into those situations where we are crossing swords on topics and people are challenging each other's thinking and we're having those deep conversations because

Dr. Charles M. Russo (47:50.734)
Yes.

Paul Povolni (48:02.708)
It kind of goes back to everything that we've talked about is we have these perspectives and my truths and we don't like them challenged. And if they're challenged, then we think that's offensive as opposed to saying I am offended. And so we've kind of lost the ability to have conversations that are sword sharpening sword type situations. so

You know, that does make it tough. And I think that's where we sometimes lose as a culture because we've become so screen-based in our interactions. You know, even in a restaurant, you see people that are not really engaging in conversation. We don't have times where people just get together and say, here's my thought, and being able to share that honestly, and then be able to receive any kind of pushback.

from others without saying, well, I'm offended or that's terrible. Or how do you say that? You know, where, where I'm unfriending you, you're canceled. I have no more interest in that relationship.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (49:08.034)
Yes. And I did that about a month ago. A colleague of all things had posted within a social media platform and very, very to me, just without thought. was, you know, it was political. So it was, you know, Donald Trump bad. And it was like, okay, well, what about it?

Paul Povolni (49:08.33)
Yes, and I did that about a month ago. A colleague of all things had posted within a social media platform and very, very to me, without thought. was, you know, it was political. So it was, you know, Donald Trump bad. And it was like, OK, well, what about it?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (49:38.432)
It wasn't just about him. was about a policy. And I went through and provided what I thought, not in defense of the man, but in defense of the policy that they were attacking, but they attacked the man and not necessarily the policy, but they had listed the policy and equated one with the other. And so I said, wait now, here's background on this policy. Here's where.

Paul Povolni (49:38.76)
It wasn't just about him. It was about a policy. And I went through and provided what I thought, not in defense of the man, but in defense of the policy that they were attacking, but they attacked the man and not necessarily the policy, but they had listed the policy and equated one with the other. And so I said, wait now, here's background on this policy. Here's where

Dr. Charles M. Russo (50:08.462)
you can say previous administrations going literally back to the 1980s. So I went back like what? Six presidencies.

Paul Povolni (50:08.892)
you can say previous administrations going literally back to the 1980s. So I went back like what six presidencies.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (50:21.098)
And I became the villain. That it was, I was called a charlatan and they attacked of course saying, you profess to be a critical thinker, yet you don't know a first thing about it. And I'm like, but I brought receipts. I was able to give you not conjecture, not assumption, but I was able to give you

Paul Povolni (50:21.448)
And I became the villain. Yeah. That it was, I was called a charlatan and they attacked, course saying, well, you profess to be a critical thinker yet you, don't know a first thing about it. And I'm like, but I brought receipts. was able to give you not conjecture, not assumption, but I was able to give you.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (50:51.854)
URLs to factual studies done by various think tanks, like, you know, really looking at the sources, the validity of sources and saying they're empirical, they're peer reviewed, meaning other people have weighed in and whether decided that it's good or it's bad research. But I get away from news, motivation, you had talked about

Paul Povolni (50:52.172)
URLs to factual studies done by various think tanks, really looking at the sources, the validity of sources and saying they're empirical, they're peer-reviewed, meaning other people have weighed in and whether decided that it's good or it's bad research. But I get away from news, motivation. You had talked about

Dr. Charles M. Russo (51:20.106)
each news organization. So I detest news myself. I don't watch news if I don't have to. I look for the headlines, like what's really, but then I go do my own. To the point, yeah, in the end, I was name called and I was like, really? I'm just trying to have a conversation here. They didn't want, and these are people my age in our 50s and 60s. And I'm like,

Paul Povolni (51:20.364)
each news organization. So I detest news myself. I don't watch news if I don't have to. I look for the headlines, like what's really... But then I go do my own. To the point, yeah, in the end, I was name called and I was like, really? I'm just trying to have a conversation here. Yeah. They didn't want... And these are people my age in our 50s and 60s. And I'm like...

Dr. Charles M. Russo (51:48.054)
So it's not necessarily generational. It's just the way people want to see their truth. And that was it.

Paul Povolni (51:48.372)
So it's not necessarily generational. It's just the way people want to see their truth. And that was it. Right. Well, and I think, I think we're in a, in a place where people are so, so tied into a perspective. I think the, I think the matrix was such a good movie. So many things that you, I continue to see in that movie that are so relevant to, to societies, you know, where the, and I can't remember the character's name, but he was sitting.

in the fake world and he was eating a steak and he was saying, man, you I know this steak isn't real. I know that this is all an illusion, but I think I want to stay in the illusion and I won't, I don't want to go back to reality, you know? And so I think we have a lot of people these days that are so stuck in the illusion that they don't want any other truth.

to, they said, I want to forget everything else. I see, I want this perspective to rule my life and, intelligent people and smart people that even when confronted with facts, because their bias is so strong, because their preference is so strong that they will totally manipulate a fact to be an untruth simply because of their bias.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (53:09.602)
And we've unfortunately become a society that if you say the lie long enough and often enough, it almost wipes out any truth behind it. It becomes, that lie becomes the truth because so many people believe it and they don't even want to refute it anymore.

Paul Povolni (53:09.898)
And we've unfortunately become a society that if you say the lie long enough and often enough, it almost wipes out any truth behind it. becomes, that lie becomes the truth because so many people believe it and they don't even want to refute it anymore.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (53:34.816)
And I see that all the time in academia, unfortunately, with students that, especially in informal discussions, they get to make their own statements and claims in informal discussions. Because research is not necessary in these discussions, according to the universities. It's just like we're, we're not teaching the critical thinking aspect of go ahead and make your claim, but you better support it with

Paul Povolni (53:35.124)
And I see that all the time in academia, unfortunately, with students that, especially in informal discussions, they get to make their own statements and claims in informal discussions. Because research is not necessary in these discussions, according to the universities. It's just like we're not teaching the critical thinking aspect of go ahead and make your claim, but you better support it with

Dr. Charles M. Russo (54:04.084)
evidence that states that it's true or not true, depending on your perspective that you're presenting. And social media doesn't help. think our public education system doesn't help either, because again, we're not really teaching any kind of critical thinking. It's memorization and regurgitation. That's where I will say it becomes an indoctrination.

Paul Povolni (54:04.392)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (54:34.09)
And I'm not talking about indoctrination in the adversary way of, you know, political. I'm just talking about that we're not teaching critical thinking. I, I myself have been a English literature teacher, a research methods teacher, a cybersecurity teacher at a high school. So from ninth to 12th grade and.

Paul Povolni (54:34.348)
And I'm not talking about indoctrination in the adversary way of, you know, political. I'm just talking about that. We're not teaching critical thinking. I myself have been a English literature teacher, a research methods teacher, a cybersecurity teacher at a high school. So from ninth to 12th grade and

Dr. Charles M. Russo (55:05.166)
is the best word taken aback. Like where do you begin with these generations? Because they all say, well, you know, I have AI. But that's what, you know, it said, I can show you 15 Instagram posts that say that this is true. And you're like, my God.

Paul Povolni (55:05.388)
called is the best word. Wow. Taken aback. Like where do you begin with these generations? Because they all say, well, you know, I have AI. But that's what, you know, it said, I can show you 15 Instagram posts that say that this is true. like, my God. Well, I think also that, you know, the Bible talks about, you know, people not wanting to believe the truth. I'd rather believe a lie.

And I think because when, when there's, when there's a truth out there that conflicts with your desires, you'll, you'll almost rather believe a lie, you know, because if you believe the truth, you're going to have to change behavior. You're going to have to change thinking. You're going to have to change your opinion. And so you'd rather believe a lie and that lie becomes then a truth or perspective, a filter that you look at life through. Right. Yes. And that's where I think critical thinking is.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (56:00.31)
Yes. And that's where I think critical thinking is the most significant aspect of the sustainment of our society is that if you can automatically review what somebody else has said is the truth based on really a lie, you have that skill to even if it's just go, huh, that's where I'll put conspiracy theories is there theories that

Paul Povolni (56:03.786)
the most significant aspect of the sustainment of our society is that if you can automatically review what somebody else has said is the truth based on really a lie, you have that skill to even if it's just go, huh, that's where I'll put conspiracy theories is there theories that you can get rid of the word conspiracy and just say, I have a theory.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (56:28.556)
You know, you can get rid of the word conspiracy and just say, I have a theory.

You're not saying it's a statement of fact, it's not a truth, but you're going, I should be able to stop when somebody else is coming out with a lie.

Paul Povolni (56:35.146)
You're not saying it's a statement of fact. It's not a truth. What you're going, I I, I should be able to stop when somebody else is coming out with the lie. Yeah. Yeah. Well, and the theory really is once again, a, here's a, here's a, here's a perspective that I am putting forth on this situation that is different to maybe the perspective that everybody else has on the situation. And, know,

Hopefully as that perspective is challenged, hopefully as more information comes forth, either that perspective will either be untrue or it'll be true. so, we like, you know, I think conspiracy theories is a good way to make, uh, to, negate it or make it seem like it's not that important or it's silly or it's tinfoil hat type of a thing, but it's also a human.

a healthy human thing to say, here's a challenging perspective that is not based on truth, but it is based on the possible truthiness of what I'm considering.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (57:47.712)
Yes, so when we say theories, or you know, and I love the way that you just said about conspiracy theories, it's a way to degrade it and demean it. But the theory is still, it's either proven or unproven. It's going to remain a theory until it's proven to be true. Now, true and truth are not necessarily even the same either.

Paul Povolni (57:48.03)
Yes, so when we say theories, and I love the way that you just said about conspiracy theories, it's a way to degrade it and demean it, but the theory is ill. It's either proven or unproven. It's going to remain a theory until it's proven to be Now, true and truth are not necessarily even the same either.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (58:17.386)
I could say that in critical thinking when we say something is true, meaning laterally, it is consistent. Now a truth doesn't have to be. Depending on what information you or I get to admit to or omit is that truth, right? That's that...

Paul Povolni (58:17.684)
I could say that in critical thinking, when we say something is true, meaning laterally, it is consistent. Now a truth doesn't have to be. Depending on what information you or I get to admit to or omit is that truth, right? That's that.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (58:45.71)
confirmation bias, assumptions, preconceived notions. And these are the terms that I think that when we ask people, give me that terms definition, people no longer know that, but they'll throw it out. And if they can't define what certain terms are, if they can't even pick up on what terms are, that shows you that our lack of critical thinking

Paul Povolni (58:46.06)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (59:15.694)
is, is proven for, for lack of a better term.

Paul Povolni (59:16.044)
is, is proving for lack of a better term. Yeah. Yeah. So when it comes to, know, we've talked a lot about critical thinking and I want to talk about decision-making as well of how to become a better decision-maker when it comes to how you think and how you process and how you absorb information. What are some tools or what are some ways to begin?

being even a better decision maker because we're having to do that all the time. We're having to decide on what perspective or truth, in quotation marks, we believe, how we move forward in life, how we approach situations. We've got to be able to make better decisions. And so what are some ways that somebody can become a better decision maker?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:00:08.726)
It's practice, it's developing and sharpening a skill. Critical thinking is not a trait. It's not a habit. It is a skill, a skill that you have to, as you said, iron sharpening iron. And that's really what it's meant to do. That if you're not the plasticity, right? If I'm not trying to understand

Paul Povolni (01:00:09.064)
It's practice. It's developing and sharpening a skill. Critical thinking is not a trait. It's not a habit. It is a skill, a skill that you have to, as you said, iron sharpening iron. And that's really what it's meant to do, that if you're not the plasticity, right, if I'm not trying to understand

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:00:36.782)
how I am coming to this decision, especially if you use the terms like, I didn't come to the decision lightly. Well, then you tell me, how did you arrive to that decision? If you cannot pick apart the, did I come to this decision, whether it is stacking or layering.

Paul Povolni (01:00:37.1)
how I am coming to this decision, especially if you use the terms like, I didn't come to the decision lightly. Well, then you tell me, how did you arrive to that decision? If you cannot pick apart the how did I come to this decision, whether it is stacking or layering.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:01:01.954)
I liken it to in English, if you remember where we did the sentence diagrams. This is why we have sentence diagrams. My high school students that I had taught, I had to bring it back in with English literature, especially older English when we start talking about pre-Jane Austen, like Canterbury Tales, where you can read a line and not understand it.

Paul Povolni (01:01:02.272)
I liken it to in English, if you remember where we did the sentence diagrams. This is why we have sentence diagrams. My high school students that I had taught, I had to bring it back in with English literature, especially older English, when we start talking about free Jane Austen, like Canterbury Tales, where you can read a line and not understand it.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:01:30.732)
I said, that's critical thinking. So start picking apart that sentence. Even if you have to update language, if you're not getting into that skillset of understanding, is why vocabulary is very important. Reading for comprehension. These are tools. mean, they're simple tools. don't.

Paul Povolni (01:01:31.028)
I said, that's critical thinking. So start picking apart that sentence, even if you have to update language. If you're not getting into that skill set of understanding, is why vocabulary is very important, reading for comprehension. These are tools. mean, they're simple tools. don't...

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:01:58.264)
have a magic bullet to say, here's a computer program that you can use. It really is researching and building your personal library of understanding how to make better decisions. Now there's tons of books out there and I've got some of those out here in my library. It's getting back to actually doing that, reading, writing.

Paul Povolni (01:01:58.572)
have a magic bullet to say, here's a computer program that you can use. It really is researching and building your personal library of understanding how to make better decisions. Now there's tons of books out there and I've got some of those out here in my library. It's getting back to actually doing that.

reading, writing, that's how I've gotten more deeply into the critical thinking aspect of it's so easy to say critical thinking, two words. But yes, what does it really mean? And we go back to the beginning where I said it's thinking about your thinking while thinking. Now, if you pull that apart and say, how did I arrive? Why did I arrive? What information did I use?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:02:26.658)
That's how I've gotten more deeply into the critical thinking aspect of it's so easy to say critical thinking two words. But yes, what does it really mean? And we go back to the beginning where I said it's thinking about your thinking while thinking. Now, if you pull that apart and say, how did I arrive? Why did I arrive? What information did I use to make that? What information am I missing?

Paul Povolni (01:02:53.868)
make that? What information am I missing? So you can start getting people. The deeper you go, the more you what's where, and why, and question your own. And I have a construction based off of this information. That's going to change my outcome.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:02:56.462)
See, you can start getting deep. The deeper you go, know what's where, and why, and question your own, did I have a disruption based off of this information? That's going to change my outcome.

Am I going to improve this? What do I need? That's the tool is the human brain. And you going, what do I need now to research to ensure that I'm going to sharpen and hone this skill deeper, sharper decisions.

Paul Povolni (01:03:12.562)

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:03:35.116)
Reading is the one, but getting an, and I think we've covered the gamut of even having conversations looking for someone who has an opposing viewpoint that you know has an opposing viewpoint that would, if I would say yes to this decision, they're going to say no, is I want to hear why all of your no's.

Paul Povolni (01:03:35.424)
Reading is the one, but getting an, and I think we've covered the camera that even having conversations looking for someone who has an opposing viewpoint that you know has an opposing viewpoint that would, if I would say yes to this decision, they're going to say no, is I want to hear why all of your no. Yeah. Yeah. That's so good.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:04:01.602)
soon.

Paul Povolni (01:04:02.028)
All right. So I can't believe it's already been an hour. So let's, let's talk about this new book that you have out and it came out last year, right? tell me about, me, tell me about the book. Well, actually it's two, but, my first one was precision and perspective. And it's, is for critical thinking for analytical minds. Now I don't want that to sound, that it is only for people who want to be analysts. No, it's.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:04:11.534)
Well, actually it's two, but my first one was precision and perspective. And it's, it is for critical thinking for analytical minds. Now I don't want that to sound that it is only for people who want to be analysts. No, it's you need to have the basics, the foundations of an

Paul Povolni (01:04:31.496)
you need to have the basics, the foundations of, and it's an easy read. I didn't make it so complex that our critical thinking books out there, I wanted to hit the basics, the foundations to get individuals geared up and motivated to understand their own thinking. And that may even be understanding their own fallacies.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:04:37.91)
It's an easy read. didn't make it so complex that our critical thinking books out there, I wanted to hit the basics, the foundations to get individuals geared up and motivated to understand their own thinking. And that may even be understanding their own fallacies. Fallacies are things that are false that we start our arguments with, our debates with.

Paul Povolni (01:05:01.164)
fallacies are things that are false that we start our arguments with, our debates with, argumentation, how we read, how we write, the perspective that we take. And I do kind of liken it to an art rather than a science because as I kind of said before, it is a skill that you have to develop in each one of us.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:05:07.342)
argumentation, how we read, how we write, the perspective that we take. And I do kind of liken it to an art rather than a science because as I kind of said before, it is a skill that you have to develop and each one of us express things very differently, especially in the way that we think. But I believe that

Paul Povolni (01:05:29.66)
express things very differently, especially in the way that we think. But I believe that my book really does at least give me that foundation of where to start. I have a lot of recommendations in the chapters of where to go next, how to go to the next step, and really in the end, how it's going to help you and your life.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:05:36.814)
My book really does at least give me that foundation of where to start. I have a lot of recommendations in the chapters of where to go next, how to go to the next step. And really in the end, how it's going to help you and your life. mean, in your personal life, it doesn't have to be question. I mean, it's good. It bleeds all over actually too.

Paul Povolni (01:06:00.158)
In your personal life, it doesn't have to be professional. mean, it bleeds all over actually, too. Professional, personal, that we as husband-wives, as individuals, as fathers or mothers, children and siblings, we don't listen to each other. And I think that is, again, that's about 80 % of critical thinking is listening. And if we do listen to one another, we'd no longer become heated.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:06:06.37)
professional, personal, that we as husband wives, as individuals, as fathers or mothers, and children and siblings, we don't listen to each other. And I think that is, again, that's about 80 % of critical thinking is listening. And if we do listen to one another, we no longer become heated. And we no longer have that emotional basis of, I'm going to tell you my opinion.

Paul Povolni (01:06:30.762)
And we no longer have that emotional basis of, I'm going to tell you my opinion. You want to hear thought. Yeah. And that's usually in a calm setting. And that's where I really kind of come from in that book. That's awesome. So how do people get a hold of the book? What's the best way to get ahold of you? Best way to the book is on Amazon. It is on the Amazon stores. You can look really quick on precision in perspective. You can look at critical thinking.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:06:35.586)
You want to hear thoughts. And that's usually in a calm setting. And that's where I really kind of come from in that book.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:06:48.098)
Best way to the book is on Amazon. It is on the Amazon stores. You can look really quick on precision in perspective. You can look at critical thinking, analytics. You'll see that with Charles Rousseau.

Paul Povolni (01:07:00.414)
analytics, you'll see that with Charles Russo. Awesome. And how do people get a hold of you? How do they kind of enter your world and learn more about you as well? They can find me on almost every social media platform. I am very active on LinkedIn. So Dr. Charles Russo, and then my sub stack is where I pen a lot.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:07:10.942)
They can find me on almost every social media platform. I am very active on LinkedIn So dr. Charles and Russo and then my sub stack is where I pen a lot of critical thinking analysis Articles some are very short some are very long but all of them really do have the

Paul Povolni (01:07:27.846)
of critical thinking analysis articles. Some are very short, some are very long, but all of them really do have the recommendations, implications. I try to provide learning material, stuff you can walk away from, it's just not opinion. That is under my name, Dr. Charles Russo in Substack.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:07:39.902)
recommendations, implications. I try to provide learning material, stuff you can walk away from. It's just not opinion. That is under my name, Dr. Charles Russo in Substack. My website is drcharlesrusso.com and those are really the ways that you can get a hold of me.

Paul Povolni (01:07:57.926)
my website is drcharlesrusso.com and those are really the ways that you can get a hold of me. Awesome. So I like to end by asking a final question. What is a head smack that you'd like to share or a question that you wish I'd asked you?

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:08:19.692)
That's a good one. I would have to say that a question that I wish would have been asked is why are people not thinking critically?

Paul Povolni (01:08:19.944)
That's a good one I would have to say that a question that I wish would have been asked is Why are people not? thinking critically So why are people not thinking critically? Because we don't want to I mean we started to touch on that with social media But I just think that we as a human race

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:08:39.022)
because we don't want to. I mean, we started to touch on that with social media, but I just think that we as a human race want things instant, gratification. We don't want to think.

Paul Povolni (01:08:50.271)
want things instant, gratification. We don't want to think.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:08:57.528)
We want to think that we have time spent elsewhere for better, but we're not doing anything introspective, anything reflective. We're not bettering society by having any kind of critical thought. It's keyboard warriors, influencers. And that's where I think that...

Paul Povolni (01:08:57.824)
We want to think that we have time spent elsewhere for better, but we're not doing anything introspective, anything reflective. We're not bettering society by having any kind of critical thought. It's keyboard warriors, influencers, and that's where I think that...

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:09:20.546)
people, why is it that people are not thinking critically?

Paul Povolni (01:09:20.854)
people, why is it that people are not thinking critically? Wow. Well, and I think, I think it's, you know, people have chosen their rut and they don't want to leave it. it's a lot easier to stay in the rut, than it is to, step outside of it and choose another path. And I think, for a lot of people, they, they, they're happy in the rut of thinking of perspective and, they don't want to change it. They're fine staying in that place.

Dr. Charles M. Russo (01:09:49.976)
Yes. And that's the start of the truth.

Paul Povolni (01:09:51.488)
Well, man, this has been amazing. know, this has been a great conversation, a lot of stuff to take from it, a lot of great stuff about critical thinking. Hopefully this has inspired those that are listening and hopefully has provided some head smacks that can really help you in maybe looking at the way you're thinking, your perspective and challenging you to maybe think a little different or think differently and change some of that in your life. So thank you very much.

Dr. Charles, and this has been wonderful. And I'll be posting some of those links in the show notes as well. But you have an amazing day and thank you so much. 

Dr. Charles M. Russo
Thank you. Stay inquisitive, stay sharp.