Duty
Permanent Fixture
- MBTI
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 5w4
At first I wasn't going to put the "PUG" prefix on this thread, but how could I ever write an article about critical thinking and not openly invite people to practice it? It seemed almost dishonorable to me to not open this article up to criticism.
Critical thinking is the process by which we choose to accept or reject information, and how much confidence we put into that choice. In short, critical thinking is not a statement of whether a claim is true or false, but is an evaluation of the method(s) used to produce that claim. An evaluation of the domino theory of Communism, in the context of critical thinking, would tend to look at the way that this theory was formed, and not as much on the theory itself. Is this theory logically consistent and complete? Is the available intelligence on the USSR, relevant to the theory, credible and accurate? Is the theory even significant to our choice of intervening in Vietnam? These are the kinds of questions that critical thinking employs.
As you can see, critical thinking would have helped the decisions of the US government quite a bit in the 1960's. It is admittedly one of the most important, and widely applicable skills for people to develop.
So why is it that we seem to not have the right to it? Every day we are impressed upon to be unquestioning. It is easily seen when you attempt to have a casual conversation about anything even slightly controversial. Politics, religion, philosophy, law, what you should do later on...it's bad enough to people if you disagree and make a case opposite of them, but once you question the line of reasoning they used to get to their position in the first place, it's suddenly war.
Why is that? Why do people so hate to have their thinking evaluated? Is it because they see it as a threat to their status? To their intelligence? What causes people to be so upset at the critical thinking of others?
And lastly...do people have the right to critically think? Do people have the right to critically evaluate the information or opinions people give them, even when it causes others frustration?
I would say you absolutely have the right, even when it frustrates the other person. How could an individual not assert this fact about themselves? The uncritical evaluation of information leads to stories like that of the domino theory of Communism and worse. If information is obtained through dubious means, I could even say it is our duty to question it before it goes out of control. For, the world is uncontrollable, except by chance, unless our information is accurate and applicable.
So why is this right constantly threatened? Why do we feel such a need to react against those the critically evaluate our thought process? Would we not be more enthused to be corrected and set right? Wouldn't we rather be rescued instead of left in the depths of ignorance?
Critical thinking is the process by which we choose to accept or reject information, and how much confidence we put into that choice. In short, critical thinking is not a statement of whether a claim is true or false, but is an evaluation of the method(s) used to produce that claim. An evaluation of the domino theory of Communism, in the context of critical thinking, would tend to look at the way that this theory was formed, and not as much on the theory itself. Is this theory logically consistent and complete? Is the available intelligence on the USSR, relevant to the theory, credible and accurate? Is the theory even significant to our choice of intervening in Vietnam? These are the kinds of questions that critical thinking employs.
As you can see, critical thinking would have helped the decisions of the US government quite a bit in the 1960's. It is admittedly one of the most important, and widely applicable skills for people to develop.
So why is it that we seem to not have the right to it? Every day we are impressed upon to be unquestioning. It is easily seen when you attempt to have a casual conversation about anything even slightly controversial. Politics, religion, philosophy, law, what you should do later on...it's bad enough to people if you disagree and make a case opposite of them, but once you question the line of reasoning they used to get to their position in the first place, it's suddenly war.
Why is that? Why do people so hate to have their thinking evaluated? Is it because they see it as a threat to their status? To their intelligence? What causes people to be so upset at the critical thinking of others?
And lastly...do people have the right to critically think? Do people have the right to critically evaluate the information or opinions people give them, even when it causes others frustration?
I would say you absolutely have the right, even when it frustrates the other person. How could an individual not assert this fact about themselves? The uncritical evaluation of information leads to stories like that of the domino theory of Communism and worse. If information is obtained through dubious means, I could even say it is our duty to question it before it goes out of control. For, the world is uncontrollable, except by chance, unless our information is accurate and applicable.
So why is this right constantly threatened? Why do we feel such a need to react against those the critically evaluate our thought process? Would we not be more enthused to be corrected and set right? Wouldn't we rather be rescued instead of left in the depths of ignorance?
Last edited:
