Archive of Learning // Pedagogy & Sociology

Writing

Arts

Academia

Pedagogy & Sociology

Critical Thinking Series

By Clarissa Lee

Part I: Introduction to some theories on critical thinking

1. To think critically is to be able to take a certain situation, and build various models of solutions around it, based on personal experiences or existing knowledge. The theorists will call it

a) explanatory coherence of mental models –which means that you are able to lucidly and clearly explain your assessment of the situation or problem in the most reasonable and logical way

b) coherence of mental models with background beliefs—which means that you are able to logically associate the your innate or existing beliefs to the solutions/arguments that you provide in a rational and logical manner without the use of fallacy (sort of like the idea of forcing of square pegs into round holes). The idea is not to be dogmatic or to refuse to see the logic in arguments. You might choose to disagree with an argument but to refuse to logically and rationally evaluate it in an objective manner places you in danger in what is called as cognitive dissonance-the refusal to look at alternative views or being stubbornly stuck in the belief that you are always right without critically re-evaluating your beliefs.

2. When assessing a situation/problem, you go through a cognitive process of internal critical questioning or personal dialogue (voicing of thoughts in your mind). You would sometimes do that when reading a newspaper or magazine article. You critically question a situation or what you are reading by evaluating it against what is norm, and from there, you can decide whether you wish to discard the theories or re-evaluate what is considered the norm. Scientists do that all the time, though a stubborn few will choose to be dogmatic about theories. You might also choose to re-evaluate your ideas by discussing it with your friends. However, in this situation, as in a public debate, it is vital that the scheme and limitations of your scope should be determined before hand to ensure that relevant responses are elicited from opponent. However, some people have been known to cover the flimsiness of their arguments by using it to obstruct the course of a dialogue or debate, to not directly answer the challenge thrown by their opponent but change the topic of discussion or use fallacious/altruistic arguments.

3. For critical thinking to take place, one must be certain of the reliability of one’s thought processes. Critical dialogues can bring about ideas, thoughts and social processes that can work in combination to produce new ideas, beliefs or decisions. A way to assess the validity of the decision or idea is to study the pattern of thought that had been used to arrive at the decision by perhaps comparing it to the decisions made before on similar or different topics. This is what is called pattern recognition. Most of these are arrived at through the fundamentals of one’s beliefs and ideals. Hence it might not be the most effective way. Hence, one might want to enlist the aid of a sceptic or non-committal bystander to act as an indifferent observer. A critical thinker sometimes employ inefficient or erroneous strategies when he or she terminates the process of critical thought too soon, or deliberate for too long. For the former, the thinker can fall into presupposed assumptions that have not been fully evaluated and have the possibility of falsehood. For the latter, it makes the process of decision making long and tedious, contributing to the bureaucratic red tape.

Archive of Learning