|
|
Some people I talk with say to me that they don't like the term "Critical
Thinking". They say that it conjures up something negative or harsh for
them and that they'd prefer to use something like "Clear Thinking" or
some such thing. I always respond by asking them, "How clear do you
suppose one's thinking could be if they were not thinking critically?"
I think that one of the main reasons why some people are not interested in
it when I bring up the concept of critical thinking is because they
are confusing it with fault-finding. This may be due to someone else's
usage of the term critical thinking or due to someone constantly picking
on them and being critical of them for every little thing they do... or
simply because they are uncomfortable with an open, honest and real
examination of what they hold dear in their world view. In any case,
please let me make it very clear, critical thinking is not
fault-finding.
a Relative Term
I don't know if I could even explain what fault-finding is very well.
Maybe this is because the use of the term is so relative. What one
person calls fault-finding, another might consider to be brilliant
investigative techniques.
What one person might sense as being picked on and being the target of
an ill-willed and crazed fault-finding mission, an attack on their
character or their person, another might sense as a genuine, honest,
well-intentioned, level-headed and thorough examination of their
opinions.
Instead of getting defensive and complaining about how uncomfortable it
is to stand intellectually naked in the indifferent light of logic and
reason, they might welcome it with open arms, knowing that their
personhood is secure and that they have nothing to hide and are always
interested in hearing what someone else has to say about their world
view.
Nagging
Sometimes people get nagged on so much (or see someone else getting
nagged on all the time) and associate someone being critical of others
with critical thinking. One thing to keep in mind though is the fact
that "nagging" is actually not about the process of thinking critically,
but about someone's conclusion and their particular chosen course of
action following finding some fault (whether in someone else's opinions
or behaviors).
Seeing that there is some kind of "fault" in the opinions or behaviors
of others is not nagging. Nagging is when the one that notices the fault
keeps picking on the other about what they've found. They refuse to
interact in a healthy way with the other person about it. If they would
set their nagging aside, they could discuss it in a level-headed manner
with the other person, they could then try to work out a more acceptable
situation for all persons involved.
I don't know exactly if nagging is what comes to people's minds when
they say the term "fault-finding", but it might be worth while to
consider how much damage it does to relationships. Not only is nagging
not the same thing as critical thinking, without doing some critical
thinking, the nagging person may never break out of their nagging
routine and end up hurting others and/or pushing them away for the rest
of their life.
Personally, I think that the root of what most of us refer to as
"nagging" is most likely "shame".
Here's a link to an article on my web site in which I explain what I
mean about the term "shame" and why I don't think it is a very healthy
concept to have in our attitudes about our selves and each other.
Unreasonable, Inflexible Presuppositions
On a related note, "fault-finding" might have more to do with the
attitude of the investigator towards the subject of their investigation.
If someone is "dead set" on some preconceived notion of a thing before
they even start the investigation, then they're not doing critical
thinking; i.e. they are not thinking critically.
In such cases, this person is approaching things with cynicism. When
this is the case, it doesn't matter what is found or discovered along
the way. No amount of information will deter them from carrying through
with their mission to "prove" the "correctness" of their particular
position.
Since I've already spent time explaining the difference between cynics
and skeptics on another page on my site,
here's the link to that page in
case you're interested.
Whose fault is it anyway?
Again, critical thinking is not about fault-finding. If there are faults
in a particular opinion that someone is thinking critically about, then
hopefully these faults will come to light in their investigative process. The
thing that so many people seem to have such a hard time grasping though
is the fact that, if a fault is indeed found, it is not the fault of the
process of thinking critically, but of the thing being investigated.
an Unbiased Investigation
Critical thinking has no opinion about what is investigated. It is
indifferent to what is discovered in the process. It is simply a way of
investigating. The findings are just what they are. Conclusions, if they
are made, are up to those conducting the investigation because critical
thinking makes none for them.
Irrational Haste
Remember this too, just because something is found to have flaws, faults
or whatever during the process of thinking critically about it, this
doesn't mean that the one doing the critical thinking will reject it
altogether. To do so, while an easy leap for many people, would not be
the result of critical thinking, but of irrational haste.
There have been many times when I have had the chance to tear apart
someone's opinion on a particular issue and point out a few errors in
logic or reason and other faults only to end up fully embracing the main
points of the particular concept and choosing to incorporate them into
my own world view.
What's an opinion worth?
Not until a person is willing to work through such issues and lay it all
out on the table in the light of critical thinking will their ideas ever
really be understood by others. Not until then will others be able to
suggest points at which their ideas might need a bit of re-thinking. Not
until then will anyone else ever benefit from what they have to offer.
So, no, critical thinking isn't about fault-finding. While it may find
faults, it did not place them there. While it might not "feel" very good
to have one's ideas examined so closely, it sure feels better to me to
know that what's left of my world view after such an investigation
actually seems reasonable to me to hold onto.
An Invitation to Investigation
I invite you to think critically about all that I have to say. Please,
by all means, come investigate the things I've posted (here on this page
and on the rest of my web site) and tell me about any faults you think
you may have found in my world view. I am not afraid of being the owner
of a faulty world view. If you point out something that you think is a
fault in any of my opinions, I will fully consider it and deal with it
in a logical and reasonable manner. I genuinely want to know what you
think about what I think.
[entry added 20040825_0944]
|
|
