Monday, 4 May 2026

Some reflections on Critical Thinking, what it is and when to use it

 

Some reflections on Critical Thinking, what it is and when to use it

 

Much is made these days of the term “critical thinking” and it is frequently used to suggest gullibility or naïve acceptance on the part of those who appear to put little thought into perspectives and perceptions.

So, what is “critical thinking” and why should it be considered important?

Before studying the operation of critical thinking, let us consider a few potential consequences of not applying what is, after all, merely a system of verification or checks and balances.

In the modern age when communication is easy and pressure to make commercial, legal or social decisions can be insidious and immediate, whether over the phone, via email or in a sales environment, it is essential to be able to verify or assess identity, figures, facts and reliability. Otherwise, you may enter into a contract with hidden clauses, false figures or disreputable partners. You may accept financial or business propositions over the phone from people falsely claiming to belong to a reputable organisation. You may hire dubious tradesmen to work on your home who fail to provide adequate documentation or guarantees. You may even be persuaded to vote for a politician who bombards you with general promises and statements of intent without furnishing details of just how his/her promises will be achieved and what he/she is likely to obtain personally from securing an elected position.

These (and many others) are all situations that may be avoided through use of critical thinking, which is merely the exercise of care and attention through application of reasonable doubt and verification. It is in your own best interests, indeed I would go so far as to say you owe it to yourself, to think critically.

At the heart of critical thinking is respect for objective truth.

Respect for truth must surpass opinion (which may consist of unsubstantiated thoughts or views), ambition (a prejudiced desire for a particular outcome to be the case), advantage (an unwillingness to accept a challenge to your belief if it weakens that belief) and pride (a stubborn refusal to change your mind despite clear and persuasive evidence).

Statements should not be accepted at face value. Corroboration or validation is required and may reasonably be expected. The proposer of a statement or contract should be able to provide clear evidence to support their claims.

Corroborated or validated accounts and evidence may be gathered to support or deny an affirmation (using facts, witness statements or accounts, images, sound recordings etc.). No extraordinary deductions should be reached – conclusions should be supported by facts, evidence and reason.

Recognition or acknowledgement of facts is essential, even (and especially) if the facts and evidence contradict previous statements or views. The overriding factor is a desire to reach the truth, not provide support for a particular standpoint.

Denial of facts or evidence, and conclusions drawn from them, is unreasonable and unacceptable as it is tantamount to setting subjective interpretation or insistence on a chosen viewpoint above objective evidence. Refusal to accept evidence and fairly-drawn conclusions will render a counter-argument invalid.

That said, some statements and evidence may be open to interpretation. Context and precision should be applied to reading of language or interpretation of evidence, and conclusions should be reached only if supported by reason and facts.

There may be insufficient evidence to support a conclusion but reasonable inferences may be drawn (clearly labelled as such), or there may be sufficient evidence to cast doubt on another assertion without necessarily proving a case.

Recognition of ignorance is essential – there should be no assertion of knowledge based on mere supposition or belief.

Insistence on a view despite counter-argument involving the presentation of facts and evidence suggests dependence on personal conviction rather than a pursuit of objective truth, and that view should be considered subjective or invalid.

 

Stuart Fernie (stuartfernie@yahoo.co.uk)

 

BLOG                                                   YouTube

No comments:

Post a Comment