In order to act meaningfully and reason about something, you cannot limit yourself to your own experience. The “it’s always been done this way” argument quickly went out of fashion with the spread of universal literacy and mass printing, so it also doesn’t work as well as it once did. Today our actions are largely determined by what we have heard or read somewhere.
But even experts make mistakes every now and then, not to mention the fact that there are always many who want to take advantage of our gullibility: from enterprising sellers of healing bracelets and unique healing techniques to unscrupulous politicians in need of public support. Therefore, each of us, to the best of our ability, tries to filter the surrounding information, to separate the true from the false and inaccurate.
The golden rule of journalism is “first simplify, then exaggerate.” According to one story, in the 50s, the editor-in-chief of The Economist issued this rule to his employees. Today it is used more widely than ever, and not only journalists use it.
Everyone tries to develop rules of behavior for themselves that would allow them to maneuver in the information flow without picking up too harmful thought viruses along the way. Some do this carefully and constantly, others do not pay much attention to such protection and prefer to drift smoothly with the flow. But it would be wiser to be guided by at least primitive safety techniques - rules of thinking that can be used consciously and systematically.
Very often we come across statements in which some kind of flaw is felt. “There’s something wrong here,” we think and decide that it’s better to stay away from these statements. Critical thinking skills help you understand what exactly is wrong with dubious reasoning, justify your criticism, and put forward your own arguments.
What does it mean to think critically and can it be taught?
Critical thinking is one of the basic academic disciplines in higher education in many English-speaking countries. Students are taught to read texts carefully, to exercise methodical doubt (that is, according to Descartes, to discover that “which is logically possible to doubt”), to find weak points in both other people’s and their own arguments, to work with concepts, to express their own clearly and reasonably. thoughts.
An important component of such training is the ability to ask the right questions. Issues may receive much more attention than is usual for the domestic education system.
Critical thinking as an academic discipline is based on the rules of formal logic, the theory and practice of argumentation, rhetoric and scientific epistemology (a branch of philosophy that deals with the tools and limitations of cognitive activity). One of the prominent theorists in this field was Karl Popper, who considered critical thinking to be the basis of all rationality. Knowledge, according to Popper, does not exist without the practice of putting forward hypotheses, their substantiation or refutation. The question of the source does not matter here at all: it is the method and attitude to the source data that is important.
In one of the main textbooks on critical thinking, called The Art of Asking the Right Questions, the authors describe two ways of thinking that any intelligent person uses. You can, like a sponge, absorb all the surrounding information. This path is quite simple and necessary for everyone: only by obtaining a sufficient number of facts can you make the world around you meaningful.
A person who is closer to the first way of thinking will try to remember any material as correctly as possible, without missing a single detail. He reproduces the author's mental paths in his head, but does not evaluate or examine them critically. This does not necessarily lead to stupid cramming and retelling without deviating from the source text: this approach can also be quite meaningful. But it lacks critical distance: you stay within the given initial framework, instead of expanding it and moving further.
Another method is like sifting sand for gold. This requires active engagement with the knowledge you are absorbing. Independent thinking without this mechanism would be impossible; all your opinions would be determined by what you last heard and read.
A person who has fully mastered the art of sifting sand understands that arguments are needed not in order to remember them, but in order to evaluate their strength. To do this, it is necessary to transfer this task from the unconscious plan to the conscious one. What are we really doing when we try to argue and disagree with someone else's position?
Real and fake criticism
The basic structure of any argument is given by the following model: things are X because Y. There is what they are trying to prove to us, and there is what they use to prove it. To treat the material critically means to learn to separate one from the other and be attentive to their relationship. Can different conclusions be drawn based on the same data? To what extent do the presented arguments justify the author’s conclusion?
Rejecting someone else's conclusion simply because we don't like it does not mean treating it critically. This means simply not understanding its essence.
Sometimes even the most intelligent and enlightened people succumb to the temptation to look at things simplistically. This is often associated with stigmatization and division into “us” and “outsiders” - this is what a significant part of our everyday social experience is built on, in which there is a place for everyday racism, gender discrimination, and intellectual snobbery.
Another mistake that often underlies our false conclusions is the myth of the “right answers.”
There really is only one relatively accurate answer to many questions. For example, there is no need to discuss what the distance to the Moon is - you can simply find it out in a reference book. But most questions require thought, and the answers to them can be very different. Therefore, it is not enough just to make inquiries in an authoritative source: you need to evaluate how convincingly the data provided is justified and try to build your own chain of reasoning.
How to Read Texts: Basic Reasoning Structure
Any text - written or oral - must contain some basic elements, without which the author risks not conveying his message to the addressee.
Of course, in media texts or our everyday conversations, we can easily cope without them. But if we want to have a meaningful conversation from which certain conclusions will follow, we at a minimum must pay attention to how the reasoning is constructed. Below are the main ones of these elements. This list can be used as a grid that can be superimposed on any extended argument. And it really makes life a lot easier.
- Target
Any text is written or spoken for a specific purpose. Who is the author addressing, what is he trying to convince the audience of? If you write the text yourself, check whether you have deviated from the given goal. First, understand whether it has any real meaning for you, and whether it is even worth the effort. - Problem
The problem is not what the author has missed, but the questions he intends to answer. It is necessary to separate those issues that have a clear solution from those that need to be considered from different points of view. In addition, large issues must be divided into smaller parts so as not to become empty abstractions. - Assumptions
These are the premises that the author takes for granted. Unconscious assumptions can put the author or audience in an awkward situation, which is illustrated by the famous joke in which a person is asked if he has stopped drinking cognac in the morning. When we write or read something, we need to think about what these assumptions are and how fair they are.
- Point of view
We all see things from a limited and private point of view. Achieving absolute objectivity is impossible not only because we are all people with our own characteristics, but also because any thing can be interpreted from different angles. The “God Trick,” that is, the claim to complete and unbiased knowledge, remains precisely an unfair trick: no one simply has enough resources to achieve knowledge of this level and quality. - Data
Any statement must be supported by relevant, that is, data related to the topic. For example, when talking about the dangers of GMOs, it is necessary to refer to scientific studies or their popular scientific translations, and not to the opinions of neighbors next door. We also need to check to what extent the given data relate to the problem we are considering - have we not gone somewhere aside from it?
- Concepts and ideas
Concepts are mental tools that we cannot do without. No matter how much we want to talk about “real things,” to do this we still need artificial models and fictitious concepts. The only problem is that they must be chosen correctly and clearly defined - this is the key difference between objective knowledge and opinions and subjective observations. - Conclusions and interpretations
These are the ways in which you extract meaning from data. Note that there is often another way to make sense of the same information. If this is the case, then there may simply not be enough data to draw a meaningful conclusion. In this case, it is better to say this directly than to make unfounded assumptions. - Consequences
What will happen if we take the author’s main provisions and conclusions seriously? What positive and negative consequences arise from them? You can often see that seemingly reasonable arguments produce contradictory or meaningless consequences - this is what the rhetorical technique of “reduction to absurdity” is based on.
Bertrand Russell in his “Philosophical Dictionary of Mind, Matter, Morals” gives only three rules that, in his opinion, can greatly improve the intellectual climate of the planet if they are accepted by a significant part of people who are trying to think and reason about something.
- if the experts agree, the opposite opinion cannot be considered correct;
- if they do not agree, non-experts should not accept any opinion as correct;
- when all the experts have decided that there is insufficient evidence for a particular opinion, it is best for the average person to reserve judgment.
These rules would indeed save us from a great deal of what Russell calls “intellectual rubbish.” But is there something unfair in such strict regulations?
As we have already said, experts can also make mistakes, and not every situation has a clear position based on reinforced concrete truth. As for the third point, life often forces us to act in conditions of uncertainty: we cannot always simply stoically refrain from judgment, waiting for wise experts who will put everything in its place.
To rely solely on expert opinions, to the exclusion of everything else, is to welcome the intellectual passivity of all but a select few who possess “true knowledge.” It would make much more sense to use critical thinking skills and principles that anyone can actually learn.
All people tend to criticize. However, this property is especially pronounced if a person’s outer corner of the eye is lower than the inner one. People with a heightened critical perception tend to see every flaw and wonder why others don't notice it. Nothing irritates them more than carelessness and inattention. These people are perfectionists. They not only engage in self-improvement, but also expect this from family members and their employees. In the family circle, excessive criticism can have a serious impact on children whose parents are likely to never be satisfied with the achievements of their children. For them, any result is not good enough. If the outer corners of the eyes are raised upward, then the person is more likely to notice what has been achieved than what has been done wrong. Such people are less critical.
The outer corner of the eye is lower than the inner corner - strong critical perception 
The outer corner of the eye is higher than the inner corner - weak critical perception
Michael's father, prone to criticism, never praised his son. No matter how hard Michael tried, he could not live up to his parent's expectations. The father believed that his son would never achieve success, and somehow told him about this. When Michael later complained to his father about his constant criticism, about the fact that his father never allowed him to finish, the answer was: “Your grandfather was a scumbag, therefore I am a scumbag.” He believed that this justified his attitude towards his son. Later, Michael decided to sign up for training. This greatly helped him cope with problems in his relationship with his father. Once again, when Michael met with him, he refused to get into an unpleasant argument. And the situation changed for the better: despite his father’s nagging and attacks, Michael managed to distance himself from offensive phrases and avoided a quarrel. Kate was brought up strictly. At home, she walked almost on tiptoes to avoid criticism from her parents, which brought her to tears. It was difficult for her at times, but she didn't want her parents to notice her weakness. If she had become an excellent student and an excellent student, Kate thought, her parents would have truly loved her. Therefore, at school she was in constant tension, confident that she could not get grades lower than an A.
When Kate notices mistakes in others, she feels superior. For example, she can’t stand amateur musicians and can’t stand unprofessionalism. Because of her sense of intellectual superiority, people prefer to keep their distance from her.
Bob, a true perfectionist, owns a construction company. Previously, he always lashed out at his subordinates if they did not notice mistakes in their work. He was indignant: “What happened to you? Don’t you see the mistake?”
This did not at all improve the morale of his workers. However, as soon as he realized his gift for noticing mistakes where others do not see them, he stopped criticizing everyone and everything and began to point out only significant shortcomings. He also realized that his three marriages had failed, most likely due to constant criticism: he was never happy with his wives, and this ultimately destroyed their relationships.
Ken, a 40-year-old man, sent me a photo of himself for me to analyze. I immediately noticed facial features that indicated a tendency towards strong critical perception. Apparently, his parents also had this feature. Most likely, it was they who broke his spirit. Ken had a rounded outer ear, indicating a natural musical ability. I suggested that Ken take up music. It turned out that when he was a child, his parents believed that he could not have any future in music. Despite their negative opinion, he still went to the Los Angeles music school, which brought his parents into indescribable anger. Unable to withstand the pressure of adults, he was soon forced to leave school. Now, as an adult, he has returned to music and plays in a local band.
If you are naturally inclined to criticize everything, try to see the good first, and remember that there is no worse critic than yourself. If you are never satisfied with anything, how can you help yourself, much less your family and employees, develop? Instead, praise them for what they did, look for the positives, and then, instead of the usual furious criticism, calmly explain what still needs to be done. Try to put yourself in the shoes of the people being criticized.
If you notice errors or shortcomings, give polite advice: “You did a great job, but there are a few things that could be changed. May I make my proposal?"
Criticizing your colleagues too often will only dampen your passion for work and hurt their feelings. If you are a parent who has this trait, try to encourage your child more often. Be gentler in everything.
If you often do not notice errors, be prepared for possible complaints. Listen to the opinions of competent people.
Remember that your criticism has a big impact on the child. Imagine how your relationship would change if you learned to control yourself? If your children have inherited your passion for criticism, teach them to use it for positive purposes; emphasize that this is a gift and not a curse. As one woman said, she simply forgets about her love of criticizing when she doesn’t need it. Of course, in words everything is simpler. In practice, for example, teachers who are prone to criticism should develop tolerance and gentleness towards their students so as not to turn learning into a test.
Professions
Critical thinkers make excellent editors, camera operators, surgeons, and any other job that requires precision. Wouldn't you want people like that flying a plane or fixing your car? They make good literary, music and film critics, as well as art critics.
Sandra believed that her mother, always extremely critical, did not love her or did not even want her to be born. Only when she reached the age of thirty did she realize that all these years her mother had loved her and cared for her. Her only regret was that it took her 30 years to realize this.
If you don't tend to criticize, you need to learn more about the shortcomings in your work from those who tend to notice mistakes. It is better to check several times that you have not missed any important fact.
Celebrities. Strong critical perception
Hugh Grant, Mikhail Gorbachev, John Ashcroft, J. Rowling.
Critical thinking is the ability to absorb important information and use it to form one's own decisions or opinions. Let us emphasize: it is your opinion, and not the same as everyone else’s. This skill does not always appear on its own and not everyone has it. Fortunately, this can also be learned through training.
1. Train yourself to pay attention to the necessary details
A very important step in developing critical thinking is to understand that details matter. Every day we receive so much information and hear so many different opinions that it is easy to get lost in the details. This means that we must accustom ourselves to distinguish significant details from insignificant ones.
Start with the news. If something seems strange, this is the first warning sign. This is where you can start looking for other gaps in the argument. There are several ways to find them:
- Think about who benefits from making such statements. When you read news or expert articles, be sure to consider who will benefit from the statements being made. There is a good chance that the person from whom an opinion comes has something to gain from it. It's not always about self-interest - motivation simply makes an opinion more reasonable. But it’s good to think about who benefits from such ideas.
- Check the source of information. On the Internet, sources are not immediately visible, so if you see a controversial statement, track down where it came from and who made it first. And only then form your own attitude.
- Keep track of the “obvious.” A common technique in debates, reviews, and even essays is to put forward many seemingly true and reasonable statements, and then “accidentally” insert another one among them, which seems to follow naturally from the above. As if. Such illogical statements are easy to miss because you have already begun to agree with the speaker/writer, he has almost convinced you. Exaggerated example: “So now we know that the sky is blue, the grass is green, the clouds are white, and Apple makes the best computers.”
There are thousands of unfounded arguments around. To practice, watch political or scientific debates - in such conversations it is nice to pay attention to specific details. The more often you do this, the faster you will become a critical thinker. Over time, the skill will become automatic.
2. Always ask questions
Paying attention to detail is only the first part of training critical thinking. This in itself is useless; you also need to know what questions to ask next. Critical thinking and asking good questions go hand in hand.
Writer and psychologist Maria Konnikova offers several ways to learn to ask questions using the example of Sherlock Holmes:
“Once he sets his target, he observes and collects data. And he also asks: okay, how do I answer this question? And one more thing: what in this conversation, in this person, in this situation will allow me to collect the data that I can then use and check whether my hypothesis is true or not?
Holmes then does what probably any great scientist does. He takes a step back and looks at the data again, redistributes it, considers different possibilities, gets creative, and finally. All to see if I missed something. Is your mind still open? Am I open-minded? Do I still know what's going on? Or is this data a reason to come up with new ideas? New approaches? Think about those things that I didn’t take into account before?”
Writer Scott Berkan shared his own set of critical thinking questions:
“What is a counterargument? Anyone who seriously studies the issue has seen enough facts to compare them with the argument put forward, look at the problem from the other side and ask a question. There are such useful questions: who, besides you, shares this opinion? What are the key problems and what is needed to solve them? What needs to change to make your opinion the opposite?”
Of course, this is similar to the Socratic method: a series of questions will help you understand what you yourself think about the quality of the argument or opinion. Regardless of the approach, the ultimate goal is to learn to think critically and analyze absolutely everything. Always ask yourself why a detail, idea, or argument is important and how it fits in with what you already know. When you ask questions, you train your brain to make connections between ideas and opinions. And be critical of the additional information you are sure to encounter.
3. Watch for power-up phrases
It’s not just the brain that learns to think critically. This also applies to the ears: you should notice small and imperceptible words and phrases that should set off alarm bells for you. Yes, it is impossible to pay attention to everything at once, but there are several phrases that make weak arguments sound significant. These are reinforcement phrases, and everything that is said after them should be carefully considered:
- I want to say;
- I'm just saying that;
- To be completely honest;
- I just want you to know;
- I do not say that;
- I hear what you say;
- Do not misunderstand me;
- Let's be honest;
- As far as I know;
- I think that;
- Certainly.
These phrases signal that the arguments following may be false and it's time to focus. As soon as you hear them, know: it’s time to ask questions.
4. Identify and challenge your own biases.
We are all biased when it comes to information, whether we realize it or not. But through critical thinking, you can learn to look beyond your prejudices.
The main idea was perfectly expressed by the writer Terry Pratchett in his book “Truth”:
"Be careful. People like to hear about what they already know. And when you say something new, they feel awkward. New ideas... Well, new ideas are not what they expect. They would, say, like to know that a dog bites a person. Dogs usually do this. But they don't want to know that a person bites a dog, because nothing like that should happen in the world. In general, people think they want the new, but what they really want is the old. Not news, but everyday life - they will confirm to people that what they already know is true.”
Thinking critically means challenging your biases as often as possible. It's hard, but if you spend time throughout the day thinking about ideas you fundamentally disagree with, you'll train your brain to do it more often.
5. Practice whenever you can.
If you want to learn something, you need to practice every day. This applies to everything, including critical thinking. Of course, you can do a lot of things in your own head, but there are other exercises.
One of the easiest ways to study is to keep a journal. This could be a daily observation note or an opinion notebook, but the point is to write in it every day.
Once you get used to it, starting a blog online is a great way to get other people's opinions and challenge yourself because not everyone will agree with you. Discussions with friends are also a great practice.
This is not all that can be said about critical thinking. The more you develop this skill, the better you will get at it. At first, you'll have to be constantly aware of where your thoughts are going, but eventually your brain will automatically learn to find better arguments, come up with interesting and useful ideas, and think creatively about solving problems.
The ability to think critically has been important at all times; in the 21st century you simply cannot do without it. For the first time in human history, there is a danger that we are capable of destroying all life on our planet. The decisions we make as individuals and as members of society will affect future generations of peoples around the globe. In addition, decisions have to be made on a number of important issues of a local or private nature. Since every citizen is required to make so many important decisions, it seems natural that society should be concerned with how these decisions are made.
It is necessary to teach schoolchildren to think productively. Students are often deprived of the most important component of education - learning to think.
In the process of thinking, a consistent transition is needed from one link in the chain of reasoning to another. Sometimes, because of this, it is not possible to grasp the whole picture in one’s mind’s eye, all the reasoning from the first to the last step. In this regard, it is necessary to be very careful after any conclusion of any reasoning, especially since the student has a predisposition to conduct a long chain of reasoning.
Critical thinking allows you to choose between several hypotheses and thereby determines the further direction of the student’s thoughts.
Critical thinking dictates questions that contribute to determining rational choices.
In the context of the psychology of thinking, criticality is usually interpreted as one of the properties of the mind and is defined as conscious control over the course of a person’s intellectual activity. Here are the statements of a number of leading Soviet psychologists.
B.M. Teplov defined criticality as “the ability to strictly evaluate the work of thought, carefully weigh all the arguments for and against emerging hypotheses and subject these hypotheses to comprehensive testing.”
S.L. Rubinstein believed that testing, criticism, and control characterize thinking as a conscious process.
A.A. Smirnov associated the independence of the mind with its criticality, that is, with the ability not to succumb to the suggestive influence of other people’s thoughts, but to strictly and correctly evaluate them, see their strengths and weaknesses, reveal what is valuable in them, and the mistakes that were made in them. them. He also emphasized that criticality is a necessary prerequisite for creative activity.
B.V. Zeigarnik points out that criticality consists of the ability to act thoughtfully, compare, check and correct one’s actions in accordance with the expected results.
A completely different attitude to criticality is contained in the empirical studies of foreign psychologists. In the works of A. Osborne and W. Gordon, activities that reduce criticality are recommended to increase the creative and intellectual potential of students. Reducing criticality can be carried out in two ways: direct instructions (“be free, creative, original, suppress criticism of yourself and your ideas, do not be afraid of criticism from others”) and the creation of favorable external conditions that reduce criticality indirectly - sympathy, support, encouragement and approval of partners , overcoming the “fear of looking stupid” (A. Osborne).
Criticality as an activity of evaluative analysis in relation to oneself and one's hypotheses is necessary and useful at the stage of reasoning; it can be contraindicated during the work of the imagination, when putting forward new ideas and setting new goals. [ 18 ]
Assessing the impact of criticality on skill development requires a meaningful approach. It is necessary to describe and analyze the content in relation to which the subject is critical. The process of setting new original goals has a beneficial effect on reducing the subject’s criticality towards himself, towards the assessment of his personality and contributes to the success of goal setting. It is also desirable to strengthen a critical attitude towards the outside world and other people.
The development of criticality leads to the formation of critical thinking in a person. Although experts in psychology and related sciences have offered several definitions of the term “critical thinking,” all of these definitions are quite similar in meaning, here is one of the simplest that conveys the essence of the idea: Critical thinking is the use of cognitive techniques or strategies that increase the likelihood of getting what you want. the final result. This definition characterizes thinking as something characterized by controllability, validity and purposefulness, i.e. this type of thinking that is used when solving problems, formulating conclusions, assessing probabilities and making decisions. At the same time, the thinker uses skills that are reasonable and effective for a specific situation and the type of problem being solved. [ 5 ]
Other definitions additionally indicate that critical thinking is characterized by the construction of logical inferences, the creation of mutually consistent logical models, and the making of informed decisions regarding whether to reject a judgment, agree with it, or temporarily postpone its consideration. All these definitions imply the solution of a specific mental problem.
The word critical, as used in the definition, implies an evaluative component. Sometimes this word is used to convey a negative attitude towards something. But assessment should be a constructive expression of both positive and negative attitudes. when we think critically, we evaluate the results of our thought processes - how correct the decision we made or how successfully we coped with the task. Critical thinking also involves evaluating the thought process itself—the reasoning that led to our conclusions or the factors that were considered when making a decision.
Critical thinking is sometimes also called directed thinking because it is aimed at obtaining the desired result. There are types of mental activity that do not involve the pursuit of a specific goal; such types of thinking do not belong to the category of critical thinking. For example, when solving a complex mathematical problem, performing some intermediate action, for example, the action of multiplication, thinking is focused on a specific goal, namely solving the problem, therefore, in practice, performing the action of multiplication does not imply a conscious assessment of the actions being performed. This is one example of undirected or automatic thinking.
Critical thinking implies the obligatory presence of a stage of checking and evaluating assumptions before answering the question posed in terms of their reliability and significance, as opposed to operating with ready-made phrases prompted by memory, without the participation of their creative processing.
The formation of critical thinking in mathematics lessons can be combined with the use of mathematical sophisms.