Critical Questions.In critical thinking, we know that we need to think carefully with attention, awareness, analysis and independent judgement. Yet there is something else that we must be cognizant about- it is an important attribute. That attribute is critical questions. Asking critical questions provides a stimulus and direction that propels us towards a continual ongoing search for better options, decisions, or judgements. As such, we can define critical thinking as :
- The awareness of a set of interrelated questions;
- The ability to ask and answer critical questions at an appropriate time; and the
- The desire to actively use the critical questions.
Note: Critical thinking consists of an awareness of a set interrelated critical questions, plus the ability to ask and answer them at appropriate times.
Thinking Styles.
There are two thinking styles or approaches that we must know about - The Sponge Approach and the Panning for Gold Approach.
Sponge Approach.
The sponge approach is where we absorb information about the world. The advantage with the sponge approach is a process where the more information we absorb about the world, the more we are capable of understanding its complexities. The knowledge acquired provides a foundation for more complicated thinking later. A second advantage of the sponge approach is it is a relatively passive way to absorb information. There is no active listening or active reading. There is no interaction with what is being heard or read. The sponge approach does not require strenuous mental effort. It tends to be a rather quick and easy way to absorb knowledge, especially when the material is presented in a clear and interesting fashion. The primary mental effort involves concentration and memory. Absorbing information provides a productive start towards becoming a thoughtful person. But the approach has a serious drawback. It does not provide a method for deciding which opinion or information to believe and which to reject. Those who read like the sponge approach will believe everything they read or hear. Such people are mental puppets of whosoever they encounter. Decisions become accidents of association , instead of reflective judgements. People who follow the sponge approach do not choose what to believe or not to believe and what to reject or not. There is passive reception to what is heard or read without proper deliberation, attention, awareness, analysis and independent judgement. There is no interactivity to what is heard or read. The alternative to the sponge approach is the Panning for Gold Approach. The panning for gold approach is a process that provides a model for active readers , critical readers and active listeners as they try to determine the worth of what they read and hear. It is a challenging and tedious task, but it comes rich with tremendous reward.
Panning for Gold Approach.
The alternative approach is the Panning for Gold Approach. The process of the panning for gold approach provides a model for active readers critical readers and active listeners as they try to determine the worth of what they read or hear. It is a challenging and tedious task, but it comes rich with tremendous reward. This model of thinking requires active reading and active listening skills. In the panning for gold approach, the critical thinker sifts through the information interactively. The panning for gold reader asks himself a number of questions designed to uncover the best available decisions or beliefs. The reader who uses this approach frequently questions why the author or speaker makes various claims. He writes notes to himself in the margins indicating problems with the reasoning. He continually interacts with the material. His intent is to critically evaluate the material and formulate personal conclusions based on the evaluation.
The differences between the Sponge Approach and the Panning for Gold Approach:
Sponge Approach | Panning for Gold Approach |
Emphasizes knowledge acquisition | Emphasizes/stresses active interaction with knowledge acquisition |
There is no interaction with knowledge | There is interaction with knowledge |
Reading and listening are done passively | Reading and listening are done actively and critically. |
There is no evaluation of knowledge with arguments | There is evaluation of knowledge with arguments |
There is passive participation with knowledge. Knowledge is not questioned | There is active participation with knowledge. Knowledge is questioned. |
The Myth of the Right Answer - Is there such a thing?
Is there such a thing as aright answer? Our ability to answer questions often is dependent on the type of question that puzzles us. Is the question a social question, that is one about something we human beings debate about such as business, engineering, law or politics, such as should sanctions be imposed on a country? is it worthwhile to allow the sale of marijuana from pharmacies? is it a scientific one, such as what is the distance of a moon from a planet?, and how old is a sword made thousands of years ago? or how much body fat does a fish have? When it comes to scientific questions such as the availability of oxygen on an exoplanet, the density of gold in an ore or the amount of cholesterol in your body can obtain reasonably accurate answers. They are answers a reasonable person can accept. This is because the physical world is in certain ways more dependable or predictable. There are ways to calculate, measure, observe and determine as compared to the social world. In physical sciences we can often arrive at the "right answer". But in social questions it is difficult to arrive at a "right answer".
Questions about human behavior are different. That is because human behavior is unpredictable. The causes of human behavior are very complex resulting in that we cannot do more than to form intelligent guesses about why and when certain behavior will occur Additionally, because many of us care a great deal about explanations or descriptions of human behavior , we rather prefer that explanations or descriptions of the rate of unemployment, the rate of inflation, the rate of foreign investment, the frequency of school dropouts at secondary level or the causes of domestic abuse, the causes of deforestation, that are consistent with what we believe. So, we bring our preferences to any discussion of those issues and resist arguments that are not consistent with them. Due to human behavior being so controversial and complex, the best answers we can find for many questions about our behavior will be probabilistic in nature. We couldn't hope to know with confidence what effects exercise has on our mental health, even if we were aware of all the available data.
Even yet, we still have to make a commitment to a specific plan of action if we want to avoid turning into "hollow men" or "nowhere women." But we will be far more receptive to the arguments made by those attempting to convince us to change our beliefs if we accept that our commitments are founded on probability rather than certainty. We might be mistaken about several of our views, after all. The questions that demand the most examination, regardless of the nature of the inquiry, are typically ones on which "reasonable people" cannot agree. In actuality, a lot of problems are fascinating precisely because there is a lot of debate on how to address them. In any debate, multiple points of view are involved. There are several valid points of support for various perspectives. Seldom will a stance on a social dispute allow you to declare, "This is unquestionably the correct position on the issue." Reasonable people wouldn't be discussing the matter if such certainty could be achieved. This essay will concentrate on these kinds of societal disputes.
The purpose of this essay is to provide you with the abilities necessary to formulate the best and most logical response possible, taking into account the problem's nature and the information at hand, even though we may not always find the "right answer" to societal issues. Usually, one must make decisions in the face of uncertainty. Frequently, we won't have the time or resources to find out all the pertinent information on a choice we have to make. Asking all the proper questions, for instance, is foolish when a loved one is complaining of excruciating chest pain and wants you to take him to the ER.
Thinking and Feeling:
You come across a conclusion for the first time with a background. You now know how to support certain causes, care about specific issues, and reject certain kinds of assertions. As a result, you always begin to question preexisting beliefs. You are emotionally attached to these preexisting beliefs. Since these are your opinions, it makes sense that you would want to defend them. This is an important topic to emphasize. Every decision we make is influenced by a wealth of personal baggage, including past experiences, goals, morals, education, and cultural norms. But in order to develop, you must acknowledge these emotions and, to the extent that you are able, set them aside for a while. You won't be able to listen intently to arguments from others that contradict or challenge your views until you make the effort. This transparency is crucial since a lot of our own opinions are not very rational; rather, they are the opinions of others, to which we have grown emotionally through time. Oftentimes, in fact, we take it personally when someone expresses an opinion that differs from our own.
Being emotionally invested in a situation increases your risk of ignoring potential valid arguments for opposing viewpoints, which, if you were to listen to them, might be enough to convince you to alter your views.
Remember: Accepting or rejecting a position shouldn't be based mostly on emotional factors. Emotional involvement should ideally peak once thinking has taken place. Therefore, when reading, be careful not to let your emotions separate you from the arguments of people who you initially disagree with. Successful active learners are those who are open to changing their opinions. If you want to ever change your opinion, you have to be as receptive as you can be to concepts that at first seem strange or perilous. But critical minds are not automatons. Many topics are very important to them. Their willingness to put in all the effort required for critical thinking reveals the depth of that concern. But since critical thinkers are aware that their current views are subject to change, any passion they may feel is restrained.
Is it efficient to ask the question , "Who Cares?":
Asking good questions can be difficult but rewarding job. You will care significantly more about some disputes than others. You'll want to invest less time and effort in critically analyzing a dispute when its effects on you and your community are minor compared to more significant controversies. For instance, it makes sense to critically assess arguments in favor of and against the preservation of endangered species because taking a different stance on this matter has significant societal repercussions. Spending time determining whether blue is the preferred color of the majority of company executives is less useful. Your time has worth. Ask yourself, "Who cares?" before spending the time to analyze a problem.
Strong-sense Critical Thinking and Weak-sense Critical Thinking:
In critical thinking, we must take a stand or a position on an issue or argument. We could be faced with issues such as; Was the decision to impose the General Sales Tax at 15% right? Should the sale of alcohol be allowed to 16 year olds? Should the country be involved in foreign military campaigns? Is the President of Russia correct in not taking part in the trade talks? We will then be compelled to take a stand on such arguments or issues. Thus, we can use our critical thinking in two ways. Our critical thinking can be used to either (1) defend or (2) evaluate and revise our initial beliefs. By using the distinction between weak sense
and strong-sense critical thinking they can helps us appreciate these two antagonistic uses of critical thinking.
Note: Strong-sense critical thinking is the use of the same skills to evaluate all claims and beliefs, especially our own.
Weak-sense critical thinking is the use of critical thinking to defend your current beliefs.
When we use critical thinking to defend our initial beliefs or we are paid to defend, then we are using weak-sense critical thinking. It is weak because to use critical thinking in this way is to be unconcerned with moving truth or virtue. The purpose of weak-critical thinking is to resist and destroy opinions different from ours. When we seek domination and victory over those who disagree with us as the sheer objective of critical thinking is to wreak the potentially humane and progressive aspects of critical thinking.
In contrast, strong-sense critical thinking requires the critical thinker to question all claims, including their own. By forcing ourselves to critically examine our initial beliefs, we help protect against self-deception and conformity. it is easy for us to stick with current beliefs, particularly when many people share them. but when we take this easy road, we run the great risk of making errors we could otherwise avoid.
The Satisfaction of Using the Panning-for-Gold Approach:
Critical thinkers find great satisfaction when to say "no" to an idea or opinion and to know why the response is inappropriate. If we regularly use the panning for gold approach, then anything that enters our minds will have been systematically examined first. When an idea or belief does pass the criteria developed here, it will make sense to agree with it - or at least until new evidence appears. Just imagine the great feeling when we know why we should ignore or accept a particular piece of advice. Frequently, those faced with an opinion different from their own respond by saying, "Oh, that's just your opinion." But the issue should not be whose opinion it is, but rather whether it is a good opinion. The sponge approach is often satisfying because it permits us to accumulate information. Though this approach is productive, there is much more gratification in being a participant in a meaningful dialogue with the writer or speaker. Reading and listening become much richer as we begin to see things that others may have missed. As we learn to select information and opinions systematically, we will probably desire to read more and more in a lifelong effort to decide which advice makes sense.
Critical Thinking and Effective Communication:
Many of the skills we will learn, as we become a more critical thinker, will improve the quality of our writing and speaking. As we write and speak, it helps to be aware of the expectations careful thinkers will have. Because our objective is communication, many of the questions the thoughtful person will ask in evaluating our speech or writing should serve as guides for our own attempts to communicate well.
References:
1. Browne, (M.N.)., & Keeley, (S.M). (2007). Asking the Right Questions.
Pearson Prentice Hall.
2. Harris, R. (2021, January 9). Virtual Salt.
https://www.virtualsalt.com/introduction-to-critical-thinking/
