Ten years ago, I watched an amazing film. I loved the film then and see it in a different light now. This film showcases cancel culture before the term took on so much cultural caché. Without spoiling the movie, the main character loses everything based on bad luck. A little girl hears an older sibling talking in graphic language about adult topics and then, unwittingly, insinuates that this family friend had molested her. Cast out, accused, he becomes paranoid but also terrorized, in large and small ways, that shatter his existence, casting doubt in people’s minds, leading them to characterize him as unworthy. Devastating.
We see this all the time now, resulting mostly from social media but increasingly from a society that no longer has trust in one another. People often gravitate towards ideas and people that share their ideologies, rather than engaging someone or an idea based on its merits and then taking a principled position upon reflection, in an open and transparent way. Such an outcome seems implausible, at best, in our tortured times.
What does this have to do with the topics usually addressed on this blog? Good question. It relates for two reasons. As an educator, creating open, honest discussions, designed for students to engage with to understand the world and create their own ideas about it remains our core charge in higher education. In other words, we foster critical thinking. This phrase receives much attention and yet remains elusive, ill-defined, ambiguous, more a status phrase used by individuals positioning amongst peers and colleagues than one with clarity and shared purpose.
What do we mean by critical thinking? A quick search for ‘critical thinking higher education’ yielded a page from the University of Louisville (link below), outlining what they see as critical thinking. They use a definition from Michael Scriven and Richard Paul (2003):
“Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.”
What do you think? Well, for me, although helpful and well-meaning, this definition has many adjectives but leaves the meaning obscured. Intellectual discipline comes across as a bit overbearing. You do not need to have a PhD or specific credentials to consider yourself intellectually disciplined. No disrespect to the authors who have formulated a thoughtful perspective that demands reflection. They have done us a favor, putting forth their own ideas that implicitly challenge us to create and reflect upon our own. You guessed it, they have challenged us to engage their definition with…critical thinking!
I have just reflected on a definition drawn from a resource I have not read. I intentionally did not do my due diligence to highlight a central critical thinking tenet – do not base your ideas on hearsay and someone else’s opinion. Using one sentence from a report, referenced by an institution with its own interests (likely respectable and well-intentioned), to create your own perspectives and opinions represents uncritical thinking. In this case, I would need to read the report by Scriven and Paul to inform my own views. As well as others. Hence, critical thinking requires an informed position. Taking snippets from somewhere to make an argument from generally does not work well. Instead, one must read primary sources, thoroughly understand positions put forth, and ensure that they have a comprehensive understanding of arguments and positions put forward before shaping their own.
This process has another element: identifying your own biases and tendencies. This can prove challenging but remains essential. We all have ideas, backgrounds, proclivities, biases, and tendencies. Some emerged simply from our life path, developing from parental and societal influences, but also our interests and experiences. Critical thinking demands identifying and engaging these influences, not to condone or dismiss, but to recognize and to understand how they affect our thinking and worldview. From this self-reflection, which one can marshal whenever confronted with an idea or argument that we respond to, sets the stage for more transparent evaluation and argument generation.
From these starting points we can move into the next level, which has to do with analyzing ideas and arguments and the information, evidence, perspectives, and intentions supporting them. This occurs when one responds to ideas from others, but also when generating our own ideas and views. Why do we believe something? We must not only analyze the arguments and positions put forward but must also assess their intentions, and our own. If someone has a preconceived notion and spends significant time supporting and justifying their position, without evidence, we would not support it. Critical thinking would lead us to reject their claims. We need to hold our own decision-making to the same standard. This requires evaluating claims, assessing evidence, observing, reflecting, and identifying strengths and weaknesses, aimed at coming to a reasoned position based on information derived from experience, evidence, credible peer review, not opinions.
We could go on and on, identifying different ways to conceptualize critical thinking. Instead, I will raise one more element that does not often receive sufficient attention. We can follow the steps listed above but may still not truly embody critical thinking. We all live in a society with norms, mores, assumptions, that create perspectives and unexamined, unidentified beliefs that shape what we mean by critical thinking. These elements have created ideologies and blind spots. Not easily overcome, critical thinking necessitates acknowledging this reality and actively examining and searching for the ways in which these shield us from identifying these factors in how they shape collective beliefs and our own biases. In particular, critical thinking starts with assessing hierarchy and power relations and using those insights to help situate where claims come from, identify how collective assumptions shape positions put forward, and uncover the root from which ideas and positions take shape.
In the end, critical thinking does not lead to particular perspectives or arguments. Rather, critical thinking molds the process by which we can question ideas and perspectives, and helps to more transparently examine how we come to our own. In the classroom, I provoke students to examine their own ideas and assess positions put forward by others but that does not mean they all believe the same things. Far from it. It does not matter what they believe. What matters simply has to do with the way in which they come to their beliefs.
A movie prompted this post. It showcased how group think can destroy people and communities. Based on fiction, the tale has important implications for contemporary society. Although associated with education, and universities in particular, we could all use a bit more critical thinking in our lives, no matter where we find ourselves. And it would help to think a bit more critically about what we mean by critical thinking.
The film: The Hunt
Comments