Five simple strategies to sharpen your critical thinking | BBC Ideas

 

                                              

We’re lucky to live in an age where the sum total of human knowledge

is pretty much available at the click of a button.

We’ve never had access to so much information.

But not all of what’s out there is quite what it seems.

So here’s a few strategies to navigate your way through.

And avoid falling out with people along the way.

We all enjoy that sweet dopamine hit of feeling like we’re right.

In repeated experiments, psychologists have shown

we’re much more likely to accept something as evidence

if it confirms what we already think we know.

And much more likely to discount information

if it contradicts our views.

It’s what’s known as “confirmation bias”.

It’s one of the key “cognitive biases” that humans have,

and it operates at an unconscious level -

affecting our ability to process information.

This is especially true for issues which are emotionally charged,

or where our views are deeply held.

But it can come into play at any time.

So don’t rush to decide,

and be actively prepared to change your mind.

So many of our discussions take place on social media platforms

where algorithms reward our desire to see and hear our views confirmed.

But in life, most situations are nuanced and complicated –

acknowledging that can enrich the way that we view the world.

For example, what colour is the sky? Well, the obvious answer is blue.

But at sunrise or sunset, it can be red.

On a cold misty morning, white or grey.

At night, midnight blue or black.

But imagine for a moment the blue of the sky on a sunny day.

Is it really blue?

The colour blue has a short wavelength,

meaning it scatters more than other colours -

making it more visible to the human eye.

So the sky looks blue to us humans,

even though there’s a whole spectrum of colours out there.

Even something that seems totally self-evident

can be more nuanced than you think.

One approach to, well, arguing,

is to let go of the idea of being “right”.

Or at least seriously consider that you might actually be wrong.

Putting yourself in the other person’s shoes

can lead to much more productive outcomes.

Really try to understand where the other person is coming from.

It’s what’s called “intellectual empathy”.

It can be challenging, but that’s the point.

This can only work when both parties are engaging in good faith.

Arguing just to waste somebody’s time,

known online as “sea lioning”,

not only makes you that guy or girl people avoid at parties,

but we are intellectually, socially and politically worse off for it.

It’s more important than ever

to know where your information is coming from.

That sciency-looking graph about the dangers of feral Dalmatian puppies

might look very convincing, until you dig a little deeper

and find it was commissioned by fur-coat-coveting

Disney villain, Cruella de Vil.

Be on the lookout for ulterior motives and vested interests.

Becoming literate in the basics of scientific methodology,

the use of data and the way it’s presented

are all weapons in your arsenal when it comes to critical thinking.

Whether engaging in online debates or arguing with Uncle Frank,

it’s very easy to lose our cool and resort to some

less-than-sound tactics.

One common tactic is what philosophers call,

“The Straw Man” fallacy.

Instead of engaging with the actual belief,

you engage with a caricature.

For example, if I said, “I prefer hamsters to gerbils,”

you might respond, “Oh, so you want to drown all gerbils?”

A viewpoint that’s much easier to take down.

Another fallacy is the “ad hominem fallacy”,

where you discount an argument

because of your opinion of the person making it.

This can lead to ad hominem attacks,

which is basically Latin for name-calling.

In that situation, it’s fair to say that everybody loses.

Engaging in critical thinking isn’t as fun as picking up a pitchfork,

or feeling like you’re fundamentally right.

But in the long run, it leads to a more curious,

educated and harmonious society,

which ultimately is the biggest win of all.

English (United Kingdom)

https://youtu.be/NHjgKe7JMNE

This tool will help improve your critical thinking - Erick Wilberding

                                                               

Socrates, one of the founding fathers of Western philosophical thought,

was on trial.

Many Athenians believed he was a dangerous enemy of the state,

accusing the philosopher of corrupting the youth

and refusing to recognize their gods.

However, Socrates wasn’t feared for claiming to have all the answers,

but rather, for asking too many questions.

While he loathed formal lectures,

the philosopher frequently engaged friends and strangers

in lengthy conversations about morality and society.

These discussions weren’t debates, nor would Socrates offer explicit advice.

In fact, the philosopher often claimed to know nothing at all,

responding to his partner's answers only with further questions.

But through this process, Socrates probed their logic,

revealing its flaws and helping both parties reach a more robust understanding.

These insightful questions made Socrates beloved by his followers.

Two of his students, Plato and Xenophon, were so inspired

that they replicated their mentor’s process in fictional dialogues.

These invented exchanges provide perfect examples

of what would come to be known as the Socratic Method.

In one of these fabricated dialogues,

Socrates is conversing with a young man named Euthydemus,

who is confident that he understands the nature of justice and injustice.

Socrates probes the student’s values by asking him to label actions

such as lying and theft as just or unjust.

Euthydemus confidently categorizes them as injustices,

but this only prompts another question:

is it just for a general to deceive or pillage a hostile army?

Euthydemus revises his assertion.

He claims that these actions are just when done to enemies,

and unjust when done to friends.

But Socrates isn’t finished.

He asks the young man to consider a commander lying to his troops

to boost their morale.

Before long, Euthydemus is despondent.

It seems that every answer leads to further problems,

and perhaps he’s not quite sure what constitutes justice after all.

In employing this question-oriented approach,

Socrates described himself as a midwife,

whose inquiries assist others in giving birth to their ideas.

His method of questioning draws out an individual’s unexamined assumptions,

and then challenges those biases.

It doesn't always provide definitive answers,

but the method helps clarify the questions

and eliminate contradictory or circular logic.

And by following a line of inquiry where it logically leads,

both the question asker and answerer can end up in unexpected places.

This technique isn’t limited by the conversation’s content,

making it incredibly useful in numerous fields.

During the Renaissance, the method was used to teach clinical medicine.

Students proposed their rationale for different diagnoses,

while a doctor questioned their assumptions and moderated discussion.

In this model, the method could even produce conclusive results.

This same approach was later used in other sciences,

such as astronomy, botany, and mathematics.

Following the Protestant Reformation,

it was adapted to tackle abstract questions of faith.

In the 19th century, the method became an essential part

of American legal education.

Professors explored students’ understanding of judicial reasoning

by challenging them with unforeseen hypothetical situations.

This approach is still used today by the Supreme Court

to imagine the unintended impacts of passing a law.

The Socratic Method can be adapted to teach almost any topic

that relies on critical reasoning,

but its success depends on the teacher employing it.

An effective Socratic educator must be well versed in their subject.

Rather than bullying their students or showing off their superior intellect,

they should be modest, genuinely curious, and affirming of every contribution.

In this regard, Socrates himself

may not have been the most subtle Socratic teacher.

Historians believe he was deeply critical of Athens’ particular brand of democracy,

and known to pass those concerns onto his followers.

These subversive beliefs were distorted in public forums

and thought to have inspired two of his pupils to treasonous ends.

It was likely for these ideas Socrates was brought to trial,

and eventually, sentenced to death.

But even on his deathbed, artists depict a serene philosopher—

ever curious to explore the ultimate question.

English

https://youtu.be/vNDYUlxNIAA