We think critically, but what does that actually mean?
What is critical thinking? What does is mean to think "critically?" We hear this all the time. You may have people telling you you need to think critically about something…or that there’s not enough critical thinking in the world...or whatever.
Well, what is critical thinking? Without explaining what it is or why it's important, it’s just a term. There are different levels of critical thinking or different ways to even think about critical thinking.
What is Critical Thinking?
Critical thinking simply means applying different lenses and different perspectives to information or concepts to see them...in different ways.
I’ve broken down my understanding of critical thinking into a number of different areas, or techniques, or concepts that you could apply that all fit within the realm of critical thinking. This is by no means a complete list. This is by no means a comprehensive list. This is just where my thinking was on this topic at a given point in time.
Once you start to adopt this level of critical thinking, you can actually begin to trust information. And being able to trust information in the modern era, in the Generative AI era, where we are subject to very compelling misinformation and deepfakes, we’re going to have to continuously evolve as humans in our capacity to be able to take in mass quantities of information on a moment-by-moment basis basis.
We have to have the systems in place, whether those are mental systems, technology systems, or other structures, that can help us take in information, evaluate that information in real time, store that information for future retrieval and future analysis, apply deep thinking and deep modeling, and arrive at correct...or directionally correct...or strategically correct outcomes.
Question Everything
The first aspect of critical thinking is to question everything. If you have been around inquisitive young children, they’re always asking what question?
Why, why, why, why, why?
And yes, it may be a little bit annoying, but they’re trying to make sense of the world around them. Why do things work the way they do? Why are you as a larger and older human telling me what you’re telling me? They’re questioning everything because they don’t know any better.
And as we progress through life, as we become adults, we tend to lose ability to ask why, or at least the want to ask why. We lose that childlike curiosity. But we still have to understand that not everything in this world is as it seems, or is even knowable, so we always have to question what’s coming into our world in any given moment.
Gather Evidence
When you’re done questioning, you have to find answers to those questions. And how do you find answers to questions? Through research, through gathering evidence. What are the observable facts? What can I see with my own eyes? What is self-evident? That’s not always apparent.
We have human senses. What are the senses telling us? What are we observing for ourselves that we know to be true? Or, if it is not something you’ve experienced for yourself, any evidence you gather where the facts are not observable or at least immediately verifiable, you then have to put through another layer of scrutiny.
And if you do think critically, you’re not making any decisions on information at this point. Information that is coming into your world, you just have to capture it. You’ll have some baseline mental models that you will apply that will help you evaluate the quality of your information.
Quarantine New Information Until Vetted
The information that is continuously coming into your world...well, you just have to capture it. You’ll eventually have some baseline mental models that you will apply, that will help you evaluate the quality of your information, and from there you work towards separating the proverbial wheat from the chaff.
Once you’ve taken information in, and once you have determined there is enough trustworthiness in the information, and that there is enough validity to that information, you can at least put it into temporary storage your brain or in an external system like a second brain.
If nothing about this information has indicated that immediate action needed to be taken, you can take that information in and store it in a self-contained area of your brain or system for evaluating later.
Simply having that information in your system is not necessary going to blow up the system...think of it as an information quarantine if you will, where you can begin to apply more advanced analytical mental models for processing and validating the information.
You can now apply deeper thinking to really understand what this information is telling you, and you still have not reacted or taken any action.
Consider the Source
You have to be able to, at a glance, know where your information comes from.
Where did I get this information from? What is the source of this information? Who gave it to me? Has this been interpreted in any way or is this the raw data?
Just understanding the type of information you’re receiving - the chain of custody, if you will - from when that information was first gathered until it reached you, and all of the steps in between, will give you a grounding point for evaluating and applying the information in the future.
You don’t necessarily need to make decisions on the information as to whether it’s valid or trustworthy at the point in time when you're taking in the information to begin with.
Being able to trace back the lineage of any information is extremely important because you need to know where it comes from, and you need to know how many times it was touched, who it was touched by, why it was touched, and you have to understand the incentives of all involved.
Are you paying for this information? Are there political incentives? Power incentives? Social incentives? Mostly you’re just trying to understand when news comes in, what it means. You're trying to understand…what are the sources that I’m looking at?
Because what you’re looking for is the atomic elements of that information. You’re looking for what everybody is saying, and you’re trying to break that down into core principles or facts.
Now, these different sources may see things in different ways, and they probably will. And, in fact, you should have sources that maybe have differing political agendas or different worldviews.
Draw from a wide range of diverse sources so that you do get the additional context of what others are saying about the information, if for no other purpose than to see the trends in data and see patterns in the data that you would not have discovered otherwise.
But for all intents and purposes, what you’re doing with multiple information sources is just doing a little cross-referencing. You’re doing a little cross-checking of the information.
Are they saying the same things, or are there fundamental differences in the information that’s being reported? Wording aside, are the facts the same? Are they all seeing the same fundamental things?
If they’re all saying the same fundamental things, you can at least apply a minimal level of trust to that information. If they’re all singing from the same hymn book, you can at least start there and understand that may be at least a basis for fact.
Apply Mental Models
When you get into domains or topics that require some level of scrutiny or analysis, you have to have a way of processing that information. You have to have a system for approaching that information and determining, “What should my next action be?”
As you take in new information, as you process that information, as you analyze that information, as you apply that information, and then as you build on that foundational information and knowledge over time, you’re going to be applying various mental models along the way.
What is a mental model? Think of it as a framework, or a filter or a "mental algorithm" that allows you to see the world in different ways.
As we evaluate information that comes into our system, we determine that it is valid and trustworthy, that we can even allow it into our system, and then we start to apply different mental models for analyzing that information, starting to categorize that information, apply it to things we already know, and so forth.
There’s a cyclical, somewhat repetitive nature here, in that you kind of have to go through these mental models over and over again as you synthesize information…as you turn that information into knowledge.
Think of it as "deliberate practice" to help your brain wire eventually wire itself to a point where it can reflexively apply these mental models in the form of what are called heuristics - or mental "shortcuts" - as information presents itself to you.
See How Things Are Related
One of the essential aspects of critical thinking is the ability to see how new information, when it comes into your system, impacts the system as a whole.
In order to understand how new information impacts the current information that you hold in your mind - i.e. your current knowledge, or your current understanding of your world - you have to understand how that information relates to what you already know.
Something you may notice straight away as information comes into your world is that it sounds or looks and feels like other information or other knowledge that you already have in your head, or that you’ve recently come across.
When you start to detect that things are being repeated, that’s called a pattern. Patterns start to emerge.
Once you start to understand what the patterns are, the next logical step is to see how the different elements of a piece of information all tie together. And you do that by evaluating the relationships.
Relationships emerge between different concepts, different ideas, and different pieces of information. Relationships are everywhere. How does concept A relate to concept B? We understand the nature of those relationships. We understand the dynamics of those relationships.
This is where understanding relationships is critical because relationships in many cases create dependencies. Understanding the dependencies between various concepts, understanding that those dependencies are the natural result of relationships, underpins a majority of the critical thinking that you will apply.
Challenge All Assumptions
If you have built any knowledge in your head, or if you have designed systems that were based on assumptions, you have a problem.
You have potentially bad information that you have made other decisions on, or possibly framed other information in the context of, and that information was never vetted or verified.
You see this a lot in technology delivery, especially with software development, where assumptions are made. Something is “easy,” or “...this shouldn’t take too long!”
Not based on any direct evidence, but just kind of based on, “Well, I think this should mean this,” or, “it could mean this.”
You have to be open to new information coming into your system that could challenge things you already know. Even if you believe those are facts, you have to be open to challenging any knowledge that you have.
The future is completely unknowable. So what we’re doing is we’re saying if you are making decisions based on assumptions, you have to be open to the fact that those assumptions may not be true. There is no guarantee of the future.
So if you’re making assumptions about the future, you have to do so in a way that at least is supported by evidence, facts, or based on the outputs of modeling...based on the outputs of thought exercises...based on the outputs of just trying to understand what comes next.
You can make an assumption without even realizing you’re making an assumption. You could have bad information. You could have interpreted a piece of information incorrectly. Your mental models could have been faulty. Your human brain could have committed a cognitive error.
So if you’re moving forward down the happy path thinking that everything’s going to be great at every step of the way, you’re going to run into disappointment at some point.
When you build on a shaky foundation, eventually it will sink, eventually it will collapse. Think of assumptions as a shaky foundation for any knowledge or any decisions.
Check Your Biases at the Door
Check your biases at the door. I’m not talking about any specific biases. I’m talking about the awareness that the human mind is subject to something called a cognitive bias, and that bias could be caused by many things.
It’s usually your experience, how your brain is wired, how you have dealt with things in the past...the information that you hold to be true. These biases form in different ways. They manifest in different ways. You just have to be aware of the concept of cognitive biases.
When I talk about biases and when I say to check your biases at the door, this is one of the most difficult things that somebody who wants to think critically has to address in their own human mind. Our minds are subject to making errors. Sometimes these errors are just simply because we make mistakes - i.e. cognitive errors.
Sometimes we make mistakes because of the mental shortcuts - the heuristics - that are applied incorrectly. Heuristics are a way for the human brain to save cognitive load, to save energy, to not have to engage the deeper parts of the brain because it’s just applying a model of something it already knows - and that model may be flawed.
In general, when I talk about mental or cognitive biases, it’s the incorrect filtering of information or the application of incorrect categorization, or just the incorrect understanding of an issue or piece of information because there’s something wired in your brain that makes you either think of things incorrectly or makes you overlook key aspects of the information that you’re evaluating.
There’s something going on where your brain is just kind of routing in a direction where it’s taking things into account that it shouldn’t be taking into account. It’s seeing things in a way it shouldn’t be seeing them.
Now, you may not be aware of these biases. This is something where you are continuously checking your own thinking. You are continuously running your thinking through models that you trust, models that you know that if you give them certain input, you’re going to get a trustable, verifiable, observable output.
Going back and checking your own thinking, rethinking what you think you know, unlearning information that was not correct, unlearning information that was based on assumptions, unlearning information where a bias may have been applied that forced you to see things differently...once you have an understanding of biases, and once you are aware of biases in your own thinking, you can really start to work on stripping these biases away.
Once you start to strip away those biases, the only way that you can work on that - i.e.the only way you can replace those biases with new thinking - is you have to literally rewire your brain.
So when you identify a bias, if you identify that your thinking is taking incorrect or unnecessary shortcuts, then you can start to relearn how to think.
If new information is seen or interpreted differently than the way it was intended, if you are missing key facts from that information because you’re just not looking for them or you’re choosing not to see them, that’s the impact of the bias.
How Strong is the Argument?
If someone is trying to persuade you to see their viewpoint, if they are trying to persuade you to take one side of an argument or another...you have to evaluate the argument that’s being made.
When I talk about arguments, I’m not talking about two people yelling at each other. I’m not talking about the programming term. I am not talking about anything other than the concept of stating a position and then being able to defend that position.
So in that context, when we look at arguments, this is where you start to think about different known errors you can make, or different known traps you could fall into.
And one of those traps you could fall into, if we move beyond just basic logical errors, beyond just understanding the core IF-THIS-THEN-THIS logic - the basic logic, the structural logic - there are different logical fallacies that can be applied to arguments that could potentially weaken them or completely invalidate the arguments altogether.
A logical fallacy, you can think of as just an incorrect argument. It’s a weak argument because the basic premise of the argument doesn’t hold up to a certain level of scrutiny.
You can run through these logical fallacies - and there are many of them - and if you apply them to your own thinking, if you apply them to new thinking, or if you apply them to arguments or decisions that are being made...understanding where the errors can occur and then identifying those errors in the thinking will help you evaluate the validity of an argument.
Taking the Other Side
A core concept of thinking critically is to see things from different perspectives. If you can effectively defend both sides of an argument, it gives you strength in your own position. It gives you strength in your own claims.
If you’re trying to make or defend an argument, seeing the other side helps you understand potential roadblocks that you’re up against, potential constraints.
I think most importantly, it also offers the opportunity for empathy. When you take the other side of an argument, you naturally have to put yourself into the position of the person on the other side of the table. You have to put yourself in the position of someone that is going to hear your argument and most likely respond with their own.
Seeing from multiple perspectives, multiple angles, multiple viewpoints allows you to understand everything differently. It allows you to see things in new ways. It allows you to see things holistically.
What’s Not Being Said?
A related concept to taking the other side of an argument, or at least seeing an argument or position from the another perspective, is focusing on what’s not being said.
As part of your critical thinking, if you understand the "chain of custody" or the lineage of information that comes into your system, in that sequence, then you understand who all the actors are and what their incentives are. We can start to listen for not only what is said, but also what isn't being said.
Or, once you have heard everything that’s been said - once you have taken into account everything that information is trying to convey, and you have applied your lenses of critical thinking - now you want to move beyond that, and you want to understand what wasn't said explicitly. You want to "read between the lines."
Tying in the concept of cognitive biases, when considering multiple angles of an argument, a position, or even information pertaining to the argument or position, take into account a common bias called survivorship bias.
Survivorship bias at its core simply means that the "survivor" is the one who provided the information. The survivor is the source of whatever it is you’re evaluating. So when you’re getting something from the survivor, you’re not taking into account other perspectives.
If you want to take into account other perspectives, you have to go and find them. You have to look beyond just what you’re getting from the survivor in this situation. You want to figure out what didn’t survive and why it didn’t survive.
Bringing it All Together
If information has flowed through your mental models to the point where you’re trusting it, you’re applying it, and you’re getting benefit and value from applying that information, just keep on building. Be confident in adding new information to your system. You've worked for it.
If your system fails, if your critical thinking fails, or if any of your processes fail, just pick yourself up, learn from the mistake, and understand how the mistake was made.
Make sure that structurally - architecturally - your systems are aware of the possibility of this happening and then update your mental models and your frameworks to ensure that this type of thinking doesn’t happen again.
That’s not to say you can control every situation or influence every situation, but you can control your thinking in almost every situation.
And being able to control your thinking, being able to evaluate things very quickly in a critical manner, to where you are not subject to logical fallacies or cognitive errors or cognitive biases, leads to making better decisions, and most importantly - better understanding your world and how you fit into it.
Next Page | Previous Page | Page Name | Published Date |
|---|---|---|---|
November 21, 2024 |