Of course, I had already come to the stunning realization that I don’t have a clue (that may not be entirely accurate) about what constitutes critical thinking. What’s more, after trying to better understand scientific reasoning, reading a few skeptic/sceptic digital magazines, I’m convinced I’m not only ignorant, but willfully ignorant (a.k.a. “stupid”) on the subject. To add insult to injury, I remember the point when I was first introduced to the Scientific Method and then don’t remember much about it after that quick “about introduction.” Worse, I remember my first class on “logic” was in my first or second semester of college…and I remember dropping the class or tuning out.

Why do I share this with you? So you’ll ask yourself the same question going around in my head:

When and where did I learn how to be a critical thinker, whatever the heck that means? And, is there a process or (fancy word alert) heuristic that makes critical thinking obvious to the ignorant (me)?

I’m not being too kind to myself. The truth is, I have learned a bit more about this.

After digging around, it’s obvious to me that I may have stumbled into critical thinking from time to time, not really understanding what it entailed. I found this interesting chart that simply blew my mind after some exploration:

Take a moment to read this table, maybe even click the link to the article explaining the table. As I read the table in bed this morning, I wondered, maybe I’m a “multiplist.” But after reading the table, I wished life was simple enough to be a realist or absolutist. It made me wonder if what I needed to be was an evaluativist. 

But how to get there? The question was too deep so early in the morning. I decided to look for heuristics.

I started to wonder if there was some critical thinking process, a series of steps or maybe a formula I could follow. Of course, that’s when I started to run into different perspectives and alternatives:

Some suggest that critical thinking is a “simple” five step process:

1. Formulate the question
2. Gather information
3. Apply the information
4. Consider the implications
5. Explore other points of view

As you might imagine, this process looks quite familiar. It reminded me of a blog entry I’d written on design thinking, which feature my modification of the process:

This looked pretty straightforward to me, but now I realize, there’s a LOT more beneath the surface. I was running the rapids and giving no thought to the rocks and boulders hidden below the water’s surface.

Ugh, that might rip the bottom out of your raft, no?

Forward movement is fraught with danger. Read anything by skeptics (like this one) and you’ll encounter a laundry list of “fallacies” and wrong ways of thinking. How have I survived not having read this book? 

The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe inoculates you against the frailties and shortcomings of human cognition. If this book does not become required reading for us all, we may well see modern civilization unravel before our eyes.” 

—Neil deGrasse Tyson, Astrophysicist, American Museum of Natural History

Want to see a skeptic in action? Watch this video of Dr. Steven Novella. Maybe review this list of pseudoscience topics. I may be mixing these things up a bit.

That is, ways that seem to make sense but you quickly realize are flawed. The problem is, most people fall into faulty thinking without a second thought. 

Fallacies are mistaken beliefs based on unsound arguments. They derive from reasoning that is logically incorrect, thus undermining an argument’s validity.

Fallacies are difficult to classify, due to their variety in application and structure. In the broadest sense possible, fallacies can be divided into two types: formal fallacies and informal fallacies (Source).

So, I started a notebook on this website, and realized, “Miguel, maybe you should have stayed in that freshman Logic class.” After a short time taking notes, I realized that if I had to know all this BEFORE I could engage in critical thinking, I probably wasn’t going to do very well at all. In truth, how many even know all these in K-12 public schools enough to apply them?

A question going around in my head is, “Is critical thinking process the same as scientific reasoning that Dr. Novella refers to in his book?” 

Daniela R. Murphy describes critical thinking in this way (albeit with a few slight edits on my part):

• STEP 1- IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM. Define the problem. Try to state it in a single declarative sentence. Then go through the pros and cons of the problem. Weigh the cost of not resolving it. 
• STEP 2- ANALYZE THE PROBLEM. Look at it from different points of view.  Is it real or perceived? Is it solvable? Can you solve it alone or do you need help? Be aware of bias or a narrow point of view that needs to be broadened.
• STEP 3- BRAINSTORM. Come up with several possible solutions. Brainstorm a list of several possible solutions. Do not reject any outright without further study. You never know when part of a solution that first seemed unlikely turns out to help the thinking go in a new direction.Write down anything that comes to mind. Then review the list before narrowing it down to the best options. In this way, you are more likely to get the best results.
• STEP 4- PICK THE BEST SOLUTION. Take some time to decide what will work best for the problem at hand. It is important to remember: What works in one situation, may not work in a similar one… in other words beware of always falling back on what’s worked in the past.
• STEP 5- IMPLEMENT THE SOLUTION. It’s important to understand that sometimes the solution may be to simply accept the situation. All problems that have been critically examined lead to personal growth opportunities.

As I was reaching the point of overwhelm, I realized that I’d run across some intriguing images, like this one from WasabiLearning’s The Ultimate Cheatsheet for Critical Thinking. I also ran into the RED Model of Critical Thinking via Pearson’s Watson-Glaser II Critical Thinking Appraisal:

So, digging into the RED Model a bit more:

I wish I had an easy answer but this looks like something that will take some time to internalize. As I look at the questions in the graphic above, I can see that, “Yeah, I know about some of these,” but I’m not sure I systematically apply them to every life situation. 

---