The framework of Critical Race Theory (CRT) has been in the political and local news lately and although I have quite a bit to offer on that, it’s gotten me wondering the extent to which folks could define critical thinking. One of the most mysterious and exciting aspects of the human experience can be our capacity to think. Although the process of thinking, for most, is an effortless task, critical thought entails control, effort, and manipulation. Additionally, critical thinking is an activity that can take on several forms, such as in-depth analysis, random musings, and concerted reflection. Unfortunately, by many accounts, it has been neglected in American schools in the last few decades.
So what is critical thought?
Let’s compare and contrast several definitions of critical thought. The, I’ll provide a reflective evaluation of how logic and emotionality interplay in my own approach to critical thinking.
Vincent Ruggiero's definition
Vincent Ruggiero defines critical thinking as a directed mental process geared towards problem-solving or decision-making to better understand particular ideas (Ruggiero, 2004). He contrasts thinking with feeling by taking the position that there is a subjective component to feeling, replete with sentiment and desire. Therefore, critical thinking is more reliable because it is based on logic and reason.
Ruggiero also distinguishes critical thinking from the creative type. Whereas creative thinking can be heavily influenced by feelings, critical thinking is a process of evaluating or assessing arguments to ascertain their merit—a quest for truth by analyzing relationships and values relative to a given question. Additionally, the critical thinker must evaluate the reasons he considers to determine their sufficiency because any idea, regardless of its veracity, can be rationalized (Ruggiero, 2004).
Critical thinking does not necessarily result in original thought. Instead, it is a process replete with misconceived notions and inaccurate deductions yielding sound creativity by way of intense scrutiny. Interestingly, he suggests that…
…critical thinking is more a habit than a skill.
Even sloppy thinkers can become critical thinkers by adopting the routines and practices inherent in the necessary thinking process (Ruggiero, 2004).
Kirby and Goodpaster's definition
Authors Gary Kirby and Jeffery Goodpaster consider thinking to be generally a function of language and non-linguistic formulations—expressed or unexpressed. Similar to Ruggiero, Kirby and Goodpaster distinguish between creative and critical thinking in much the same way. However, they consider feelings and the socio-cultural environment from which the thinker operates to be inextricable from thinking and, therefore, suggest a required subjectivity in the critical thinking process. Who we are is a direct reflection of how we think (Kirby & Goodpaster, 2002). Although the critical thinker makes an effort to remove opinions and influences from his analysis, personal experience will always factor into the critical thinking process because the mind is such a product of personal experiences. That is, the mind may not be able to remove itself from the process, and as a result, what may appear to be an objective thought may be more subjective than one may think (Kirby & Goodpaster, 2002).
To think more objectively, the mind requires a metaphorical mirror to observe its processes. They suggest that the linguistic expression of our thoughts may provide the apparatus necessary to refine our thinking—the mirror of communication. The presentation of our ideas allows for a cognitive dissonance wherein we can observe our own thinking and receive feedback from peers to ensure objectivity (Festinger, 1957). Communicating externalizes thoughts allowing one to reflect on them to determine their veracity and possibly recognize personal influences that may have been embedded in the thought process. Additionally, by engaging in revisions of our writings relative to proposed thoughts, one can refine their thinking to bring about as objective intellection as possible.
Schwarze and Lape's definition
Much like Kirby and Goodpaster, Sharon Schwarze and Harvey Lape recognize the relationship of the self to the process of critical thinking and the confines of rational thought. They state that "the more rational you try to be, the more conscious you will become of the limits of reason" (Schwarze & Lape, 2001, p. 27). This is not to say that critical thinking is not possible. Instead, by engaging in open dialogue and using precise language, one can fine-tune thoughts through warranted statements. Schwarze and Lape define warranted statements as those that have been scrutinized by people to a point wherein questioning the statement's authenticity ceases. By extension, its kernel of thought becomes a fact (Schwarze & Lape, 2001).
Knowledge and certainty are byproducts of argumentation, reasoning, and explanation. Therefore, critical thinking can be defined as the linguistic expression of confirmed ideas and facts.
I recognize the extent to which emotion and logic influence my critical thinking process. In reflection, there have been many events in my life when decisions have been made based on logical reasoning, and yet, the desired effects did not come to pass. Conversely, far too many choices have been made based on an emotion or an ill-conceived belief resulting in massive failure. As I have gained experience, I have come to rely more on the critical thinking process as a modus operandi. However, I do not rule out or suppress feelings or emotions when making decisions. The various authors referenced in this post have shown that logic and language are the standard tools used in establishing a basis for decision making as they are the tenets of critical thinking.
Nevertheless, creativity, often fueled by emotion and feeling, is often the innovating spark of innovation. Without it, the solely critical thinker may become stilted and unable to improve.
To conclude, I have struggled with valuing critical thinking over creative thought. Having a background in fine art, I consider impulses and fleeting moments of emotion to be valuable—almost divine in origin. In writing this post and considering the various definitions of critical thinking presented, I have concluded that feelings and instinctual thoughts are pretty crucial to critical thinking. What must be abated at all costs to pursue essential thought and analysis is emotional thinking and expression to curb reason or to manipulate dialogues amongst colleagues as they scrutinize and evaluate ideas presented by an individual.
Further, I recognize the need to rely primarily on logic to validate my findings and refine my thought pattern to employ a more scientific approach to my work rather than an artful one. By supporting my claims, engaging in formal reasoning, being open to dialogue, and externalizing my thinking, I believe I will become a more facile critical thinker and a successful leader.
References
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Kirby, G. K., & Goodpaster, J. R. (2002). Thinking (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ruggiero, V. R. (2004). Beyond feelings; A guide to critical thinking (7th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Schwarze, S., & Lape, H. (2001). Thinking Socratically: Critical thinking about everyday issues (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.