Non-Critical Thinking

Introduction

In the summer of 1787 it took eighty-five articles totaling almost 600 pages to debate and defend the U. S. Constitution. Does anyone really think that issues today are so much simpler that they can be properly defended in a fifteen second snappy slogan? Of course not.

Being a critical thinker is difficult. First, it goes against the popular culture. Thinking carefully is not admired. Often the conclusions critical thinkers arrive at are not the popular conclusions. Second, it takes time. You need to find evidence, weigh the evidence, and be honest. Third, true critical thinking is threatening to the ego. Critical thinkers must exercise intellectual humility.

In a general sense, people fit into one of the three basic categories. Let's find out what characterizes each, and which category most accurately describes you.

Non-Critical Thinking

Unable or unwilling to consider the value of logic in everyday life, the non-critical thinker becomes a thought follower. Their beliefs are a collection ideas planted in them by others. They tend to be easily manipulated, but are unaware that they are being manipulated. Of course, if one told them they were being manipulated, they would likely deny it.
Non-critical thinkers generally accept the beliefs which are easiest to access. For the student, for instance, these are the dominant beliefs and biases presented by their teachers, peers, textbooks, and the popular media.

The non-critical thinker's beliefs usually conform to the group they most strongly identify with and are most comfortable with.

Non-critical thinkers spout slogans which are programmed into them, but they are unable to logically defend these positions. The positions are simply accepted as true. Anyone who challenges the position will likely be considered ignorant or a bigot. Any challenge to the position is responded to with anger rather than intellectual consideration.

Anger (and sometimes violence) is a predictable response. Here's why. First, the belief is part of the person holding it. It feels good to hold the belief. People around the person also accept the belief, so they are comfortable holding it. When the belief is challenged the person feels threatened. It violates their "comfort zone." Second, they are not capable of reasoning properly about the claim. The inability to think logically causes them to feel inadequate. Operating in a world of emotions, the only response a non-critical thinker can have to opposition is anger.

The only way to change the mind of a non-critical thinker is to expose them to propaganda which enables them to feel more comfortable about a new belief. If a new idea feels better to them than the one they currently hold, they may change their mind. As the group they identify with changes its collective mind, the non-critical thinker will change their mind to conform.

Notice that truth has nothing to do with the non-critical thinker's selection of beliefs. Emotions alone drive their "thinking." It should be quite clear that the non-critical thinker is potentially quite dangerous. Non-critical thinkers are likely to make decisions which are bad for themselves and for those around them. The thinking in their minds is literally disconnected from reality. They can be manipulated by propagandists into voting in blocks large enough to result in bad decisions for society. Ultimately they can be organized into violent mobs or even armies who can harm or kill those who disagree with them.

Why does disagreement ultimately lead to violence? If a person is unwilling or incapable of reasoning, what means do they have for dealing with opposing viewpoints? Remember, they are controlled by emotion, not reason. One can only respond to opposition with an emotion - a feeling, and that feeling will be anger. Reasoning with the opposition is not an option, so the only possible response is violence. This often explains why people beat their wives, riot, and go to war.

Are you a non-critical thinker? Ask yourself these questions.

• First, do you find that you generally believe the same things that your peers believe? Think about what you believe about politics, religion, abortion, and other controversial issues. If you find that you are squarely among the majority of your peers, you may be a non-critical thinker.
  
• Second, ask yourself why you believe the things you believe. Can you give a reasoned defense of those positions? Are the reasons actual reasons, or do you find yourself simply repeating things that you've heard other people say? If your "reasons" sound like a tape-recording of someone else, then you are probably a non-critical thinker.
  
• Third, how do you respond to people who disagree with you? Do they irritate you? Do they make you angry? Do you consider them to be "radicals," "bigoted," "hateful," or "ignorant"? If you answer yes to any of these, you are probably a non-critical thinker.
  
• Fourth, what do you know about views which oppose your own? Pick a topic and try to give sensible reasons which would support your opposition. If you can only think of silly "reasons," then you are probably a non-critical thinker.