Standards of Critical Thinking
Critical thinking attempts to understand the world as it is and know the truth. It is self-guided and self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. Since critical thinking is an intellectual activity, having some standards to measure the quality of critical thinking is important because, as Peter Drucker said, “You can’t improve what you don’t measure.” In this chapter, we shall discuss the intellectual standards which are necessary for the development of critical thinking. These standards are,
- Clarity
- Accuracy
- Precision
- Relevance
- Depth
- Breadth
- Logic
- Fairness
- Significance
1. Clarity
Clarity means to be clear about what you think, mean or believe. It would help if you expressed your thoughts in a way that the audience can grasp the intended meaning. You have clarity when you can state your thoughts exactly and elaborate on them to explain the issue to the audience. Sometimes, you must give some good examples and illustrations to convince the audience about your point of view.
The first requirement is that there must be no ambiguity in your statement, and the audience should understand what you want to convey. For instance, the statement, “Indians like Americans because they love democracy”, is ambiguous because it can be interpreted in two ways.
- Indians like Americans because Americans love democracy.
- Indians like Americans because Indians love democracy.
Hence, instead of using ‘they’, you must be more specific, i.e. whether you are referring to Indians or Americans.
Secondly, your statement should not be vague, which means it must be clearly understood. For instance, when you say, “Many people attended the wedding function of Anuj”, the statement is vague since many could mean a dozen, a hundred or even a thousand. Likewise, terms like tall, rich, early, hot, cold, good and evil are vague. It would be best to avoid vagueness by being as precise as possible. It would be better to say that almost fifty people attended the wedding, instead of using ‘many’ to describe the number of guests.
Vagueness sometimes also depends on one’s audience. For instance, if a doctor explains a medical issue to a lay patient using highly technical medical terms, the patient or his family may not be able to grasp it. Hence, a good doctor must use simple words to explain the ailment so that everyone one can understand it. Likewise, an economist or an IT professional must avoid using technical jargon to address the common people. Likewise, when dealing with the professionals who are well conversant with the terminology, it would be preferable to use the technical terms, making the conversation more accurate and precise.
You are also vague when your intentions are not clear. For instance, take the statement, ‘What should be done to improve education in our country?’ Here, we have not clarified what exact issue we wish to address. Are you seeking suggestions for the generation of employment, improving the moral values of society, making the content of education more contextual, etc? You may be asking this question with something more specific in mind, which must be reflected in how you make your statement.
We often lose clarity due to our emotions and biases. We assume that the audience feels the same way we do and, hence, would easily understand what we are saying. However, no human being can read another person’s mind. If there is any ambiguity or vagueness, we are likely to use his own emotions and biases to interpret our message. This can lead to a great communication gap.
We also tend to lose clarity when we are suffering from depression or illness, as in such a situation, we are driven more by emotions than reason.
2. Accuracy
A statement can be considered to be accurate if it is true. However, it is never easy to ascertain the truth, and absolute truth is almost impossible to gather. However, we must try to achieve the highest degree of accuracy to become a good critical thinker. Accordingly, a claim would be considered more accurate if it is confirmed by evidence, defended by justifications, corroborated by facts, and authenticated by testimony.
It is easy to be accurate concerning factual statements (like 2+2=4 ) or objective statements (Delhi is the capital of India) since such statements can be either true or false. Hence, we can express our views accurately if we have the right knowledge. However, many statements like “Globalization is creating inequality and destroying cultures” can’t be said to be a matter of fact or an objective reality. Hence, these explicit statements are not accurate. However, the statement can be more accurate if we provide reliable evidence, data or research to fortify our claim. When evidence is presented to make a claim more accurate, we must also determine the credibility of the source for the reliability of the data and accept only true or correct information. For instance, if the claim is made on the basis of a WhatsApp or Social media post, it does not have as much credibility if the same is based on the findings of a study published by an international agency or in a reputed journal.
For instance, if one makes a statement like “India is one of the most corrupt countries in the world”, the statement is not accurate since it does not provide the basis of the claim and also fails to provide any information about the degree of corruption.
The statement can be made more accurate by providing a reliable source of information. Hence, the statement “India is one of the most corrupt countries in the world because India was ranked 93 among the 180 countries on the corruption perceptions index (CPI) published by Transparency International.”
However, it is not easy to gather accurate information in the present times. We collect most of the information from the internet and social media, where lots of fake information and news are circulated. It is a fact that fake news is more likely to become viral and reach to more people than genuine content. According to a 2018 study by three MIT scholars, it was discovered that false news spreads more rapidly on the social network Twitter than real news. According to the study, it takes true stories about six times as long to reach 1,500 people as it does for false stories to reach the same number of people. When it comes to Twitter’s “cascades,” or unbroken retweet chains, falsehoods reach a cascade depth of 10 about 20 times faster than facts. [1]
We can’t have first-hand experience of the world in every aspect. We usually learn about the world through films and fiction, and in the absence of any genuine information, we consider them to be a true reflection of reality. However, the movies are made to entertain us rather than provide us with a well-rounded truth. They can’t go against popular opinion, stereotypes and prejudices due to commercial considerations. They can entertain us, but we must try to judge the real world from the world of fiction.
It is often difficult to find accurate information because sometimes the source of information is limited. For certain information like unemployment, taxation, and crime, we have to rely solely on government data, which is often inaccurate. For instance, it is common to reduce the number of crimes by suppressing the data or making the process of filing criminal complaints difficult.
We all have personal biases and prejudices, and we are generally unaware of them, which hugely affect our perception of the world. Further, it is difficult to find flaws in our knowledge or faults in our argument because we strongly believe in the correctness of our understanding. It is also very difficult to defy popular opinion & beliefs, which may outcaste us and face hostility from our friends, family and society.
We tend to generalize our personal experiences and those of others, and we believe that what happens to us must also be happening to others. We often provide anecdotal evidence instead of statistical data to prove our point. For instance, in India, many people believe that Muslim eateries deliberately mix meat products with vegetarian food to impure the fasting of Hindus during religious fasting. They often show viral clips or evidence when a Muslim person was found to be doing such a thing. They tend to generalize the actions of one person to 180 million Muslims in India,
3. Precision
Precision is the quality of being exact to the necessary level of detail. Precision means to be specific. Precision bears similarlity with accuracy, but they are not the same. Precision means accurate, but accurate need not be precise.
Accuracy is how close a given set of measurements are to their true value, while precision is how close the measurements are to each other. Precision thus describes a measurement system i.e. how good it is at giving the same result every time it measures the same thing. For example, if a substance is weight same (1.5 kgs) each time, it is precise, but may not be accurate, if there is error in the equipment.
4. Relevancy
It is common to put forth all types of arguments, evidence, and material to prove a point. However, more is better for critical thinking. The more is the information, the higher chances of getting confused and missing the most important material.
A critical thinker must present only such material that is relevant to the problem at hand and omit everything else. A material is relevant when it has a bearing upon or relates to the matter at hand, which implies a close logical relationship with the matter under consideration.
Let us say a person is stating a fact, like Delhi is the capital of India. Now, in this issue, his character is irrelevant. So, if you counter his claim on the ground that he is corrupt or unfaithful, it is not relevant to the veracity of his claim. However, if the same person a witness of a crime like murder, or rape, his character becomes an appropriate factor to decide the criminality of the accused person.
5. Depth
The human mind seeks simplicity and avoids complexity. However, little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Albert Einstein wisely said, “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” If it is an important matter, we must get into the depth of the issue and acquire detailed knowledge because superficial solutions won’t work.
For instance, it is common for Indians to say that Indians are corrupt because it is in their blood. Sometimes, people would provide quick solutions to the problem like ‘hang all the corrupt people’. However, if indeed such solutions are implemented, corruption may increase manyfold since the agencies that have the power to hang the corrupt can extract any amount of money. If one is serious about removing corruption, one should find out the reasons for corruption, like complex procedures, discretionary powers, legal loopholes, salary and incentive structure of the government officers.
6. Breadth
In Critical Thinking, width refers to the scope, breadth, and comprehensiveness of one’s thinking. It involves considering multiple perspectives, factors, and contexts to gain a more complete understanding of an issue or problem. Width encompasses:
- Broad perspectives: Considering diverse viewpoints, experiences, and expertise.
- Contextual understanding: Recognizing the broader context, including social, cultural, historical, and political factors.
- Interdisciplinary approaches: Drawing on insights from multiple fields and disciplines.
- Holistic Thinking: Examining the relationships and interconnections between components.
- Inclusivity: Considering diverse stakeholders, needs, and potential consequences.
By developing the width, we can identify blind spots and potential biases, develop a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding, and anticipate and address the possible consequences of our actions. We make more informed decisions and enhance creativity and innovation when we think holistically and use the knowledge of one discipline for another.
A critical thinker must develop a wider perspective of reality and understand the interconnection between different issues. By considering width, critical thinkers can ensure that their analysis, evaluation, and conclusions are thorough, well-rounded, and take into account the complexity of real-world issues.
We must avoid developing tunnel vision and see the problem from a limited perspective. It is well said, “When all you have is a Hammer, everything looks like a Nail.” Instead, we must enhance the ambit of our knowledge and develop multiple viewpoints and holistic perspectives.
For instance, if we want to know whether positive discrimination is good for the nation, we must go beyond social media handles like Twitter because the socially weaker section of society may not use social media as much as the privileged section. Hence, the sample must represent society and have a width that includes all its members in fair proportion.
In the book “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”, Robert M. Pirsig explains how a society, like a motorcycle, is a system where everything is connected. Each part of a motorcycle is designed to suit the other parts. Suppose you replace the engine of a motorcycle with a car or aeroplane. Wiel it make the bike move faster? Instead, it will make the bike uncooperative. Likewise, in the real world, every issue is connected with everything else in the society. Hence, a critical thinker must find the connection between the issue and other issues and find a holistic solution. For instance, if you want to reduce corruption in your country, you must study the countries that are more or less corrupt than your country to find out the factors that are responsible for corruption and then make a multidimensional approach to remove corruption by reforms in education, politics, judiciary, democracy, civil services etc.
7: Logic
In critical thinking, logic refers to the quality of using reasoning and evidence to support our arguments. Logic provides a systematic approach to evaluating arguments, making informed decisions, and solving problems. A critical thinker must ensure that conclusions follow logically from premises.
We bring a variety of thoughts together in some order when trying to find a solution to a problem. When our arguments support each other, their persuasive power increases. However, if they contradict, the arguments don’t make sense and create confusion. thinking is more logical if it is consistent and integrated and makes sense together. A logical statement makes better sense if it is supported by evidence.
8: Fairness
We naturally tend to think about an issue from a personal perspective, and we usually tend to take a position that benefits us or provides us happiness. For instance, if we are well off, we usually resent government policies like reservation or positive discrimination because they hurt us, while those who benefit from these policies support them. Similarly, wealthy people are resentful when they have to pay high taxes, which are spent to provide benefits like free education, healthcare, homes, or doles to the poor people in society. However, if we are poor, our perspective may be the opposite as we benefit from such legislation.
Fairness refers to the quality of being impartial and objective. While deciding on an issue, we must be free from bias, favouritism and selfish interest. We must treat relevant viewpoints like a neutral judge without being influenced by our feelings or interests. Fairness is essential in critical thinking, as it allows for a more comprehensive and balanced evaluation of information, leading to more informed conclusions and decisions.
9: Significance
Significance refers to the importance, relevance, or value of information, arguments, or findings. While many issues can be relevant to the topic, not all issues may be equally important, nor will the impact of all issues be the same. Hence, we must be able to arrange the relevant issues in the order of relevance and impact and then make decisions accordingly. Hence, the significance in critical thinking involves evaluating the impact, implications, or consequences of an idea, claim, or conclusion.
Critical thinkers must, therefore, focus on the most important information and prioritize efforts and resources to make the decisions and develop solutions that are most effective in solving the problem and have maximum impact.
For instance, if you are the head of the police department of your district, you want to reduce crimes in your city. Now, thousands of criminals are in your district, and you have limited manpower and resources. If you treat every criminal equally, you can hardly make an impact on the crime. If you go after petty criminals, there won’t be much impact on overall crime because the bigger syndicate can find many petty criminals to replace them. However, suppose you just take action against a few top criminals in the district. In that case, you will send a clear message that crime shall not be tolerated, however big you are. As a result, the criminal activities will be considerably reduced.
Likewise, in a tax department, almost 90% of tax revenue comes from a handful of top taxpayers. Hence, instead of looking for petty cases of tax evasion, if you use your resources to book the top tax evaders, you get the highest tax recovery with the least effort and increase the overall compliance level of the taxpayers.
Conclusion
Critical thinking aims to ascertain the truth and discard fallacy using good reason and valid logic. It is challenging to become perfectly rational since humans are emotional creatures, and feelings are necessary to give us happiness. However, we must ensure that our rational mind guides the emotional mind, particularly in critical decision-making in life. Interestingly, when we develop the habit of critical thinking, we internalize rationality and become natural critical thinkers. The nine standards of critical thinking should guide us to become better critical thinkers.
