A500.2.3.RB - Tell Your Story

Welcome back to another week on my blog! 😤

This week, I will tackle the different thinking standards that I hold up to when evaluating statements, comments, and other types of information that we encounter on a daily basis.

Critical vs Non-Critical Thinking Standards

Whether it is reading a trending news article, debating a topic with co-workers, or conversing with loved ones about an important issue, it is important for us to evaluate these exchanges of information based on various thinking standards. The process of taking in external information, processing that information, and coming to a conclusion or judgment is something that we all inevitably encounter every day. We all have to make judgment on the trustworthiness and accuracy of a claim and evaluate it on a personal level through our thinking standards. These standards can be classified as either critical or non-critical and can help us reach a decision objectively or subjectively.

Some items of information can be evaluated logically and argued against thoroughly, but other topics can be a bit murky and more difficult to come to a conclusion. The standard seven standards of critical thinking include: clearness, accuracy, importance/relevance, sufficiency, depth, breadth, and precision (Nosich, 2012, pp. 133-134). These standards act as the filters in critical thinking in order to reach a conclusion or answer. Critical thinking standards help to combat fallacies and other irrational forms of thinking, but sometimes non-critical thinking standards such as moral or ethical judgment can help aid us in more personal areas.

My favorite traits of critical thinking standards outside of the seven standards brought up by Nosich (2012, p. 153) include being reasonable, logical, consistent, reliable, and falsifiable. Being ‘reasonable’ and ‘logical’ are usually used when describing critical thinking because it adds rationale when evaluating information. The terms ‘consistent’ and ‘reliable’ are used in critical thinking standards to help to substantiate claims and adds truthfulness and stability. For example, during a discussion on ‘claim vs. fact,’ I brought up the equation ‘1 + 1 = 2’ to be considered a fact. While this is true at first glance, it is factual based on the assumptions that is agreed upon in mathematics. So, ‘1 + 1 = 2’ in normal math, but in a binary system, ‘1 + 1 = 10.’ This fall along in the depth and breadth of understanding math under the standards of critical thinking. Therefore, the foundation and parameters of the subject matter can dictate what the truth is and will be consistent and reliable due to the set assumptions.

Photo: The image above is an infograph depicting a simplified version of critical thinking techniques in an academic area. It utilizes the concepts of elements and standards of critical thinking that are easily understood to a broad audience. Mentoring Minds (2017).

However, not everything can be rigorously analyzed and proven on the same level with math as it can be in other more subjective areas such as art. Sometimes using non-critical thinking standards may help to provide insight when judging information. Some notable non-critical thinking standards include popular, moral, ethical, religious, and spiritual principles (Nosich, 2012, p. 154). These standards are more subjective and are based on our own personal beliefs and virtues. These forms of non-critical thinking standards can become fallacious because they may overshadow what is accurate or true based on some of the emotional ties associated with them to our own feelings. Thus, both critical and non-critical thinking standards need to be utilized appropriately when examining information.

What are some standards that are most important in your life?

For me, the thinking standards that I hold important in life include: integrity, freedom, falsifiable, and care. Integrity is important because it has elements of consistency and reliability that should hold true based on the foundation on which it is built upon. Integrity can be applied to a theory in science to our interpersonal relationships in life. This standard of thinking helps to develop trust and it allows us to work our way to an answer based on the integrity of the source. Integrity in leadership is paramount because you want to have the type of relationship with your co-workers and subordinates that will heed your words as truth. In a sense, that you would ‘walk the walk’ when a new policy is given or when an announcement is made. Integrity develops trust between co-workers and allows certainty to grow when information is relayed up and down the chain of command.

Freedom is an important thinking standard because to me it allows all ideas to flow from both sides of an argument to be expressed without hindrance. Part of leadership includes issues to be tackled that can range from a logistics problem to an interpersonal conflict. It is important that co-workers and subordinates can bring up these issues freely without fear. If there is an inability to communicate problems within an organization then it can develop into a systemic issue which can disrupt work and lead to a toxic environment. If I saw an issue and felt as though I could not bring it up to my direct supervisor, then I would look into other routes such as an Inspector General (impartial entity that evaluates complaints, available in many military organizations) or another equivalent source. If an alternate source is not available then the issue would continue on unresolved and could escalate to a more pressing issue.

The term 'falsifiability' grew recognition under Karl Popper and is based on the ability to prove something as incorrect (Lombrozo, 2017). This is an important thinking standard because it is one of the guiding principles of science. To help determine what is scientifically true includes a hypothesis that can can be nullified either through proving it as incorrect or false, hence the term. This type of scrutiny allows a hypothesis or theory to be tested to failure, which allows a controlled experiment to be conducted towards finding an answer. Relating this concept to leadership can be a bit difficult, but can be considered through different leadership styles used in order to become the most effective. These techniques can be derived from psychology, which can aid leaders to use different leadership styles based on the organization that they are in best manage their personnel. For example, my personal leadership style is servant-like which means I like to help out my subordinates and do as much as I can to help them out. According to Johnson (2017), this falls into a participative and transformational leadership style, which works very close to subordinates in taking their opinions with open communication and high visibility.

Lastly, a non-critical thinking standard that I find to be significant in my life is the element of care. This is an important part of humanity in general because it is how we look over those that we love, bond with close friends, and help those in need. This element when applied to leadership allows a close working relationship that extends out to a personal level that is more sincere. It provides evidence that a leader cares for its workers not only in the output and results, but on the actual worker's well-being. When this care is applied in the work environment from a leader, then workers can feel secure and can focus on the task at hand knowing that their boss is looking out for them. When I had a personal issue come up that my bosses knew about, they were able to get me the resources that I needed in order to resolve the conflict. They would even check-in a few weeks down the road to ensure that all was well. By knowing that they cared and took the situation seriously made me feel more proud to be in the organization that I was in and fortunate that I had such caring bosses. In turn, this made me more dedicated to my job and I was able to focus and do my best towards any given task with my undivided attention.

For example, you might hold yourself to a standard of honesty, of ability in sports, of being a good sister or brother. How did you acquire those standards?

Many of my standards on critical thinking first derived from my parents, teachers, and other adults that I looked up as a child. It came from their virtues and values and how they lived their lives and me being an observer of their choices and actions and listening to their advice. I feel as thought I received many of my non-critical thinking standards from my family, especially my mother, through the dedication and love she had for myself and my brothers. She was not always the most logical of thinkers, but her heart was in the right place. Her loving nature and all of her sacrifices allowed us to have a good education.

My critical thinking skills can be attributed to years of schooling and teachers that valued those skills. I am thankful to many of my science teachers who were able to teach me the scientific method, which intrinsically values inquiry and questioning to figure out the 'truth.' This is where I learned how to make a hypothesis and test it against the concept of falsifiability through a controlled experiment. The concepts from science permeated through other areas of my life too. It made me more critical of the everyday information that I came across. These reasoning skills that I acquired through grade school and throughout college helped to hone my critical thinking to be applied to virtually all areas of my life. It ultimately made me an independent thinker and a searcher for the truth.

How have they changed over the years?

Over the years, my critical thinking skills have gotten challenged through various life experiences. From being taken care of as a child to entering the workforce as an adult, I have been able to take these fundamental skills in critical thinking and work through any problems with an analytical and inquisitive mind. From my experience in the military, I have learned a great amount on dealing with many different personality types in formal and informal situations. This takes a lot of personal communication and leadership as well as being able to think critically through scenarios to effectively resolve any issue. My critical thinking skills have been able to get tested through unique problems over the years. This has resulted in invaluable experience that cannot be simply taught. It is the mix of experience and intelligence that gives wisdom. Thus, I have gotten a little bit older and have a nuggets or two of wisdom for anyone willing to hear. 😏

Thank you for reading my post and hope to see you here again next week! 😄

References

Johnson, R. (2017). 5 different types of leadership styles. Hearst Newspaper, LLC. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/5-different-types-leadership-styles-17584.html

Lombrozo, T. (2017, May 8). What is pseudoscience?. National Public Radio. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2017/05/08/527354190/what-is-pseudoscience

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: Critical thinking across the curriculum. (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Mentoring Minds. (2017). Developing 21st century thinkers. Mentoring Minds. Retrieved from http://www.speechbuddy.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/developing-21st-century-critical-thinkers-infographic-mentoring-minds.jpg