Human Weaknesses

As human beings, most of us tend to exhibit five characteristic weaknesses in the formation and retention of our beliefs, namely:

Gullibility: uncritical readiness to believe what others (news paper, TV, internet) tell us.

Conformity: uncritically believing what others in our group (our family, our community) believe.

Trust in authority: uncritical readiness to believe what an ‘authority’ (teacher, textbook, government) tells us.

Emotional clouding: uncritical readiness to believe what we wish to believe and what we are told by the people we like, while disbelieving what we do not wish to believe and what we are told by people we dislike.

Resistance to change: uncritical unwillingness to change our beliefs and actions, especially in the case of beliefs and actions that we are used to or are rewarded for.

As an antidote to these weaknesses, critical thinking demands that we systematically doubt and question what we believe, what we do, and what we are told to believe and do. It requires us to think for ourselves and subscribe to beliefs and actions only after careful consideration. When faced with choice of accepting a personal responsibility for our beliefs and actions, there are at least three positions that are open to us:

1. It is good to acquire the ability to think critically. There is nothing that can be exempted from doubting and questioning. We should not accept anything without careful consideration.

2. It is good to acquire the ability to think critically, but only in some domains. There are certain things that the elders tell us which should not be doubted or questioned. We should accept them uncritically on unconditional trust.

3. There is no need to think critically. Our heart will tell us what we should believe and what we should do. We should trust our heart.

Which of these paths we take is a personal choice that each of us has to make. Should we think for ourselves, or surrender our thinking capacity to those around us, tradition, antiquity, authority, our emotions, and habits? If we choose the former, we take path A.
Attitudes towards knowledge, learning and teaching

In the domain of knowledge, thinking for ourselves calls for a commitment to the following principles on the part of students and teachers:

1. Attitude towards knowledge:

   1. All humans including me, are fallible. What we currently take to be knowledge may turn out to be false.
   2. It is therefore important to check what we believe to be true, and keep modifying our beliefs as required by experience and reasoning.
      
   
   

2. The student’s attitude towards learning:

   1. Teachers and textbook writers are human, and therefore what they present as knowledge may turn out to be false or not justified.
      
   2. It is therefore important for me as a student to check what they present as knowledge, and accept them only if I am satisfied that it is justified by experience and reasoning.
      
   3. To do this, I need to ask for their justification for the conclusions they present as knowledge.
      
   
   

3. The teacher’s attitude towards teaching:

   1. As a teacher, I will not tell you what to believe and what to do. I leave it to you to decide for yourself.
      
   2. But I can help you acquire the capacity to decide for yourself what to believe and what to do.
      
   3. I can also help you understand the ‘received knowledge’ – what the current academic community currently takes to be knowledge – and the positions that are currently controversial.
      
   4. My goal as a teacher is to help you become independent of me as quickly as possible. For this, I need to help you become independent learners and independent inquirers.

In educational institutions that aim at helping students to think for themselves, teachers and students need to be committed to (1)-(3).

The Commitment to Collaborative Rational Inquiry

If we accept both (A) and (1)-(3), the next step is to undertake a collaborative search for rational knowledge and rational-moral action. This calls for a commitment to a contract with fellow members of the human species, crossing the barriers of self-interest as well as religious, national, ethnic, and communal loyalties.

4. As fallible, rational, and moral human beings, we are committed to:
   
   1. the search for rationally justified knowledge, and action that is rationally and morally justified;
      
   2. settle disagreements in our views (on the truth of propositions and the moral goodness of actions) on the basis of grounds and/or criteria that we agree on, combined with reasoning;
      
   3. provisionally treat either as undecided or as equally legitimate those views that we disagree on but have not been able to settle as in (4b);
      
   4. resort to (4c) only as the last option;
      
   5. accept a statement as true or reject it as false only on the basis of compelling reasons; and
      
   6. change our views if and only if there are compelling reasons.
      

The international academic community of the twenty first century has already signed this contract. It now remains for the world’s nations, religions and other groups to sign a similar contract in the domains of religious beliefs and practices. moral codes, and legal systems.

Auto-critical thinking

It is important distinguish the concept of critical thinking (evaluating the merit of something) from the concept of being critical of (seeing the weaknesses of) something. It is easy to be critical of the ideas or people that one is negatively disposed to, but much harder to be critical of the ideas or people that one is largely positive about. To use an analogy, it is easy to see the weaknesses of someone else’s parents, but much harder to see the weaknesses of one’s own parents.

The true test of critical thinking is the ability to see the strengths of the people and ideas that one is negatively disposed to, and the weaknesses of the people and ideas that one is positively disposed to, including oneself. As a self-test, try the following:

1. List three people or their ideas, approaches, or theories which have had a significant influence in shaping your current thinking or research.
   
2. Identify at least two important components in each of the above that you reject as false, undesirable, or unjustified.
   
3. State your reasons for your rejection.
   
4. Identify at least two important beliefs, ideas or claims that you accepted as true, desirable or justified in the past, but now reject as false, undesirable, or unjustified.
   
5. State your reasons for your rejection.
   If you are able to come up with adequate responses to (2)-(5), you can congratulate yourself as a critical thinker. If not, it would be reasonable to conclude that you have more ahead of you on the way to becoming a critical thinker.
   

Contributed by K P Mohanan ().