Post by jimcobb on Dec 17, 2022 1:59:57 GMT
In a previous essay, I talked about what I call “soft skills” that are often overlooked when it comes to survival education and planning. One of them is critical thinking and I feel it is important enough to warrant its own discussion.
To make sure we’re all on the same page, we’ll define critical thinking as the use of objective analysis to arrive at a conclusion. This is a skill set that often seems to be lacking in our modern society, and especially on social media. Entire classes are taught on this subject, so we’ll only be able to scratch the surface here.
The two key words in our definition are “objective analysis” and that’s exactly where people tend to stumble. Human nature is to run all new information through our own internal filters and apply what’s called confirmation bias to it. We are predisposed to reject information that disagrees with how we already feel about a topic, even if that new information is rock solid. However, if we strive to apply objectivity to the information, we’re more likely to incorporate it into our overall view.
The analysis angle involves work, which is why we don’t do it. We’re kind of lazy in that regard. We don’t want to spend too much time thinking about things, we want to act and move. But, it is important to take even just a few moments to consider the new information and think about it logically. Does it make sense, based on what we already know? Does it pass the smell test?
It is vital to understand that every media source will have their own biases and they will cater to their perceived audience. They don’t want to lose listeners, viewers, or readers because that means a loss in advertising revenue. As much as is possible, every story they run will be framed in a way that’s favorable to their audience, even if an objective analysis might lead to a different conclusion.
On top of that, every online media source worth its salt knows how to craft a headline that all but guarantees “shares” on social media. The most inane, innocuous story will be couched in terms that will incense readers, as they know full well that an embarrassingly high number of people won’t read beyond that headline and because they are so offended, so sickened, so furious by it that they can’t help but share it family and friends immediately. Which in turn leads to more clicks on the site, which translates to more money in the media source’s pocket.
The views that get the most press are the ones that are the most extreme. The problem lies in believing that the extreme views are commonplace rather than being, well, extreme.
You’ll find that many if not most arguments with people stem from miscommunication. That, in turn, can often arise out of assumptions based on your preconceived notions about that person. You experience a knee jerk reaction to something a person says and that taints the rest of the conversation, even if that reaction was the result of a misunderstanding on your part.
By definition, an informed decision requires information, right? However, if the information is inaccurate, then the decision may be flawed. Garbage In, Garbage Out (GIGO) as old school programmers might say. Do everything you can to base your decisions on proven facts and educated, informed guesses rather than being led around by your own internal biases. Apply objective analysis to new information instead of reacting emotionally.
To make sure we’re all on the same page, we’ll define critical thinking as the use of objective analysis to arrive at a conclusion. This is a skill set that often seems to be lacking in our modern society, and especially on social media. Entire classes are taught on this subject, so we’ll only be able to scratch the surface here.
The two key words in our definition are “objective analysis” and that’s exactly where people tend to stumble. Human nature is to run all new information through our own internal filters and apply what’s called confirmation bias to it. We are predisposed to reject information that disagrees with how we already feel about a topic, even if that new information is rock solid. However, if we strive to apply objectivity to the information, we’re more likely to incorporate it into our overall view.
The analysis angle involves work, which is why we don’t do it. We’re kind of lazy in that regard. We don’t want to spend too much time thinking about things, we want to act and move. But, it is important to take even just a few moments to consider the new information and think about it logically. Does it make sense, based on what we already know? Does it pass the smell test?
It is vital to understand that every media source will have their own biases and they will cater to their perceived audience. They don’t want to lose listeners, viewers, or readers because that means a loss in advertising revenue. As much as is possible, every story they run will be framed in a way that’s favorable to their audience, even if an objective analysis might lead to a different conclusion.
On top of that, every online media source worth its salt knows how to craft a headline that all but guarantees “shares” on social media. The most inane, innocuous story will be couched in terms that will incense readers, as they know full well that an embarrassingly high number of people won’t read beyond that headline and because they are so offended, so sickened, so furious by it that they can’t help but share it family and friends immediately. Which in turn leads to more clicks on the site, which translates to more money in the media source’s pocket.
The views that get the most press are the ones that are the most extreme. The problem lies in believing that the extreme views are commonplace rather than being, well, extreme.
You’ll find that many if not most arguments with people stem from miscommunication. That, in turn, can often arise out of assumptions based on your preconceived notions about that person. You experience a knee jerk reaction to something a person says and that taints the rest of the conversation, even if that reaction was the result of a misunderstanding on your part.
By definition, an informed decision requires information, right? However, if the information is inaccurate, then the decision may be flawed. Garbage In, Garbage Out (GIGO) as old school programmers might say. Do everything you can to base your decisions on proven facts and educated, informed guesses rather than being led around by your own internal biases. Apply objective analysis to new information instead of reacting emotionally.