Main Body
A look at good decision-making through the lens of effective communication
Ethical thinking requires one to view the world soundly and carefully. We will begin our study by examining fundamental theories of thinking that result in solid critical thinking. This chapter introduces problems with human thinking and follows the tendencies that cause issues in ethical leadership. We will explore the idea that effective leadership incorporates the concept of thinking well; this may be difficult to do consistently. Humans need to work to improve their critical thinking skills continually so we become effective and honest in our interactions with others. To do this, we must view this through the lens of continual practice and improvement.
Human thinking patterns
From the essential psychological study, there are conflicting theories relative to the human thinking processes; but it is clear that some tendencies are essential to evaluate. I refer to these trends as human thinking patterns. This does not imply that we are carbon copies of one another or are not unique in our perceptions or viewpoints. Instead, when analyzing how individuals think, understanding certain tendencies may help us become more attuned to our thinking habits and effectively identify those trends in others. Two of the most potent factors influencing our thinking patterns are conditioning and association.
Conditioning represents how our surroundings or environment influence our processing and world understanding. Looking through the lens of behavioral psychology, we see how much our surroundings and environment impact us. These conditioning patterns can be self-inflicted, consciously, unconsciously, or even subconsciously present.
Psychology reveals that we process and retain knowledge through association and other known and unknown factors. But, we recognize and process information and then store thoughts according to our experiences, environmental placement, and world understanding. As such, the association can impact how we interpret or make sense of the external world.
When considering the importance of conditioning and association, we must evaluate the implications of their effects on sound thinking. Their thinking influences individuals; therefore, we can predict potential issues or encourage individuals to employ helpful thinking patterns that offset perception-based mistakes that can lead to adverse outcomes or problems.
Beyond conditioning and association, cognitive and temperamental thinking help us understand thinking patterns.
- Cognitive thinking refers to our tendency to carefully evaluate words, use logic, and construct a full consideration of possible reasons and outcomes of ideas or actions. This approach places great emphasis on the process of logical thinking and reason as the best way to think through challenges and problem-solve.
- Temperamental thinking represents the intangible portions of our thinking. It is a consciousness of the will or the desire behind thinking–perhaps best termed in Richard Double’s text Beginning Philosophy as “the understanding of or appealing to concepts such as justice, fairness, or other factors that motivate our thinking.” This approach highlights emotion or other contextual influences as a constructive way to make sense of the world around us by helping humans better to evaluate solutions through a more inclusive understanding of reality.
Both cognitive and temperamental thinking, as well as conditioning and association, as explained by Double, are at the heart of crucial factors that may enhance or diminish one’s ability to be a better critical thinker—appropriate in effective value determination and one of the essential underlying topics of this course.
Potentially “poor” thinking tendencies
Troubling trends may emerge when cognitive and temperamental factors are not skillfully understood. Trends can become habits of the mind, keeping us from effectively interpreting scenarios, situations, and the world around us and potentially leading to thinking mistakes. These mistakes can be found to be at the root of many poor ethical decisions. Through the lens of skillful evaluation of the nine tendencies below, experts argue we can begin to identify critical thinking mistakes. Here is a list of nine potentially poor thinking tendencies that are important to consider:
- Faulty data collection–this approach centers on decisions made based on faulty information. This mistake is in how information is accumulated or can be traced to the nature of the information itself. I likened this to an equation where the inputs are wrong; therefore, the product of the equation is incorrect. Faulty data are not something that one can control. Often information is obtained from outside inputs. The poor thinking tendency is not inherently centered on simply avoiding faulty data; the one receiving the information must continually check or evaluate the data (or knowledge) to verify the validity of the data.
- Truth-is-Relative Problem–this problem centers on the assumption that whatever is said or written is true. It implies there is no concept of truth or objective analysis. When using this poor thinking tendency, individuals center their world on their interpretation, perception, or analysis without considering the external world’s reality.
- Vividness and Anecdotal Evidence Issue—directly correlates with making the mistake that objective truth or reality can be assumed from small, inconclusive, or vivid (connected) samples of information that one believes sets a reliable pattern or definite outcome. This usually is centered on concepts, ideas, or even physical representations determined to be accurate based upon their inherent closeness to the subject. Inherent in this viewpoint is the further assumption that one’s thoughts, interpretations, or evaluations are unique or special to themselves, leading to gaps in good thinking processes.
- Belief Perseverance–individual bias is rigid in one’s belief in a subject even when overwhelming evidence discredits or questions such a line of thought or outcome. This thinking discounts the value of asking questions about oneself and the original thinking position or process; instead, the individual believes their thought process or conclusion cannot be challenged because their belief is correct.
- Ego-Defensiveness–this tendency highlights the inclination of an individual to default to a mechanism, ideology, or framework which espouses that their viewpoint, argument, or reality cannot be wrong. Beyond this, ego-defensiveness usually coincides with a feeling, or attitude, of inflated importance or a high degree of self-assuredness despite a high degree of reliability in terms of argument or fact that disputes their perception or viewpoint. This can lead to outbursts of anger and refocusing on their poor thinking tendencies rather than the initial issue at hand.
- Wishful Thinking–this thinking fallacy centers on the idea that if an individual wishes something to be accurate, that reality will come to be with little or no effort or progress towards that assumed end outcome or goal by the individual involved or by any other influences. Unlike belief perseverance, wishful thinking does not have to be concentrated on a belief or a series of beliefs. Instead, one can be persuaded by solid evidence that the process or result is viable. Still, the individual miscalculates the accuracy of the possibility of the outcome because they badly want that outcome or process to be true.
- Acceptance of Authority presents itself as an individual knowingly or unknowingly conceding expertise and authority to individuals, organizations, institutions, or, more commonly, to a preconceived idea or notion believed to be most reliable. This process is best represented by the belief and evaluation by the person involved that the individual, group, institution, society, or idea is correct simply because that entity or idea has been primarily accepted over time or is in a position of influence or responsibility.
- Conflict Avoidance–this thinking tendency encourages one to shy away from thinking problems, conflicts, or discourse because the individual is convinced that the process will yield a series of complex outcomes, processes, or by-products. Inherent in this thinking is the belief that the process is too complicated or threatening to work through or become involved in. As a result, rather than struggle with conflicting thoughts and work with them towards a greater understanding, the individual is hindered by the belief that an exchange of helpful resolution is impossible and accepts the perceived more straightforward approach of moving away from interaction or exchange with others to avoid conflict.
- Self-delusion Theory–this thinking centers on the distortion of understanding about ourselves at its base. Unlike the other patterns discussed, this approach centers on misinformation or distortion of reality about oneself. This pattern creates a series of assumptions, developed over time, that conclude that individuals are either better or worse than we are (in any capacity, process, or outcome). Rather than developing a sense of internal reality about themselves, the individual is trapped in a process that continually feeds their self-misperception, thus reinforcing the notion of false superiority or inferiority. This leaves the affected person with an unrealistic view of one’s place in their surroundings and with the people they interact with.
After evaluating the poor thinking tendencies described above, it is clear that specific trends seem to be at the center of our ongoing thinking struggles. I have chosen to highlight the self-delusion poor thinking tendency as it has recently been discussed more often by experts in the field and by organizations growing concerned by the impact this trend has on American society and throughout the globe. Listen to Meaghan Ramsey’s Ted Talk on the importance of self-esteem and beauty (12 minutes). Notice how self-delusion may be at the root of outcomes that significantly impact others, their self-perception, and the world around them. Poor-thinking tendencies are essential when evaluating the potentially dangerous thinking processes with those we encounter. To be a constructive thinker and leader, one has to identify these tendencies and be on the outlook for thinking problems, so solutions can be found to offset or remedy situations efficiently and carefully.
Themes of “Poor” Thinking
Many experts believe critical thinking mistakes can be divided into five categories. When evaluating these five divisions, it becomes even more apparent that we may be our worst enemy due to our lack of ability to move beyond our selfish notions, individually or collectively.
Evaluations by those who have studied American society, Paul Loeb, Associated Scholar at Seattle’s Center for Ethical Leadership, in his book Soul of Citizen, and Dr. James Rachels of the University of Alabama in his work The Elements of Moral Philosophy, describe in detail the results poor thinking tendencies–people become too self-focused or self-absorbed. Loeb is greatly concerned about)what he terms) the “soul of our citizenry,” which has been directly threatened by what he and his colleagues in Seattle saw as the increase of a lethal and contagious level of cynicism. Loeb defines this cynicism as a protective shield of self-absorption that sells “the notion that every institution and every person is for sale, and enshrines it as an eternal truth… (this phenomena) insists that human motives are debased and always will be…(implying) that no institutions, truths, or community bonds are worth fighting for” (Loeb, 2000).
Loeb writes when “asked to account for moral discrepancies or lack of them, “we respond ‘I just work here’ or ‘I’m only running a business.’ Or ‘If I don’t do it, someone else will.'” He believes,“this paints a categorically bleak portrait of human existence, with no possibility of redemption: We end up believing that all businessmen and politicians are dishonest, all religious leaders [are] charlatans, all reporters cheap-shot hacks, and all social activists [are] fools.” (Loeb, 2000) This kind of cynicism, extends beyond healthy skepticism and is directly tied to a society that Dr. Rachels writes “has become increasingly satisfied and then demanding when it comes to our desires and needs. We promote our interests, which often dramatically damages or hurts others” (Rachels and Rachels, 2014).
According to these two contemporary philosophers, the cycle of doom is steeped in self-absorption and cynicism and seems to be worsening. When we become self-absorbed, we lose touch with others. Suppose this mechanism is left unchallenged by better thinking. In that case, people are more prone to continue with unfortunate outcomes centered on hatred, apathy, and self-defeatism.
Styles of Thinking
In addition to studying our inclination to poor thinking tendencies, we must be aware of certain thinking styles. We can develop better thinking outcomes by building a more solid understanding of triggers that influence our thinking. Thinking styles may best describe how a person identifies or processes information. Though all of us gather and analyze information in a similar baseline manner, it can also be said that we perform those functions in a wide variety of possibilities based on cultural and/or environmental factors. Knowing how individuals and groups are the same in their thinking styles and how they differ in that function is a powerful tool for those who wish to understand individual and group dynamics. These are six major areas that are most important to consider:
1. Categorization–all of us define concepts in sets of categories or definable sub-sets. We all process information within a wide breadth of definitional possibilities in our attempt to do this. This is called category expansion or category deviation, where differing individuals similarly define a term but simultaneously conceive of that term in categorical deviance or in relationship with forms we are most familiar with.
2. Object sensitivity–in this thinking perspective, individual thinking inclinations make people more prone to look for, garner information from, and fully process concepts linked to objects one is more likely to connect with. This can be based on experience and/or innate characteristics. In this regard, individual sensitivity to certain environmental factors shapes their thinking.
3. Reaction to uncertainty–thinking styles can also be impacted by one’s reaction to uncertainty in thinking, specifically whether one is willing and able to accept uncertainty as a positive process of thinking or not. This third style focuses on how people contemplate and are comfortable with uncertainty or the inability of individuals to live with uncertainty factors. When one cannot deal with these factors effectively, one can employ overcompensation factors that bias one’s thinking.
4. Continuum thinking approach–in this analysis, people deviate on how “deep” or complex their thinking is. A continuum is a theoretical thinking construct that sets up a process of thinking based on comparative conceptualization. At different times in our lives and depending on the situation, we understand concepts through direct comparison—often with what we think we have known before. Some people are more inclined to think of strict comparative conceptualization, while others are able and willing to integrate these concepts, creating a more layered approach to problem-solving.
5. Origination of worldview perspective–individuals conceptualize their reality regarding their unique background and position in the world in this thinking style. This can be done consciously or without formal recognition. Thus, the understanding one has of their place in the universe, or how one fits in a cosmological way, significantly impacts interpretation by that individual.
6. Pursuit of Truth–this approach refers to an individual’s ability to pursue thinking outcomes. As a result, thinking predisposition is heavily influenced by an underlying and strong desire to look and conceive of the truth. In this way, we are influenced by what we interpret as the definition of appropriate levels of truth dictated by our understanding or layering of that concept.
All six thinking styles allow us to understand better how much we have to be aware of how people think and why people come to certain conclusions. From these insights, we are better prepared to hold ourselves accountable to determine where inconsistencies lie in our poor thinking tendencies and to help others in situations and circumstances they might face that could produce poor thinking outcomes.
Troubling Outcomes
Balance: We rely less on a healthy interaction and balance of belief and reason.
Truth: We focus less on reality and more on what we want from an outcome or situation.
Result Orientation: We become too centered on the result without considering all potential costs.
Risk: We are more likely to give in to miscalculations inherent in probability mistakes.
Knowledge: We do not fully contemplate the outcomes of a decision and the limitations of incoming information.
When we are not aware of our human tendency to fall into unhealthy thinking problems, styles, and patterns, the impact can lead to a myriad of potential problems. I have termed these practical themes “troubling outcomes.” Based on this list, we can see where, in practical terms, our lack of thoughtful processes can lead us. Where might this be apparent in our society today? What trends do you see?
MAKING SENSE OF KNOWLEDGE
We do have helpful tools at our disposal. An essential element of strengthening our thinking can be found in analyzing two concepts at the root of good thinking. The study of critical thinking, and inherently the academic discipline of philosophy, focuses us on the continuous process of evaluating what we know and the process we go through to take information in, and then how we determine or verify such trends. This field of study is referred to as epistemology. For our practical use, we will divide our study of knowledge by looking briefly at the two basic constructs or field theories on how we gain knowledge.
The first is referred to as the experiential argument. One line of thinking is that we, as humans, gain our understanding of something through direct and indirect experiences. Thus, what we know is tied concretely to what we take in from the external world. Any definition of experience should acknowledge a wide array of physical and non-physical factors.
The other theory is loosely referred to as the “inherent” argument. We know things because they are “planted” in us from birth or before, which gives us knowledge. In short, we did not have to learn these things by going through an experience; this approach to knowledge acquisition is firmly founded on the belief that knowledge discovery is an internal exploration and experience reinforces our understanding of inherent conceptualization.
Both theories offer us insight into how we know things. Still, as often in academic circles, the theories can create hybrid theories with varying components of both approaches integrated into a careful knowledge outcome. The last part of the study of knowledge that is important to pay attention to is the field of metaphysics or the determination of reality. As we have seen in this chapter, what we consider real influences our understanding of what knowledge or information we believe to be true. By evaluating what we are potentially given in terms of knowledge from birth, what we learn from our experiences, and also what we accept and understand as genuine or true about the external world, we are more in tune with developing a more honest analysis of who we are and what is essential.
Goals of Better Thinking
- To seek a consistent and correct ideal of life,
- To gain further knowledge of the world around us and, from that, to better understand the world in the present,
- To reflect on decisions that have been made and to learn from them, and
- To encourage and teach others to seek the same outcomes.
As we conclude this chapter, thinking about the end goal of good thinking is helpful. Rachel argues in The Elements of Moral Philosophy that the goal of enhancing our thinking should carry with it practical results. As humans, we should seek to live a more consistent and correctly ideal life; to explore and be open to various perspectives and experiences that allow us to understand the world and its complexities better fully, to be more aware of our tendencies to think in specific patterns; and to be much more productive in every realm of our lives in the arena of problem-solving. Suppose we can begin to create practical, productive thinking goals. In that case, we will be more likely to enhance our skills in understanding others, moving us closer towards better decision-making.
Finding True Wisdom
David Hume (1711-1776)
“The best expedient to prevent (lack of insight) or this confusion is to be modest in our pretensions and even to discover the difficulty ourselves before it is objected to us. By this means, we may make a kind of merit of our very ignorance.”
Socrates (5th BC)
“Admitting, I don’t know, maybe the smartest thing to say.”
In summary, looking at our thinking and decision-making tendencies allows us to draw solid conclusions about the world. In addition, starting by developing strategies that allow us to get to know ourselves better is essential. The more we learn about ourselves, the better we assess how to make the best sense of new knowledge and problem-solve when those policies and procedures do not adequately deal with the problem. Perhaps two of the greatest philosophical minds in Western history can offer insights into the Twenty-First Century. Dave Hume, a Scottish philosopher of the 18th century, and Socrates, perhaps the most famous of Ancient Greek minds of the Classical era, clearly state that good critical analysis prompts us to be more diligent in our pursuit of workable outcomes based on a willingness on our part to stay in a frame of mind that is open to new ideas and new perspectives; rather than simple reliance upon our unchecked perceptions. In this TED talk, Barry Schwartz analyzes how true wisdom should look in our daily lives. In his book, Practical Wisdom: The Right Way To Do The Right Thing, Schwartz discusses how we might better understand how the practical nature of true wisdom can help us in any industry or situation. Schwartz argues that this notion might enable us to solve some of the world’s most significant problems through a refined understanding of proper decision-making that can ultimately be found in our ability to think more productively.
References
Double, R. (1998). Beginning Philosophy. Oxford Press.
Loeb, P.R. (2000). Soul of Citizen, St. Martin’s Griffin.
Rachels, J. & Rachels, S. (2011). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill.
Ramsey, M. (2014, September). Why thinking you’re ugly is bad for you. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/meaghan_ramsey_why_thinking_you_re_ugly_is_bad_for_you
Schwartz, B. (2010). Practical wisdom: The right way to do the right thing. Riverhead Hardcover
