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 basic 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 and that this may be difficult for many to consistently do. Humans need to continually work to improve their critical thinking skills, 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 basic psychological study, there are conflicting theories relative to the human thinking processes; but it is clear is that there are tendencies that are important to evaluate. I refer to these trends as human thinking patterns. This is not to imply that we are carbon copies of one another, or we are not unique in our perceptions or viewpoints. Instead, when analyzing how individuals think, understanding certain tendencies may help us to become more attune with our own thinking habits and to effectively identify those trends in others. Two of the most powerful factors that influence our thinking patterns are conditioning and association.
Conditioning represents the way our surroundings or environment influence, or may control, in some instances, our processing and understanding of the world around us. Looking at behavioral psychology, we see how much we are impacted by factors around us, and more revealing, how we are less likely to see how those forces influence us. These conditioning patterns can be self-inflicted and be either consciously, unconsciously, or even subconsciously present.
Psychology reveals that we process and retain knowledge through association as well as other known and unknown factors. Simply put, we recognize and process information, and then store thoughts according to experiences, environmental placement, and our understanding of the world. As such, association can have an important impact on how we interpret or make sense of the external world around us.
When we consider the importance of these first two concepts, we must evaluate the implications of their effects in reference to sound thinking. Individuals are impacted by the influences of their thinking, therefore we can predict potential issues or encourage individuals to employ useful thinking patterns that can off-set perception-based mistakes that can lead to negative outcomes or problems.
Beyond these two terms, we also can turn our attention to cognitive and temperamental thinking to help us understand our 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 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 to better 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 key factors that may enhance or diminish one’s ability to be a better critical thinker—obviously appropriate in effective value determination and one of the most important underlying topics of this course.
Potentially “poor” thinking tendencies
When the factors discussed above are not skillfully understood in oneself or in others, certain troubling trends can identify themselves. These trends can become habits of the mind, keeping us from effectively interpreting scenarios, situations, and the world around us and ultimately leading to possible 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 by one based initially on faulty information. This mistake is seen in how information is accumulated, or can be traced, to the nature of information itself. I likened this to an equation where the inputs are wrong; therefore, the product of the equation is incorrect. Faulty data is not something that one can control as our information comes from inputs outside of our control, this poor thinking tendency is not inherently centered on simply avoiding faulty data but the one receiving the information must continually check or evaluation the data (or knowledge).
- 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 are prone to center their world on their interpretation, perception, or analysis, without ample consideration for the reality of the external world around them.
- 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 that are determined to be true 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 are rigid in one’s belief in a subject even when there is overwhelming evidence that discredits or questions such a line of thought or outcome. This thinking discounts the value of asking questions of oneself and the original thinking position or process; instead, the individual believes that 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 that espouses that their viewpoint, argument, or reality cannot be wrong. Beyond this, though, one’s individual 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 one to outbursts of anger and refocusing of 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 true, that such a 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, but the individual miscalculates the accuracy of the possibility of the outcome because they so badly want that outcome or process to be true.
- Acceptance of Authority–this presents itself in the form of 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 right simply because that entity or idea has been largely 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 difficult outcomes, processes or by-products. Inherent in this thinking, is the belief that the process is too difficult 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 useful resolution is impossible and accepts the perceived easier 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 really 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.
It is clear after evaluating the poor thinking tendencies, described above, that there are certain trends which 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 who are growing concerned by the impact this trend is having 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 important to keep in mind when evaluating the potentially dangerous thinking processes with those we encounter. If one is going to be a constructive thinker and leader, they to identify these tendencies and be on the outlook for thinking problems, so solutions can be found to off-set or remedy situations efficiently and carefully.
Themes of “Poor” thinking
According to many experts, critical thinking mistakes can be divided into five categories. When evaluating these five divisions, it becomes even more apparent that we may be our own worst enemy due to our lack of ability to move beyond our own selfish notions in either an individual or collective manner.
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 for )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 and often this 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 getting worse. When we become self-absorbed, we lose touch with others. If this mechanism is left unchallenged by better thinking, people are more prone to continue with an unfortunate series of outcomes centered in high levels of hatred, apathy and self-defeatism.
Styles of Thinking
Besides our need to study the tendency of all of us to employ these poor thinking tendencies, we also need to be aware of certain thinking styles. By building a more solid understanding of triggers that influence our thinking, it is possible to come to better thinking outcomes. Thinking styles can perhaps be best summed up as the path or manner in which 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 upon cultural and/or environmental factors. Knowing how individuals and groups are the same in their thinking styles as well as how they differ in that function, is a powerful tool for those who wish to understand individuals and group dynamics. There 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. In our attempt to do this, we all process information within a wide breadth of definitional possibilities. This is called category expansion or category deviation, where differing individuals define a term in a similar fashion but at the same time conceive of that term in categorical deviance or in relationship with forms that 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 that one is more likely to connect with. This can be based upon 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 the inclination of how people contemplate and are comfortable with uncertainty or the inability of individuals to live with uncertainty factors. When one is unable to effectively deal with these factors, they can employ overcompensation factors that bias one’s thinking in some manner.
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 upon comparative conceptualization. At different times in our lives and depending on the situation at hand, we come to 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 other individuals are able and willing to integrate these concepts, creating a more layered approach to problem solving.
5. Origination of worldview perspective–in this thinking style, individuals conceptualize their reality in terms of their unique background and position in the world. 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, has a significant impact on 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 within all of us to look and conceive of the truth. In this way, we are influenced by what we interpret to be the definition of appropriate levels of truth dictated by our own understanding or layering of that concept.
All six thinking styles allow us to better understand 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 own poor thinking tendencies and to help others in situations and with circumstances they might face that could produce outcomes 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 out of an outcome or situation.
Result Orientation: We become too centered on the end result without considering all potential costs.
Risk: We are more likely to give in to miscalculations inherent in probability mistakes.
Knowledge: We don’t 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”. We can see, based upon this list, 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 nonetheless. 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 go about determining or verifying such trends. This field of study is referred to as epistemology. For our practical use, we will divide down 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 factors, both physical and non-physical.
The other theory is loosely referred to as the “inherent” argument. We know things because they are “planted” in us from birth or before, and that those factors give us knowledge. In short, we did not have to learn these things by going through some experience; this approach to knowledge acquisition is firmly founded on the belief that knowledge discovery is an internal exploration and experience reinforces our understanding on inherent conceptualization.
Both theories offer us insight into how we know things but as often is the case in academic circles, the theories can and do create hybrid theories with varying components of both approaches integrated in 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 determination of reality. As we have seen in this chapter, the issue of what we consider to be 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 real or true about the external world, we are more in tune with developing a more honest analysis of who we are and what is important.
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
- To encourage and teach others to seek the same outcomes
As we conclude this chapter, it is helpful to think about the end goal of good thinking. Rachel argues in The Elements of Moral Philosophy that the goal of enhancing our thinking should carry with it the 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 better understand fully the world and its complexities; to be more aware of our own tendencies to think in certain patterns; and to be much more productive in every realm of our lives in the arena of problem solving. If we can begin to create practical, productive thinking goals, we will be more likely to enhance our skill in understanding others and therefore, move 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 may be the smartest thing to say.”
In summary, the importance of taking a good look at our thinking and decision-making tendencies allows us to draw solid conclusions about the world around us. In addition, it is important to start by developing strategies that allow us to get to know ourselves better. The more we learn about ourselves, the better we will be in assessing how to best make sense of new knowledge that we encounter and how to best problem solve when those policies and procedures do not adequately deal with the problem at hand. Perhaps two of the greatest philosophical minds in western history can offer insights to us in the twenty-first century. Both thinkers, 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 that are 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 own unchecked perceptions. In this TED talk, linked here, Barry Schwartz analyzes how true wisdom should look like 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 largest problems by a refined understanding of true 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
