Insights from a Commentator

What is critical thinking, and why is it important?  In this day and age, it is necessary to begin the conversation with an understanding of what is the basis for the definition of Critical Thinking.  Critical Thinking should be thought of as a process, a philosophy whereby statements of fact are considered from an independent perspective that asks the question, does this conclusion comport with all the available facts?  In other words, if I take an argument to its illogical conclusion in the extreme, would this conclusion still apply?  If it does, then you have a solid argument, but if it doesn’t, then there are assumptions along the way that are incorrect and require modifications to realize a workable conclusion in the end.  The statement of fact, or the conclusion, must be considered independently from the originating variables or from any preconceived expectations to avoid confirmation bias.  As an example, consider the age-old argument that Socialism is the best method of governance because everyone is cared for and no one is left behind.  Here, the goal is everyone is cared for and no one is left behind, and the conclusion is governance through Socialism satisfies these goals the best.  This idea and solution feels good on first inspection, it has seemingly simple principles that everyone will understand, and it appeals to people’s emotional side because who doesn’t want to help their fellow man?  We always feel better when we help those who are struggling around us, so why wouldn’t this system of governance be best?  Here is where you either follow the path the author is leading you on, accepting his statement blindly, or you objectively look into the statement of fact further.  This is the application of Critical Thinking.    

Since this article is not about different means of governing but rather about Critical Thinking applied to basic subjects encountered every day in society and in business, the reader is left to determine their own answers to governance.  It is at this point in the argument, though, where people will look at past applications of Socialism, identify a reason the previous application failed, such as a prevailing attitude, assuming the premise of Socialism is accurate, and then declare it will work once we change that particular problem.  Only when critical thinking is engaged in reviewing these “simple” principles and the original premise, that questions concerning the viability of Socialism, (for example), begin to emerge.  Several points begin to evolve as the conclusion is analyzed.  By what measurement are you determining the success or failure of Socialism?  Who is considered a part of the “everyone” that is being cared for, and what is included in the care portion?  Is it healthcare, welfare, psychological well-being, or all three?  Then the question of, when are you “left behind”?  If everyone is living in poverty and you only compare results within the group, then no one has been left behind, or are those not left behind the ones sharing in all the accumulated affluence of the party leaders, and those living in poverty don’t deserve the benefits so they aren’t left behind either?  These are all variables that need to be addressed before they become assumptions, to understand when Critically Thinking about the conclusion “Socialism is the best means of governance”.  Success could also be defined by the National GDP, economic growth, ease of implementing rules or regulations (governance), prosperity of the ruling body, prosperity of the governed, or …… Then each of these has additional variables that will impact the results, such as the personality of the leader may not be conducive to this governance type, perhaps he was analytical and couldn’t delegate responsibility like Jimmy Carter, or an engineering type like Herbert Hoover, who overanalyzed everything and couldn’t make a decision.  Mao Zedong didn’t appear to have any of these decision problems, he knew where the problems with Socialism were and how to progress from Socialism to Communism, and he didn’t let anything stand in his way.  Does the fact the CCP started this governance type decades ago and it’s still around automatically make it a successful endeavor?  

When there is a specific goal to be achieved, it’s even more important to employ critical thinking.  The author of a statement of fact will likely phrase the statement in a specific manner so their reader or listener gives them their tacit approval without the need of further discussion.  

• Yes, we need to help those not fortunate enough to be born in a rich nation like the US.  
• If we reduce taxes, there obviously will be less money for the government to operate with and provide assistance to those who need it most.  
• They are reducing the budget, so there will be less money to distribute and people will lose their jobs or they won’t receive health care.  

These are all statements of fact messaged in a way to draw a seemingly obvious answer and illicit a response in favor of the author’s objective. Initially, there doesn’t seem to be a reason to put much thought into the answer because it’s self-evident, but is the reader/listener being led to some unspoken conclusion?  The answer lies in the question, what variables should the reader assign to the statements, and what assumptions must be made in order to arrive at the same answer?  In each case, there are a multitude of variables, all of which require only a small change to reach a different answer, and each assumption removes another variable from the statement of fact.  In today’s media and social platforms, the more a person includes these assumptions within their statement of fact, the more successful they become because it provides an answer for the reader in a way they feel good about agreeing, and they don’t have to give much thought to it.  When you have a series of these issues and conclusions that all lean in the same direction, it’s again obvious what the outcome is expected to be.  But it’s important to ask what the variables were and what the assumptions behind each one of the statements of fact are.  Looking at the variables, would you make those same assumptions?  For 8 years, beginning in 2008 and then in the more recent 4 years, we have been faced with a series of seemingly independent issues and asked to draw certain conclusions.  Any one, two, or three of these issues any number of people could agree with, such as Blacks have been oppressed, predominately white police forces have focused on black crime, men showing a predilection to toxic masculinity, minorities needing additional assistance from the privileged white men, trans people have been oppressed and need special dispensation to feel included in society, it’s ok for transmen to compete in women’s sports, or we are such a rich nation we need to let anyone anywhere come and have a chance at everything we have worked for.  Any of these issues taken individually are plausible, but another aspect of Critical Thinking requires the person to look at the whole of all the parts.  When these topics are considered in the aggregate instead of independently, it is less apparent that so many people would agree in such a one-sided split.  Critical thinking at this point, includes all the past statements of facts relevant to the issue, and the assumptions used for each statement previously now seem out of place to the point where they appeared to be 80/20 in favor of each statement; now the polling appears to fall on 80/20 against all the statements.  Critical thinking is a continuous evaluation of checking back in order to look forward. 

Critical Thinking is obviously just as important in the business world, particularly when new ideas or new approaches to existing procedures are introduced.  In business, rarely are new techniques ever introduced without extensive testing or theoretical proofs, so they will be heavily defended.  Unlike social or political statements, where the author will fashion statements to conceal variables and assumptions to lead a reader to their conclusion, business statements tend to follow the definition of the variables involved and include only those assumptions where large variations in the assumption have minimal impact on the final conclusion.  Seeing the variables and the assumptions in the Proof or Tech paper doesn’t mean critical thinking is less of an issue, it just means you must be more specific in its application.  By way of illustration, forecasting oil well performance is critical to estimating the economics of drilling exploratory and developmental wells, as you may well imagine.  Reliable techniques have been developed and proven over the years for conventional reservoirs, but with the advent of shale oil development from different types of reservoirs than previously understood, these proven techniques begin to break down.  New techniques were developed to forecast the new reservoirs, new completion techniques, and for opening up previously undeveloped areas of the US and around the world.  With all the theoretical proofs demonstrating how solid the mathematics are, and then applying the equations over historic time to known producing fields and finding the answers matched here as well, it was too easy for the engineers to accept the new techniques and the premise these methods needed very little backup.  A failure to critically think about the premise, the variables, or the assumptions resulted in overestimating the ultimate recoverable reserves by almost 40%, in one incident, which in turn overestimated the profits that would be generated and how much capital the company could afford to invest for this project and several other projects already on the planning board.  The cost to invest based on these values would have resulted in a devaluation of the company had it not been discovered.

In business, as in social and political environments, it is critical to understand what variables will impact the final answer, and by how much they can change the final answer.  It is also critical to consider what assumptions can legitimately be made without impacting the final answer.  The most difficult aspect is correctly identifying the variables that have the largest impact on the final results.  One of those variables may be an advantage the author of the statement receives if people agree with him, financial gains or notoriety, or perhaps other opportunities.  How many people were aware of the financial stake Dr. Fauci had in directing the conversation about Covid 19 away from a lab leak and towards vaccines that are supposed to prevent transmission?  Nonetheless, critical thinking can also allow you to avoid ending up on the 20% side of an 80/20 issue, or conversely, vociferously being able to defend the 20% side of an issue if you genuinely believe 80% of the people are wrong.  During the Covid 19 debacle, it appeared that 80% of the people and information presented gave the only legitimate side of the story, but in fact, when the variables were looked at instead of accepting the conclusions given by the authors, it became apparent there might be a different answer.  In retrospect, it looks as if this may be a case of the 20% manipulating the news to sound like the 80%.  Critical Thinking is necessary in all aspects of our lives.

Thanks for taking the time to review this article.  As always, I hope it has given you something to consider in this age of social and political media influences.  As AI begins to have an ever-increasing influence in business research and development, the need to Critically Think about the results becomes more important.  What are the variables in the new processes and techniques then what assumptions can be made concerning those variables without significantly changing the results?  In the previous example, the engineer assumed the author knew more than he did; consequently, he failed to question the application of the analytical technique and attributed a far greater economic value to the well.  Across the board, assumptions are made for us every day to guide our thoughts where the author wants them.  Stay engaged.  Check out other topics of interest at wrbloom.substack.com