Much of the strife in the world today boils down to people having, and sharing, unshakeable thoughts and ideas. Conversation becomes a battle to prove oneself right and others wrong. Many otherwise critical thinkers are of the opinion that if everyone thought critically about the same thing, they would each come to the same (correct) conclusion. This belief ignores the fact that each of us perceives “correctness” based on what we value.
For example, when choosing good economic policy, are we seeking the economic policy that benefits us personally, the one that is good for the geographic area we live in, or the one that spreads the wealth broadly and fairly around the world? When contemplating good healthcare spending, do we value saving lives, minimizing infirmity, or increasing life expectancy?
Critical thinking includes being open to hearing others’ ideas and striving to understand their perspectives. A good conversation that seeks to understand rather than change minds is the key to good critical thinking. Provided both parties agree that it’s OK to believe (and value) different things, people with contrary opinions can have good conversations and remain friends. The Conversation offers some great tips on improving conversation when we disagree.
All ideas grow out of other ideas. —Anish Kapoor
If your dignity hinges upon your (perceived) intelligence, it may often be tempting to believe that you are right and everyone else is either misinformed or unintelligent. Critical thinkers must avoid this temptation. In fact, even among very learned people, there are differences of opinion. Sometimes there is no “right” solution, only a better solution for your value system. Learning to disagree without being disagreeable (or judgemental) — the humility in seeing the validity of diverse conclusions — is the key to a more civil and democratic society.
Image by cottonbro studio via Pexels, used under the Pexels License
Discussion:
What have you learned from someone with a different perspective? Did it change your perspective?
Whatever. Being agreeable is overrated, but admittedly adaptive for the mediocre. Intelligence is objective, not a perception. As is reality. Humility is indeed very important – but not with respect to lesser mortals who confuse respect for everyone’s right to an opinion with some sort of entitlement to have their opinions respected… Yes to political and legal democracy but a hard no to personal democracy!
I agree that being open to other people’s points of view is beneficial for your own cognitive structure, your world outlook, and your values. Listening to others can give you valuable insight into facts that you may have overlooked, and can sometimes lead you to new strategies for bettering your life (and the lives of others). But if I think I have an open mind, I restrict my serious discussions with others to those with an equally open mind. As for democracy, I don’t buy it. What you think is democracy is only an illusion, a system that gets undermined by surreptitious power groups right from the start.