How do we know what truth is? What is the truth?
These are two big question. Nowadays it seems that most of the things are established and proved by someone that is apparently an "eminence" in a specific field or given topic.
Even though the opening questions of this post touch delicate topics that are worth considering individually, I want to focus on a term that seems to be banned from the modern educational system and collective consciousness. Maybe there are some that think it is too dangerous for the system they are promoting.
Critical Thinking, What does this term refers to? Let's take a look at some dictionary definitions first:
- Cambridge's Dictionary: "the process of thinking carefully about a subject or idea, without allowing feelings or opinions to affect you"
- Oxford's Dictionary: "the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement"
Well, apparently it seems that these definitions are enough to explain Critical Thinking but I personally think there is more.
I believe that the most powerful idea that critical thinking conveys is that you can actually dissent from the consensus of the masses. And this is not just for dissension sake, it is not just to be odd, it is actually the exercise of the capability that every human being is born with, the possibility to think independently.
Now, when you start asking questions to yourself and begin to find that there is more than one possible explanation or solution to the line of thoughts you are having, you have to be solid in the way you look for answers. A premise must be understood, every human is susceptible to err, those who set the rules by which this world runs may err, you can err, !science has erred! so in order to freely exercise critical thinking in an accurate way, one must find strong foundations upon which it will be safe to sustain the structure of an independent thought.
It is vital that any new thesis proposed as an alternative to something people take as established is explained by its respective evidence. I believe no rule has to dictate which evidence is valid and which is not because the objective of presenting evidence is not only to prove a point but to foster critical thinking in others. The process of explaining the reason why a thing may or may not be a certain way will cause some to awake to the new possibility or shut the door to it, and it is their right to do either of them. If a person believes a certain thing to be true it is normal to see that person proselytizing about it and then it comes into play the freedom of choice of the receptors.
This is a broad subject but my intentions here are two things. I want you to investigate about critical thinking and second and more important, I want you to critically think. Dare to question, dare to dissent, dare to think on your own. I invite you to get on this journey of discovering possibilities and realities the majority don't know anything about. Dare to spread the news "Hey! you can think without anyone imposing over you". Changes start one person at a time.
If you want to support empowering material on Steemit please follow my account, leave a comment, resteem and consider giving a very welcome upvote.