The first principle of thinking critically is to “assume any belief or claim is wrong until it proves itself to be right” or, short of the possibility of absolute certainty, it is the best explanation of the available evidence.
I repeat the fundamental tenet for learning to think critically is to question the veracity of any claim by anyone. Assume they are wrong. Why should you implicitly accept any account or claim about anything, especially from a source you don’t know or trust as reliable?
The media? What angle are they following? Who is feeding them their version of reality? Social media? Even worse. Those in authority? Exactly how has any agency in power ever demonstrated it’s reliability or that it has the public interest in mind?
In the end, most people are well-intentioned, but that doesn’t mean they don’t omit crucial details or alter the facts to suit their own bias. Or maybe, they could be incompetent purveyors of truth.
Someone may believe that we should give the benefit of the doubt. Again, why? Aother pleads that we should suspend judgment. Suspending judgment is a kinder version of the principle I have elucidated.
Yes, we render all kinds of decisions and implicity trust others all the time. We depend on drivers to obey the rules of the road. However, that is why you also drive defensively. You can’t depend on others to pay attention.
What I’m focusing on is the things that matter. What does the science actually say about Covid, for example. Too many parrot the words. Far too few have a clue. Do public sanctions and the removal of your civil liberties justify the protections for the weak and aging? What is the actual potential harm to a child, let alone a healthy adult? Do you know? If you don’t you are a sheep being herded into a pen.
