A500.2.3.RB_CavaliereMike


Comparing the lists of critical- and non-critical thinking standards (Nosich, 2012, p. 153), I realize that I not only fall firmly on the critical-thinking side, in terms of what values guide my life in certain respects, but I actually have a gut-level aversion to the non-critical thinking standards. Standards like "chic," "popular," "attention-getting" and "feels good" serve as a sort of Bizarro World refection of how I see the world and what I value in myself and other people. It couldn't be further from my truth.

As I reflect on those non-critical thinking values, though --"fun, exciting, spontaneous" -- it isn't lost on me how those qualities are often the ones most people value in their friends and families. Who wants a friend who's hyper-organized and logical? People don't put "I'm looking for a guy who's 'testable'" on their online dating profiles. 

But, obviously, these lists are not mutually exclusive, and having a natural inclination toward one set of values doesn't mean that a person possesses no qualities of the other. There's always bound to be overlap, and that's a good thing. "Without critical thinking, even loving can become caretaking and co-dependence" (Nosich, 2012, p. 154).

So on that note -- although I'd like to think that I prioritize fun, and it's hard to imagine I'd willingly take grad classes on top of a full-time job if I didn't believe that it would eventually benefit me, I recognize that the critical-thinking standards more accurately define my personal set of priorities. Namely, my core standards include "reliable," "reasonable," "well-organized," and "rational."

The acquisition of those standards tracks back to my parents and the way I was raised. I remember them stressing, even at an early age, the importance of following through, and putting forth your best effort. I brought home a C on a test once, and I remember being worried to tell them about it when I got home. When I finally gathered the courage, though, and squeaked out the words, their answer surprised me. 

"Did you do your best?" 

And I said, "Yes." 

"Well, that's all we ask." 

It seems like a small moment, but that line has always stuck with me, carrying with it the simple standard that working hard, in itself, is its own reward. Try for a better grade next time. Get organized. Make an effort. That's all we ask.

As I've gotten older, priorities change and standards evolve. In high school, for instance, I remember it was ultra-important to me to have strong principles and communicate them loudly, and often. Today, I recognize that stage as a necessary part of my intellectual and emotional growth. I was questioning the way the world works, as well as my reactions to it, attempting to carve out an identity by firmly establishing the boundaries of my belief system. As I grew, though, I realized that identity isn't so cut and dry, and that it's important to question things and have strong opinions, sure, but it's not so important to constantly verbalize them. 

Realizing that, and growing from a high school/college kid into a 31-year-old man, has turned my arguably judgmental instincts into much more benign self-reflection. I had always been a questioner, but I learned over time to value rationality over hard-and-fast rules about how people “should” conduct themselves. Now I look for motivations. I try to figure people, and myself, out. That kind of openness to how complicated the world is has made me more thoughtful, empathetic, productive, and — hopefully — a lot less annoying.

References:
Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: Critical thinking across the curriculum. (4th ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A641.2.3.RB - Am I a Resonant Leader?

Like a lot of young people, I had (and flaunted) an unearned sense of jadedness and cynicism in my earlier years. It wasn’t until I got a little older and experienced my first real struggles in life that I began to see things differently. I realized that, in order to pull myself out of ruts, I needed to be intentional, and that realization eventually carried over into every part of my life and outlook. It’s how I started to see and plan my career and personal goals. It became the foundation of a sort of personal philosophy: simply, to do things on purpose . It’s funny how simple yet powerful that idea can be. “Resonant leadership is common sense, but it is not common practice” (McKee, p. 43). When we start to do things on purpose, though — for real, thought-through reasons — instead of just doing them reactively or instinctively, we begin to feel more in control, and for me, far more positive. That positive tone has served me well over the years. At work, it’s been noticed — ...
Read more

A641.9.3.RB - Becoming a Resonant Leader

Dear Mike, A lot can happen in five years. Five years ago from today, you weren’t married, you didn’t have a kid, you didn’t own a home, you didn’t have an MBA, you’d never been out of the country, you still had school debt, and your salary was literally half the amount that it is now. I say all this to remind you that change is possible, and that it can come quickly. That seems important to point out because, let’s face it, when it comes to the future, you've been indecisive, and you tend to focus on imagined downsides as a reason to avoid taking risks. You want your big life decisions to be logical and serve a grander plan, and that’s great, but you never planned to become a step-father or get your MBA. Those things happened because, regardless of plan, life happens. Things change. Opportunities arise. And you’re not only kidding yourself if you honestly think you can control exactly where you’ll end up down the road, but you’re missing out on potential changes that might act...
Read more

A500.4.3.RB_CavaliereMike

I can’t remember where I heard it first, but there’s a saying that has stuck with me through the years that always seems to pop up in my head when things get overthought, over-“strategized,” or overly politicized at work: “A camel is a horse designed by committee.” I love that saying, not only because it’s funny but because it communicates so much truth about efficiency, productivity and the value/purity of a good idea in the workplace. I’m sure there are a lot of other clichés that communicate the same idea — “Too many cooks in the kitchen” comes to mind — but the sentiment remains the same: At a certain point, the more people contributing to the decision-making process, the worse the decision will become. Now, look, a camel’s fine. They do well in rough climates. They’ve advertised cigarettes and made a fortune. They have a hump — which is practical but, you know, still a  hump . A camel gets the job done, but it’s just not a horse, which is streamlined and simple. Th...
Read more