On a weekend afternoon, I finished reading Asking the Right Questions (《学会提问》) by Neil Browne and Stuart Keeley (12th edition) in a bookstore. The book is regarded as a classic of critical-thinking training, and my deepest takeaway after reading it is this: in this age of experts everywhere and information overload, knowing how to ask questions matters more than knowing how to find answers.
Why We Need Critical Thinking
The book opens with a stinging reality: in the real world, all kinds of people always insist that we must do exactly as they say, because they know best. Drug companies tell us we need to take some pill, without mentioning that the research supporting the drug’s efficacy was funded by none other than themselves.
Jonathan Haidt describes our dependence on emotion as an angry elephant, while reason is like a weak rider, straining to control the elephant’s frenzied rampage. No matter how nicely an expert talks, he isn’t necessarily reliable. Critical thinking isn’t about making us doubt everything; it’s about making us the gatekeepers of our own information.
Sponge Thinking vs. Panning-for-Gold Thinking
The authors use two metaphors to distinguish two ways of learning:
- Sponge thinking: absorbing external information like a sponge soaking up water—the more knowledge you acquire, the more you can appreciate the world’s intricacies. But the danger is that, by the end of reading, the reader will believe whatever they read last.
- Panning-for-gold thinking: actively interacting with knowledge while acquiring it, constantly asking questions, sifting, and evaluating, finally panning out the gold of wisdom.
The most important feature of panning-for-gold thinking is interactive engagement—a dialogue between author and reader, between speaker and audience. A thinking person is willing to agree with others’ views, but first must find convincing answers to their own questions.
Weak-Sense vs. Strong-Sense Critical Thinking
This is the distinction in the book that most alarmed me:
- Weak-sense critical thinking: using critical thinking to defend one’s current beliefs, the purpose being to refute those who disagree.
- Strong-sense critical thinking: using critical thinking to evaluate all claims and beliefs, especially evaluating one’s own beliefs.
Strong-sense criticism doesn’t necessarily force us to abandon our initial beliefs—sometimes it actually makes us firmer, because after critically examining those beliefs we know why we believe them, rather than just following the crowd.
The Roadblocks That Block Our Thinking
The book spends a lot of space analyzing the various biases in our thinking, almost every one of which hits home:
1. The Halo Effect
We first recognize a positive or negative trait in a person, then link that trait to everything else about them. For example, some tech guru is great at writing code, so we automatically assume everything he says is worth believing—even when those views are completely outside his field of expertise.
2. Belief Perseverance and Confirmation Bias
We always set off carrying all sorts of views, and once a belief forms, it’s hard to change. Confirmation bias makes us treat only evidence that confirms existing beliefs as reliable, while automatically blocking out contrary information.
The book quotes a clever line: our greatest bias may be exactly the belief that only we ourselves are free of bias.
3. The Availability Heuristic
We form conclusions only from the information most readily at hand. More than sixty thousand people die every day from hunger and unsafe drinking water; by comparison only a few die from terrorism—yet our fear of the latter far exceeds our fear of the former, because terrorist attacks more easily make the headlines.
4. Wishful Thinking
If a person would rather believe a concept they hope is true than one already proven true, then they are loyal to their heart rather than to the truth. The book calls this mindset the greatest obstacle to critical thinking. We must constantly ask ourselves: do I believe this is true because I hope it’s true, or because there is solid evidence?
Expressing Yourself Like a Critical Thinker
The book also raises an often-overlooked point: a critical thinker must not only know how to ask questions, but also how to ask questions in a friendly way.
Once you start cursing, you lower the level of your own argument, equating it with the shouting at a campus yelling contest—whoever shouts loudest wins. An aggressive, narrow, and bigoted tone easily alienates people.
The most useful approach is to say your critical questions out loud, showing that you’re full of curiosity about them, rather than putting on an attitude of “aha, I’ve caught you in an error.”
In Closing
Becoming a critical thinker isn’t about becoming a biting, cold, fault-finding person. On the contrary, it requires: broad knowledge, using reasons and evidence as the basis for decisions, treating others’ beliefs with a receptive attitude, and genuinely respecting rigorous argument.
As the book says: you can act confidently on your own views and not waver about your conclusions, but also leave a little room to reflect now and then: could I possibly be wrong?
In this age where everyone expresses opinions but few truly think, may we all be people who, after listening to others, don’t just say “yes, yes, yes,” but say, “That’s a great point—I have a good question.”
评论
0 条评论