Thinking is a serious problem

Why is thinking a serious problem, you might ask. Simple, there is very little of it going on, either in public life (politics, newspapers, commentators, etc.) or in private life. There are many reasons for so little thinking, and I will explore those in other posts. Today: emotion.

Emotional responses characterize what passes for thinking far more often than not. Emotions are not the problem; they are natural. The problem is unexamined and undisciplined emotions that call for a very simple, and devastating, outcome: I win, you lose.

What passes for thinking is merely the emotional ramblings of people whose views of the world are set in stone. For such people, information that challenges their view or disturbs them in any way, that pushes them out of their treasured states of equilibrium, is anathema. The only response to such information is to attack, demean, lie, obfuscate, misrepresent, name-call and display anger. These people have internal referencing systems. That is, their views and values are contained in a "box" impermeable to challenging information; in other words, closed. Only information that supports what's in the box gets in: hence self-referencing.

Most people imagine (I will not dignify such as thinking) themselves to be quite objective, when they would be incapable of an objective thought if it fell on them from a great height. Notice how people congregate with those with whom they share common values and positions. Why? Simply because they can maintain the fiction that they are actually thinking (goodness, look at how all these other very bright folks think just like I do!). Keep in mind that all such non-thinkers believe absolutely in the "logic" and accuracy of their own thoughts; there is no other possibility. The system is simple: if you disagree with me, you are by definition wrong on all counts. Further, if we happen to be talking about politics, you are not only wrong, but evil into the bargain. Since you are wrong and evil, I can do anything I want to you. Not only does the information you bring have to be "destroyed," but likely you will have to be as well.

Real thinking requires a person to put aside preferences, biases, and prejudices, and examine a situation on its own merits, no matter what the person's feelings are, and future posts will address this. People emotionally align themselves (usually unconsciously) with values and positions and judgments. Only after do they try to use supportive information to validate their views. Selective perception is the faculty we have for seeing or accepting only information that supports our views and positions, meaning that people select validating information only, and seldom consider invalidating information. You can see the conundrum: most people are unaware of their emotional attachment to an idea, position, value, procedure, etc., and thus cannot address their inability to think. They think they are thinking. Put another way: they do not know that they do not know.

But you might say that there are times when people can think clearly. I agree, but they have to be about things that are generally not contentious or ones in which they do not have an emotional stake. Since most of the latter are in the unconscious and not available to the person, they are unaware of any such stake. Beware suggesting that their behavior was, shall we say, problematic. Being in their heads and without access to their unconscious, they can find no logic or fairness in your view and are left considering it an attack. The result: disrespect, hostility, and even hate. Take a look around and you will see exactly what I mean.

More reasons for poor thinking anon.