The Art of Thinking Critically

Understanding Questions, Strengthening Skills & Staying Humble

Image Source: Canva Pro

After a pleasant exchange with Dr Brittany, I realised it was time to write a post on critical thinking. A topic I’d been considering for some time, but just needed that final nudge!

Here we go …

We hear critical thinking mentioned in articles, debates, social media; but rarely do we pause to ask what it really means. And just as importantly, how often do we examine whether we’re applying it ourselves, rather than just expecting it from others?

So, let's have a look at what the features of critical thinking are, the kinds of questions it helps us navigate, the dispositions it relies on, and the traps we can fall into when we fail to apply it.

Cognitive Features of Critical Thinking

Let’s start with the core feature of critical thinking, a set of cognitive abilities that help us process information carefully. These include the ability to analyse arguments, evaluate evidence, draw reasonable conclusions, and solve problems.

Take, for example, the claim that daily cold showers can cure depression¹. When approaching a claim like this, we need to go from thinking “I love this idea!” to thinking critically.

Let’s start with analysing the argument:

• What exactly is being claimed? That cold showers can cure depression? Is this a reasonable statement?

• Well, let’s evaluate the evidence. This means simply looking into the reason why this is being said: Is there solid scientific research backing this, or just personal anecdotes?

• Then, we draw some inferences or conclusions: Do cold showers cure clinical depression or do they momentarily boost alertness or mood?

• Finally, we can even problem-solve: If the claim has some merit, how might we apply it safely?

The Kinds of Question We Answer

Empirical Questions

It’s no surprise that the question I raised here, “Do cold showers cure depression?”, is an empirical one. An empirical question is one that can be answered by gathering evidence through measurement, observation or experimentation. Given my background in science, this is the kind of question I’m most familiar with. When I put my critical thinking cap on, I know I need to turn to observation and experimentation. In this case, that means conducting a careful search through the academic literature. Not to hunt for evidence that simply confirms what I want to be true, but to discover what the research actually shows.

Non-empirical Questions

But not all questions we face are empirical. Some are non-empirical, meaning they are answered not through observation or experiments but through reasoning, definitions, and proofs. Think of questions like “Can we divide a number by itself?” or “What counts as a triangle?” These belong to the world of maths and logic, where we rely on established axioms (the basic rules we accept as true) and check whether claims are consistent within that system.

Here, critical thinking helps us judge whether the reasoning is sound, whether the conclusions follow from the premises, and whether we are applying the concepts correctly. For example, we reason that a triangle must have three sides because that follows directly from its definition.

Philosophical Questions

Then we have philosophical questions. For me, these are the most challenging ones to deal with. Because they are not about facts or logical rules, but about the foundations of how we understand the world. Questions like “Does God exist?” or “Do we continue after we die?” don’t have straightforward answers you can find through experiments, or axioms. They push us to reflect on the assumptions behind our culture, context, and beliefs, and often challenge the concepts we take for granted.

In this scenario, critical thinking plays a slightly different role. Because it’s less about testing specific claims and more about carefully examining ideas, looking for hidden assumptions, and exploring their implications. And what matters most is the quality of the argumentation. Meaning, how clear, coherent, and well-reasoned the arguments are, even if the answers themselves remain open. For example, if someone says we continue after death because “that’s what I’ve always believed,” the argument lacks depth and support. But if they reason carefully, drawing on philosophical perspectives, cultural traditions, and thoughtful reflection, their argument gains strength and invites genuine engagement.

Now, note that irrespective of whether we’re transmitting or receiving a message, critical thinking invites us to approach these questions with curiosity and care, and to stay open-minded and humble, knowing that some questions may always stay partly unresolved, and that doesn’t mean they aren’t worth thinking about.

At this point it’s worth pausing to ask:

Why do we need to differentiate between empirical, non-empirical, and philosophical questions?

Well, critical thinking isn’t a one-size-fits-all tool. To apply it well, we need to understand what kind of question we’re dealing with. Without that, we risk using the wrong approach or expecting answers that don’t fit the nature of the question. For example, if we approach “Do cold showers cure depression?” as if it’s just a matter of personal belief, we miss the need for empirical evidence. Or, if we expect a clear scientific answer to “Do we continue after we die?”, we overlook the current philosophical nature of the question.

This takes us to the other key feature of critical thinking: its dispositional side.

Dispositional Components: The Inner Stance

Dispositions are the attitudes and habits of mind that guide how we approach thinking. Qualities like open-mindedness, curiosity, fairness, and humility shape whether we apply our critical thinking skills wisely. Without them, even sharp thinkers can fall into bias, overconfidence, or rushing to fit every problem into the same mould.

So, at its best, critical thinking is not just about what we know, but about what we are willing to practise.

Double Thinking

You see, we live in a curious time. On one hand, we have access to more expertise and evidence than ever before. On the other, we live in an age of constant debunking, where countless voices set out to call out myths, misconceptions, and mistakes. But here is where critical thinking demands even more from us. Because just because someone positions themselves as a debunker does not mean they are free from error.

In fact, many who set out to correct others can fall into a kind of doublethink, not necessarily in the strict Orwellian² sense, but in the habit of pointing out flaws while failing to notice similar weaknesses in their own reasoning. They criticise oversimplifications or faulty arguments, yet often commit the very same fallacies they condemn. To my mind, this happens when true critical thinking is mistaken for simply criticising or even … mocking. When in reality it is about applying careful, consistent standards of reasoning, both outward and inward. I have written posts myself calling out myths (see here), and I know how easy it can be to slip into critique without fully engaging the deeper, reflective work that critical thinking requires.

So, this is perhaps where we need to be sharpest. When dealing with correctors, clearers of confusion, who seem to themselves and to the audience, almost beyond scrutiny. This is perhaps where we need to remain alert to the possibility that even those claiming to clean up the conversation can be tangled in bias, contradiction, or overconfidence.

All of this leads us to one more important feature of critical thinking: its domain specificity.

Domain Specificity

Thinking critically in one area does not guarantee we will do so in another. Someone skilled in scientific analysis may still struggle with ethical reasoning. A person who can break down data and evaluate experiments might still make assumptions in personal relationships or oversimplify complex social issues.

This is because critical thinking is not an innate, distinguished quality. It’s a skill we can intentionally develop and apply across different areas of life.

And this brings us full circle. To strengthen this skill, we need to work on cognitive abilities and the understanding of the kinds of questions we deal with, along with dispositions like curiosity, fairness, and humility. Above all, critical thinking is about approaching our thinking with care, clarity, and consistency, wherever we apply it.

Importantly, critical thinking is not just a tool for debates or arguments. It is something we carry into our daily lives, shaping how we understand ourselves, others, and the world. Whether we are examining a claim, reflecting on a personal belief, or questioning what we take for granted, critical thinking invites us to pause, reflect, and approach our mental processes with care.

And for me, this is its true value: not as a vehicle to certainty, but to the ongoing commitment to thinking well.

If you’re new here, welcome! I post a new article every Wednesday at 4.30 pm (UK time) & share notes every day. I’m so glad you’re here :)

---

Reference List:

Kaplan, J. (2021). What’s philosophy? [Video]. YouTube.

Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review (Research Report). Pearson.

1. For an excellent discussion of the recent hype around cold plunges, see Dr Brittany’s post The Hype About Cold Plunges, where she examines the scientific evidence (and overclaims) surrounding cold exposure and mental health.

2. Orwell’s concept of doublethink comes from his novel 1984, where it refers to the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs at once and accept both, a form of self-deception maintained through controlled thought. In this article, I use the term more loosely to describe inconsistency in reasoning, not in the political context Orwell applies it.