The Importance of Critical Thinking

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Intellectual Standards
Fallacies in Reasoning
Reflexive and Reflective Decision-Making
Conclusion
References

Communication is a crucial aspect of socialization, yet exchanging knowledge and using it for decision-making (DM) may not be efficient, thus requiring individuals to develop their critical thinking (CT) skills. A commonly accepted definition of CT suggests that it is the process of actively analyzing, synthesizing, or evaluating information as a basis for belief and action (Masys, 2022). CT is especially influential within law enforcement (LE) since a lack of CT mastery may cause damage to lives, properties, and trusting relationships (Masys, 2022). Consequently, the main points of the current paper will be CT techniques and their application in LE. The first topic for the following discussion will explain intellectual standards and their usage. The second subject will explore potential fallacies in reasoning and how to inspect for such misconceptions. The third matter will focus on the specifics of reflective and reflexive DM. Finally, the paper will draw a conclusion to the reviewed findings on the importance of CT. Such critical thinking techniques as using intellectual standards and checking for fallacies can help individuals, especially those in law enforcement, make better judgments and prevent misinformation by thoroughly examining data.

Intellectual Standards

People can advance their CT skills and subsequent DM by properly using intellectual standards (ISs). The most commonly acknowledged ISs are clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance, and fairness (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Each IS is associated with specific questions meant to assess and enhance the quality of reasoning (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Clarity demonstrates that a person comprehends what is being said, and the IS can be employed by asking one’s interlocutor to elaborate or explain their point differently (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Accuracy refers to having a healthy skepticism toward what is communicated and examining how the statement can be verified (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Precision encompasses queries needed to obtain explicit details, whereas relevance asks whether what is being discussed is directly connected to the issue (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). The reviewed ISs must be utilized to determine that parties involved in the conversation understand the essence of the exchange.

Furthermore, the ISs of depth, breadth, logic, significance, and fairness can aid in determining a solution to a problem. The former is meant to identify a matter’s distinct areas of complexity by asking about the issue’s specific factors or difficulties (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Breadth refers to considering various points of view in relation to the subject by examining what would be suggested by a person with another perspective on the topic (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). The IS of logic verifies that what is being discussed makes sense based on arguments that correspond with one another (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Significance demonstrates that the matter at hand deserves attention by determining that a statement is important for the conversation (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Finally, fairness reflects freedom from bias and selfishness by questioning if someone has a vested interest or acts sympathetically toward others’ standpoints (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). Consequently, a manager may rely on the CT technique of using ISs to aid in DM by examining the nature of information exchange and generating a sound stance toward resolving an issue.

Notably, CT can be put in a LE context by assessing how police officers (POs) can apply ISs. Cortright et al. (2020) propose that despite having many duties, LE are pushed to prioritize crime control over prevention. As a result, POs become distant from the communities they serve and view citizens as a means to an end to obtain a warrant or make an arrest (Cortright et al., 2020). Instead, POs should also strive for peacekeeping and engage in problem-solving activities with the public (Cortright et al., 2020). Therefore, POs should assume the roles of critical thinkers to evaluate information and make constructive decisions by asking others and themselves questions from ISs. For example, officers can rely on clarity-related queries to clarify a suspicious situation and consider fairness to determine the appropriateness of how they treat a person (Masys, 2022; Thomas & Fujimura, 2022). CT technique of using ISs can help LE build a more trusting relationship with civilians to increase the likelihood of preventing crimes.

Fallacies in Reasoning

A manager’s DM can benefit through CT by checking for fallacies. An argument is fallacious when its logic appears convincing but is based on weak assumptions or generates irrational conclusions (Burgess & Kloza, 2021). Fallacy refers to an error in reasoning and can be formal or informal (Davarpanah et al., 2021). The former can be detected by examining the statement’s structure, whereas the latter can be identified by analyzing the content of the assertion (Davarpanah et al., 2021). For instance, ad hominem is an informal fallacy representing an argument refuted because of the proposer’s personal qualities rather than the idea’s merit, like the premises’ validity (Burgess & Kloza, 2021; Davarpanah et al., 2021). Fallacies in reasoning have multiple types that can be applied within a LE context. For example, border patrol officers can utilize their understanding of fallacies to determine the reliability of a statement by considering that an opinion of a superior may not always be trustworthy (Burgess & Kloza, 2021). Checking for fallacies assists in ensuring that information and subsequent judgment are rational and free of prejudices.

Reflexive and Reflective Decision-Making

CT is associated with two kinds of DM: reflective and reflexive. The former refers to being self-aware and analyzing events to challenge one’s implicit assumptions (Sajid et al., 2021). In comparison, reflexive DM occurs when a person contemplates possible courses of action to resolve what may be feasible at a certain moment in a particular situation (Ryan et al., 2021). The best time to use either of the two DM types depends on the nature of the decision and time constraints. For instance, reflective DM can be applied to deliberate on one’s personal values, whereas reflexive DM is practical if an individual needs to make a prompt conclusion (Ryan et al., 2021; Sajid et al., 2021). For example, Drozek et al. (2021) propose that in stressful circumstances, LE officers are likely to rely on reflexive DM and its automatic forms of mentalizing due to the influence of threat and anxiety. Notably, some researchers argue that reflexivity represents a deeper level of and is a consequence of reflection (Sajid et al., 2021). Therefore, despite being employed in distinct conditions, reflective and reflexive DM are interconnected.

Conclusion

To summarize, critical thinking techniques of using intellectual standards and checking for fallacies assist in examining information and making better decisions based on the analysis. ISs provide managers with questions that explore the nature of a discussion and suggest ways toward a fairer judgment. On the other hand, knowledge about fallacies in reasoning can aid in determining arguments that are illogical. In addition, CT is connected to reflective and reflexive DM, but the application of each type depends on what needs to be resolved in specific conditions. Overall, critical thinking is a crucial skill, especially for those with the power to enforce the law, due to helping make appropriate and reasonable decisions.

References

Burgess, J. P., & Kloza, D. (Eds.). (2021). Border control and new technologies: Addressing integrated impact assessment. Academic and Scientific Publishers.

Cortright, C. E., McCann, W., Willits, D., Hemmens, C., & Stohr, M. K. (2020). An analysis of state statutes regarding the role of law enforcement. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 31(1), 103-132. Web.

Davarpanah, N., Izadpanah, S., & Fasih, P. (2021). The relationship between critical thinking, frequency, informal fallacy and evidence in argumentative writing. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literatures, 13(2), 303-319. Web.

Drozek, R. P., Bateman, A. W., Henry, J. T., Connery, H. S., Smith, G. W., & Tester, R. D. (2021). Single-session mentalization-based treatment group for law enforcement officers. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 71(3), 441-470. Web.

Masys, A. J. (Ed.). (2022). Handbook of security science. Springer.

Ryan, M., Khosronejad, M., Barton, G., Kervin, L., & Myhill, D. (2021). A reflexive approach to teaching writing: Enablements and constraints in primary school classrooms. Written Communication, 38(3), 417-446. Web.

Sajid, S. M., Baikady, R., Cheng, S. L., & Sakaguchi, H. (Eds.). (2021). The Palgrave handbook of global social work education. Palgrave Macmillan.

Thomas, J. J., & Fujimura, C. K. (2022). Developing cross-cultural competence for leaders: A guide. Routledge.

Click Here To Order Now!

The Importance of Critical Thinking

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)