Critical Thinking seems like a pretty good idea, wouldn’t you say? Who among us hasn’t been asked some variation of the following question, typically as a child by a more knowledgeable adult, “Well if so-and-so said to jump off a bridge, too, would you do it? Just because he said so?” That sounds familiar, doesn’t it? At least a little.

But why wouldn’t we also jump off the bridge? Why wouldn’t we just do what we were told? Because our parents and other wise adults were trying to teach us to think before acting–and we hope that the message got through, the lesson was learned, and we learned to critically consider what we were told before offering–

Blind obedience.

Yet Blind obedience is what “so-and-so” would have preferred from us. And that “so-and-so” grew up alongside us, getting jobs as politicians, marketers, influencers…you’re catching on!

“Social proof,” the shared belief that (for example) “jumping off the bridge is good,” can be compelling. Even after we learned to not simply do as others say, we find how much more difficult this is when many others, including people we trust, all seem to agree. Compounding this is having prior beliefs that support this. A common thing we tell ourselves in such moments is some variation of, “I’ve always heard that this is a good thing, everyone says that this is true, etc.” It’s more compelling when close friends agree. The tricky part is that we generally choose close friends who already agree on the major points in life. By default, they are likely to have homogenous views on many topics.

Enter the Echo Chamber. We often choose sources of information that support our preexisting beliefs, prejudices, et al. NLP calls this our existing Map of the World and while it’s not inherently bad, it can filter and bias any new information we receive. If we choose news sources, web sites, podcasts, media pundits, that are skewed in the same way, we further limit our ability to get new, accurate information. The bias filters everything. Though even that could be countered by Critical Thinking skills.

I’ve noticed in the past few years a backlash against teaching Critical Thinking, which, if those lashing out are trying to control you, makes sense. Limit your, ahem, BS Detector, your access to it, your understanding of how to use it, and others may find it easier to con you, BS you, and control you.

Even if you don’t choose to live in Echo Chambers, though, information is exploding all around us. Critical Thinking has gone from being “useful” to a “vital survival skill.” Yes, seriously. The competing echo chambers and propaganda machines surrounding us continually strive to indoctrinate us, influence us, and control us.

We are deluged with data at all times–news, music (which typically offers a story or information of some kind, even if it’s simplistic and inane), TV, social media… And that effect compounds because not only are we being deluged, so is everyone we know. Think: Echo Chamber. Because they parrot back the various information, noise, and opinions to which they’ve been exposed, giving us a distorted idea of truth–the illusion of social proof. Sifting through this deluge is now truly necessary just to move forward. We’ve all seen films in which the brilliant, though mentally disturbed character is overwhelmed by such a deluge. And as we’ve mentioned, everyone you know is watching the same types of films, internalizing a model of how to become overwhelmed, inundated, controlled by media.

Before allowing that last phrase to pull out your Conspiracy Theorist’s badge, hear this: Not all of this information is bad. Much in fact is relevant to our safety, our growth, our ability to operate in our world. We need that. But it’s often hidden in the noise of dissenting opinions, arguments that what we think we need isn’t correct–that someone else knows better. Knows what we should be doing, what we should be buying, how we should be voting, and even how we should be thinking.

Hidden within that programming noise may be actual information. If it’s there, we must find it.

Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) offers a great toolkit to do just that, the Meta Model. The Meta Model takes messages we receive and critically challenges them. Some hold up to such scrutiny, many don’t. And in the space between those points are data which may be partly correct, though distorted.

Imagine a contrarian response to everything you’re told. Seriously–picture someone who challenges everything they hear. It may be annoying at times, but even a broken clock gets it right twice a day. In this case, it’s a useful first step.

Now play with that in your own interactions, if for that one moment where it’s useful.

Sure, if what you’re being told is accurate and useful, you may find no need to argue it further. But in order to figure that out, you must critically challenge that message. And as above, some of those points will prove accurate and useful. Those will pass this scrutiny while others, which don’t hold up to your challenges, don’t.

The Meta Model provides a framework for clarifying and challenging vague or ambiguous language, which in turn can enhance critical thinking skills. Here’s how you can apply the Meta Model to improve critical thinking: 

Challenge Generalizations

When encountering vague statements or generalizations, ask for specific examples or evidence to support the claim. For instance, instead of accepting a statement like “Everyone knows that,” you might ask, “Who specifically is included in ‘everyone,’ and what evidence supports this claim?” Yes, you’re likely to get resistance to this request, as the person has either intentionally used a generalization to mislead you or had simply gained that “information” from their own echo chamber. You don’t want to simply buy into it.

Clarify Deletions

If information seems to be missing or omitted, seek clarification by asking for specifics. For example, if someone says, “It’s always like this,” you might ask, “What specifically happened in this situation, and are there any exceptions?” The same pushback may happen here, and for the same reasons. But you can anticipate that and be prepared to insist. If the message doesn’t hold up to your critical thinking, it doesn’t deserve to influence you.

Question Presuppositions

Identify underlying assumptions or presuppositions in statements and challenge them by asking for evidence or alternative perspectives. For instance, if someone says, “You’ll never succeed,” you might ask, “What evidence supports this belief, and what alternative outcomes are possible?” You may begin to notice patterns to the responses you get. If someone isn’t intentionally using these hypnotic language devices to influence you, they themselves were programmed to repeat them. Their echo chamber has reinforced the messages so they first, don’t question them, and two, repeat them. This provides others around them with that illusion of social proof mentioned above.

Challenge Modal Operators

Modal operators express necessity or possibility, such as “can,” “should,” “must,” or “can’t.” Challenge these modal operators by exploring alternative options or perspectives. For example, if someone says, “You must do this,” you might ask, “According to whom, and what other options are available, what would happen if I didn’t?” 

By applying the Meta Model to clarify and challenge language, you can enhance critical thinking skills, promote deeper understanding, and make more informed decisions based on evidence and logic. And logic is the hallmark of the individual who thinks for ourselves as opposed to groupthink and programming, the hallmark of “sheeple.” Keep that BS Detector in tune so you’ll recognize when others are trying to control you. Or make you a tool in their own influence campaign.

Copyright © 2024 Chris Gingolph