Importance Of Critical Thinking In Decision Making

Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning

Discuss about the Critical Thinking And Managerial Decision-Making.

Critical thinking is a purposive method of advancing ones thoughts beyond the normal mode of thinking (Kallet and Kallet 2014). I learned that I should arrive at a decision after accessing all relevant ideologies concerning the concept at hand. A close study of the problem will enable me to have exposure on the phenomenon and establish consequences that would arise by handling it differently. In the event of adopting an automatic thinking, I won’t arrive at a correct decision and may even take a longer time formulating solutions, which may turn to be out of context.

Week 1

The study of Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning informed me on application of basic logic in Critical thinking whereby the solution to my argument should be supported by a predicate of the conclusion as well as its subject (Goel, Gold, Kapur and Houle 1997). For instance; Green plants need sunlight for photosynthesis, sunflower is a green plant, sunflower needs sunlight for photosynthesis. I will arrive at a conclusion that a sunflower plant will require sunlight for photosynthesis based on the precept that it is a green plant. The above example is deductive method of reasoning in that I began with a premise and ended with a conclusion. On the other hand, inductive method would involve moving from a specific into a more generalized solution. E.g. Since a sunflower needs sunlight for photosynthesis and it is a green plan, it follows that all green plants need sunlight for photosynthesis.

A study on different ideas of Kuhn and Popper postulate that Kuhn believes in science following a pattern or a conceptual framework while the latter advocates for theory to guide thinking while searching for truths rather than it being dominant (Parusniková 2005, p.222). The ideas of Kuhn and Popper helped me advocate for following of facts to arrive at decisions, which are reliable rather than making personal judgments. Personal judgment may be sentimental or biased thus ineffective realization.

Week 2

It dawned on me that automatic thinking is good to some extent but it limits the content of the solution arrived at. On the other hand, critical thinking conducted within a designed framework is expected to arrive at conclusions free from bias and distortions due to consideration of other perspectives (Evans 1989). By studying the Ten Rules of Clarity I was presented with the relevance of acquiring insight on the topic in question for better understanding of what to do, why to do it, what else is needed as well as the vision and goals I look forward to achieve (Pierce 1989). Getting a clear understanding should always be my first step since it will enable me to stay in line. It would also be easy to deal with a topic, which I am familiar with rather than handling one, which I have no clue about.

Kuhn and Popper’s Ideologies

A study of Prospect Theory created in 1979 informed me people’s decision making under risk will be compromised such that they will happen to choose between probabilistic alternatives, which involve risk with the probabilities of the outcomes not known. I discovered that people tend to make decisions in relation to potential value of gains and loses rather than the expected outcome by adopting certain heuristics (Kahneman and Tversky 2013, p.114). A scenario may exist whereby a person spends money gained from compensation of a loss excessively as never before. One will assume to have free money since the compensation may exceed the value of the product lost or destroyed. On the other hand, segregation and integration of gains and losses would blind me to ignore small bit losses compared to a big sudden loss. Therefore, I should treat losses and gains with similar magnitude regardless of their occurrence.

Week 3

A premise involves an assumption regarding that something is true. When I use inductive reasoning to come to conclusions, I should consider; facts, observations, experiences, believes and assumptions (Thagard and Shelley 1997, p.415). These aspects will greatly influence the nature of the conclusion I’m to arrive at in the end. Different people have different assumptions, and the analysis of their comparison will yield better result rather than having to depend on one person as a source. These sources should be reliable as well to ensure credibility of a premise. The observations I make ought to be consistent with each other in addition to my experience.

Triangulating will help me attain confidence results having estimated future expectations of my work in relation to other people’s similar tasks (Cottrell 2017). On the other hand, people do not usually welcome change since they hold no assurance to what the outcome will be. I realized that having an insight on the relevance of a particular change will make me advocate for its benefits. Influence and persuasion will play hand in hand in helping me drive people towards worthy conclusions based on facts that exist about a phenomenon of interest. For instance, I may convince a friend to buy a particular brand of phone though expensive for it meets the specifications that he/she desires.

Week 4

I got to fathom that self-awareness is the attribute of realizing myself more deeply: what makes me who I am and the precepts I uphold thereof (King and Kitchener 1994). I will only become a good leader by understanding my attitude and opinions towards various matters, feelings and emotions on the subject matter, the purpose I desire to meet, my desires, ability to distinguish my strengths from my weaknesses and assessing myself in an accurate manner (Pierce 1989). In accordance to Johari Window, I should be informed of what I know about myself in relation to what others know about me. It was quite an exciting experience to discover that they exists some characteristics that I exhibit according to others yet I have no knowledge of their existence whatsoever. For me to become a good leader there is great need to widen the window, which entails the traits I portray to my knowledge and others.

Ten Rules of Clarity

Self-analysis will help me understand myself by distinguishing the areas I excel at from those which are normally difficult to me (King and Kitchener 1994). The things that I do cherish as well as the kind of people whom I associate with will speak volumes about my character. The attitude that I hold upon myself does mold my self-esteem (Fletcher and Baldry 2000). I came to realize that a good job and several awards will reflect a successful life resulting to a high self-esteem whereby I will feel worthy to myself and to the community at large.

Week 5

I learned that for me to arrive at a decision to innovate, I need to adopt a solution, which is paradigm changing (King and Kitchener 1994). A quality solution will drive me to making a conclusion in context to my task. The solution I chose should be supported by known facts, my observations, experiences, assumptions and beliefs.

I also have to know the essence of abductive thinking, which encompasses identification of a most probable scenario by use of experience and knowledge as my guide (Thagard and Shelley 1997, p.416). By relating a current situation to previous experiences, it becomes easier to handle it since estimation of results is possible. It dawned on me that one could discover impossible results by persistence to ideas, which my brain had deemed to be irrelevant. There is a need for me to distinguish between simple, complicated, complex, chaotic and unclear categories of the concept in context. This will enable me to attend to the task I hold differently and efficiently to arrive at best results.

Week 6

Directors in a firm as well as fellow employees should be informed of the decision I make as it serves the entire organization (Paul and Binker 1990). It would be impossible to make a conclusion without consent of my superiors. All the necessary proceedings need to be followed before making conclusions. Besides that, whatever ideas I hold will require finances for actualizing them thus a requirement of consent from the funding committee.

The evaluation of risks enabled me to distinguish between upside risk and downside risk. Upside risk can be avoided while downward risk is usually unpredictable. It should therefore be my obligation to avoid making decisions which would cause a downward risk and be prepared to deal with occurrences of downward risks.

Week 7

A summary of critical thinking emphasized further on the methods, reasons and relevance of making correct decisions. I realized that there are several forms of decisions, which one requires to make in day-to-day life (Fletcher and Baldry 2000, p.310). People will advise me on my lifestyle decisions, but the ultimate decision remains to be mine. When it comes to an organization, other people’s opinions really matter since this is a collective situation. It beats logic to make a conclusion with no consent from corresponding higher authorities. Every decision I make should be supported by facts (Phillips 1987). I should have the ability to approximate my results in relation to previous outcomes achieved by others before on the same subject matter. Paradigm in itself reflects confidence in expected results of a decision, as I am able to stay tuned to the topic at hand.

Conclusion

Generally, the study of critical thinking equipped me with necessary knowledge to help realize important decisions, which need to be analyzed critically before making conclusions. Assumptions are not always applicable in decision-making. Personal reasoning is usually biased thus for relevant conclusions should be made by reviewing experiences of others on the topic. I might find out that some experiences were not successful thus; adoption of means to avoid repetition of the same is required. By consulting other sources, we gain more exposure as well as new insight on various aspects besides the topic of coverage.

References

Cottrell, S., 2017. Critical thinking skills. Macmillan Education.

Evans, J.S.B., 1989. Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Fletcher, C. and Baldry, C., 2000. A study of individual differences and self?awareness in the context of multi?source feedback. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), pp.303-319.

Goel, V., Gold, B., Kapur, S. and Houle, S., 1997. The seats of reason? An imaging study of deductive and inductive reasoning. NeuroReport, 8(5), pp.1305-1310.

Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., 2013. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. In Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part I (pp. 99-127).

Kallet, M. and Kallet, M., 2014. Think Smarter: Critical thinking to improve problem-solving and decision-making skills. John Wiley & Sons.

King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and Promoting Intellectual Growth and Critical Thinking in Adolescents and Adults. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series and Jossey-Bass Social and Behavioral Science Series. Jossey-Bass, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1310.

Parusniková, Z., 2005. Kuhn versus Popper. Filosofický ?asopis (Philosophical Journal), 2(53), pp.219-241.

Paul, R.W. and Binker, A.J.A., 1990. Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA 94928.

Phillips, D.C., 1987. Philosophy, science and social inquiry: Contemporary methodological controversies in social science and related applied fields of research. Pergamon Press.

Pierce, G., 1989. Critical Thinking in Managerial Decision-Making. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 3(4), pp.9-9.

Thagard, P. and Shelley, C., 1997. Abductive reasoning: Logic, visual thinking, and coherence. In Logic and scientific methods (pp. 413-427). Springer, Dordrecht.