In this post, I am going to examine five kinds of thinking
that I believe people engage in. I’d love to hear some of your thoughts on how
this might be expanded, applied, or even corrected!
1. No
thinking.
This is what
happens when people simply repeat things, like campaign slogans, one-liners,
and other things. People aren’t always
revealing a lack of thinking when they engage in such things, but they
frequently are. It sounds good, so they repeat it, so they can move on. This is
dangerous for the church, for it opens the door to cults and cult-like
movements that can be unbiblical.
2. Simplistic
thinking.
This occurs often
at the “one-liner” level. The person who engages in simplistic thinking often
approaches an issue and is willing to engage with it, but only as far and as
quickly as it takes to espouse a position. This is not always (or even usually)
done maliciously. An example is found in politics, when Democrats accuse
Republicans of lacking education (as a catch-all explanation; as an alternative
see “evil”), or when Republicans accuse Democrats of wanting to control your
every move (again, as a catch-all). Simplistic thinking can be harmful since,
on the “defensive” side, it easily lends itself to misrepresentation of one’s
opponents, and on the “offensive” side, it reflects very little contemplation
of an issue (e.g., “Something bad happened to you; therefore, you must be in
sin!”).
3. Confirmatory
thinking.
This goes beyond
simplistic thinking, but perhaps not by much. It allows the person to think
just so far as it makes her position stronger, and no farther. It’s a lot like
confirmation bias in this respect. It’s damaging to the church at large since
it allows believers to stay within their tradition, whether or not that
tradition is even remotely correct. Questions are answered only as far as it
takes to confirm the pre-conceived idea. It’s not wrong to investigate an issue
and find out you were right the whole time, or even to defend what you believe
to be biblical truth. However, it is wrong to short-change the issue by
refusing to entertain contrary objections or evidences.
4. Interactive
thinking.
This is a decent
level of thinking. It moves beyond initial answers to interact with objections,
answers, and counter-answers. It weighs the arguments and evidences to see what
the best answer might be. From a Christian perspective, it measures things
against the biblical record. If what is at stake is a matter of biblical
interpretation, interactive thinking seeks to resolve this from a wide variety
of sources, arguments, and evidences.
5. Exploratory
thinking.
Not everyone is
required to engage in exploratory thinking. This is the level that not only
engages scholarship but also uses it to stimulate new ideas. These new ideas
need not come at the expense of old ones; in fact, these new ideas just can be
new ways to arrive at old conclusions. In politics, exploratory thinking can be
applied to help solve governmental issues and meet societal needs. In
Christianity, exploratory thinking can run from theology to culture to every
area of life in solving problems, raising new questions, and answering old
ones. It’s a very exciting area indeed!
So, do you have anything to add? What do you think about
these levels? Tell me in the comments below!