When Everyone Is Thinking Alike, No One Is Thinking
To approach a very complicated matter in a very direct manner, I feel the concept of critical thinking is an outlook for the thinking differences amongst people. The idea, “When everyone is thinking alike, no one is thinking” clearly proposes the need for critical thinking in people. There are many outlooks proposed by ideologists and leaders in the past regarding the diversity in thoughts and how it led to reconstruction of humanity and evolved into our current state of multiculturalism.
Although we pride ourselves on being at the other side of the fence, broader mind and advance brains, we are still trapped within the confinements of conventionalism and the limitations of rules binding us towards a certain sets of instructions to be followed when analysing and processing new concepts and thoughts. This so called modern world still perceives difference as contentious behaviour, negative impact and even destructive. Therefore the question brought to mind still remains, do we use critical thinking?
We often believe in identifying great minds but think about our history and be honest, haven’t we shown contempt for those whom think differently. Again and again, the human race has only glorifies martyrs for no one listens to those willing and alive afraid of the revolution and consequences of the difference in the thinking. Our disdain towards ‘new’ ideas is perhaps how we conformed to be the modernized versions of the cavemen. Can’t say we have reached far off from the start of evolution now, can we. To be honest, we can’t say that great minds thought alike.
No, for the greatest thinkers throughout history didn’t offer the same ideas. Nope. They offered different viewpoints. Take Columbus for instance, his thought of the “round world” when others were 110% certain that it was square and Galileo’s conclusions that the earth revolves around the sun instead of vice/versa we not same thoughts but they were in reference to a similar idea pertaining the advancement of mankind. We earthlings didn’t like being told that we weren’t the centre of the universe, so instead of being sent on a voyage to fall off the edge of the earth, Galileo was sent to his room for a very long time.
And the voices that have started movements, led scientific breakthroughs and developed technological advancements were small at first. But they sure had big ideas that gathered momentum. Mahatma Gandhi, the man who created the notion of ahimsa, an ideology to fight freedom not through mass weaponry but through non-violence. Rosa Parks didn’t follow unjust seating charts and inspired the civil rights movement. And JFK, with no assurance whatsoever, proclaimed we’d land on the moon within the decade and we made it in the nick of time. Look at conventional wisdom, and how much has been rendered wholly unwise.
Take the doctor who posited the unthinkable that germs could be spread between patients by doctors who did not properly wash their hands. The other doctors? They laughed and mocked him. But he was right and, to this very day, millions of hospital infections still occur each year due to the very basic problem of poor hand hygiene. So why, when history proves us wrong, time and time and time yet again! Do we place more value and more of our time on BIG voices rather than small? Moreover, why, when people question popular opinion do we label them contrarian or cynical, instead of opening our minds to different views?
History proves, it’s more likely that the voices that may seem small or “fringe” will change the world, start new trends and better the profession rather than those booming voices echoing their ideas to emanate faint reason. Critical in thinking calls for innovation in thoughts and it can only be truly cultivated when we break our barriers of being what we have been and march forward to be what we can be. Our right for voicing thoughts has always been supressed and we have always been thought never to question what is, but take a moment and ponder on this; If we had never questioned what is, could we be who we are?