A summary of guidelines for clear thinking (1 of 4):

◦ Get to the root of the question you are trying to answer, and the specific purpose of your thinking;
◦ Suspend judgment;
◦ Stick to the point;
◦ Seek structure, though be aware of the constraints a given structure may impose;
◦ Separate what is relevant from what is not;

A summary of guidelines for clear thinking (2 of 4):

◦ Be clear about premises and assumptions;
◦ Consider the reasonableness of premises and assumptions;
◦ Seek out any missing information that may be important;
◦ Seek out options and possibilities;
◦ Seek out alternative viewpoints;

A summary of guidelines for clear thinking (3 of 4):

◦ Summarize complex ideas;
◦ Consider facts dispassionately;
◦ Judge on merits;
◦ Keep calm and cool;
◦ Listen patiently and tolerantly to other people’s opinions;

A summary of guidelines for clear thinking (4 of 4):

◦ Avoid getting defensive;
◦ Be willing to reconsider in the light of new evidence or argument;
◦ Be persistent in trying to get to the bottom of the issue or issues;
◦ Explain the rationale behind decisions or conclusions reached.

Be sure that your thinking has a purpose. Many of the thoughts we have are more of the nature of idle dreaming rather than being purposeful. Thus if you are thinking about something in order to come to some form of conclusion, ensure that you are asking yourself specific questions, and not vague, indeterminate ones.

Keep focused on the matter in hand. Failure to think clearly about an issue is very often a result of irrelevancies becoming part of the consideration. It is important, when irrelevancies begin to surface, to quickly bring the subject back to the matter in hand. This need to keep focused applies as much when we are thinking to ourselves as when we are interacting with others.

Distinguish relevant from irrelevant facts. There are often many pieces of information around, some of which might be very interesting or provoke an emotional response. However it may not all be relevant to the particular issue under consideration. Being able to differentiate what is and isn’t relevant will help us go a long way towards thinking clearly about an issue.

Look to present or express ideas as clearly and as simply as you can, possibly using illustrations and specific examples. If you have difficulty understanding something then more likely than not it is because it is poorly expressed or described, or because it actually doesn’t make sense.

Be honest about what you do and don’t understand, at least to yourself, and be wary of allowing yourself to be impressed with and accept on faith something you don’t understand. Fear of being seen to be ignorant leaves us exposed to accepting invalid arguments. Thus, if you don’t understand something that is important to you, make the effort to do so.

Look for hard data wherever possible, rather than assumptions or opinions. Ensure the data is itself reliable, preferably coming from multiple but unrelated sources.

Be clear about what you know and what is conjecture based upon what you know. If there is an increase in reports about something, it doesn’t mean that the something is on the increase; only that there are more reports. This may be because there is an increase, or it may be because of changes in the way it is reported.

Sometimes there is simply not enough data to allow any particular conclusions to be drawn. Don’t pretend that there is, if there isn’t. If you are accepting a matter on faith then be honest about it.

Sometimes there is too much data and information and it is difficult to determine what is and isn’t relevant. In order to sort through information we need to identify ways of categorizing or grouping it. There is no single correct way of categorizing information but there are ways that are more useful than others. We need to categorize it and group it up in a way that is relevant to the particular issue at hand. Be aware however that in categorizing you are also constraining the way you think; you can’t help this, it is the price you pay for being able to make sense of the information: nevertheless be willing to adopt or consider other categorizations if they are also useful.

How much detail you need about something, or how accurately you need to know something, should be determined by the matter under consideration. It is counterproductive trying to obtain details or accuracies that are beyond what you need to come to a conclusion about the matter in hand. You should not go seeking further detail or accuracy just because you can.

If the information used in arriving at a conclusion changes, then you may need to re-examine the conclusion.

An important aspect of clear thinking is recognizing assumptions, whether stated or un-stated. Once the assumptions are clearly recognized we can then decide whether or not we accept them. Many arguments are dependent upon assumptions that we don’t even recognize, but if we did, would not accept.

Ensure you understand the meaning of concepts and terms used as part of any thinking you are doing, and if others are involved ensure you have the same meaning as they do with regards any concepts or terms that are important or are differentiators in terms of alternative viewpoints.

It is important to understand what terms mean in the particular context in which they are being used. Terms have many subtleties and potential associations that can differ dependent upon context.

An essential element of effective thinking is not simply being able to think clearly about what is in front of you, but to think clearly about what might have been omitted, or what isn’t there and maybe should have been.

No manner or amount of logic will make up for ignorance. Clear thinking requires good knowledge to ensure that the premises on which arguments are being built are reasonable and appropriate to the matter in hand. Good logic cannot compensate for poor or inappropriate premises.

If you never change your mind, you are not thinking clearly. We do not know everything, and thus we will come across things we didn’t know before. If we are open minded then new information should at least refine and occasionally completely overturn our previously held opinions and beliefs.

Always be willing to listen to arguments that are contrary to your own. You will either learn something new that may modify your existing beliefs, or you may learn to better express and appreciate your existing beliefs.

It is a general truth that anything should be expressed as simply as possible. However simplification should not lead to the loss of what is being expressed. It is easy to simplify if one is willing to lose part of what is expressed. If that part was important then the simplification is counter-productive.

The simpler something is the more likely it is people will believe it and act on the basis of it.

In hypothesis testing we are looking to be able to accept something that is true and reject something that is false. However we could reject something that is true, which is known as making a Type I error, or accept something that is false, a Type II error. These errors are inherent in any hypothesis testing. How tolerant we are to one or other of these errors should be dictated by circumstances.

Our clear thinking can be significantly affected by our mental and physical state. We should avoid making important decisions when tired or stressed or emotionally aroused or under the influence of drugs.

A good understanding of cause and effect relationships is important because it underlies the rules we use to help us understand what is likely to happen in the future if we do or don’t do certain things. Many problems are largely about identifying the cause of a given effect.

Just because B has occurred shortly after A does not mean that A has caused B. It could be just a co-incidence that B has occurred after A. Or it could be that there is something else that has caused both A and B without there being any direct causal link between A and B themselves.

Generally before we have high confidence in a cause and effect relationship we should seek to have some understanding of the underlying phenomenon giving rise to the relationship. However, just because we don’t yet have an explanation that doesn’t mean the relationship doesn’t exist.

For A to be the cause of B, then the occurrence of B should always indicate that A has occurred, and the absence of B should mean that A did not occur. Failure to take this into account is a common cause of poor thinking. Adverts on TV frequently fall foul of this. Some super fit person is shown eating some particular breakfast cereal. However it is almost certainly the case that the person is super fit irrespective of whether or not they eat that particular cereal, and there will be many cases of people who eat the cereal who are not super fit. It is blatantly not true that the breakfast cereal has led to the super fitness.

Many arguments that claim a later event is a consequence of an earlier event show only that the earlier event was a contributory cause of the later event. However they often fall short of showing that the earlier event was both a necessary and sufficient cause of the later event.

It is very common that there are many potential contributory ‘causes’ to a given effect. For example, if a house collapses in a storm, is the cause the storm, poor design of the house, some particular weakness of a given material? In circumstances such as these we should look for what was out of the ordinary. Was the storm more severe than the house could reasonably be expected to have been designed for – what happened to other similar houses in similar circumstances; was there a flaw in the design we would not have expected to have been there – and was not present in other ‘similar’ designs; was there some material used which was outside of the usual specifications for such a material?

When looking for an explanation for something, the cause of an effect, ask ‘why’ did the effect happen. And if you identify a cause, then ask why again; is it itself an effect of some other cause. You should continue to ask yourself why and seek out root causes that are often missed by simply accepting some superficial explanation. Of course you need to stop somewhere, but it will usually become obvious when you have got to a root cause about which you can take effective action.

A common fallacy in thinking is identifying a possible cause and effect relationship and then assuming that this is the only one possible.

In considering hypotheses to explain an event or circumstances, think about absence of evidence, not just the evidence itself. If the hypothesis were true, what should you be seeing that you might not be?

The mistaking of correlated events for causal relationships is a frequent one, both in everyday life and in the scientific community. There have been numerous cases of causal effects being declared based on evidence of correlation only for it later to be found that there was some other cause that gave rise to both or that the correlations were just normal statistical variations with researchers simply having picked on some of the more extreme sampling results.

The link between cause and effect is often of a probabilistic nature. Smoking causes lung cancer, but not everyone who smokes will get lung cancer.

When there are lots of people doing something for which there is a significant element of randomness, then things will go well for some and bad for others as a result of chance. Those for whom luck is on their side will usually believe that they have succeeded because of their own skill. It is very common that financial traders and business leaders are highly rewarded for luck rather than skill.

The gambler who has a string of good luck will believe he is more skillful than others, or he is fated in some way. When his luck changes he will continue to believe in his own skill, but find excuses for his then losses.

We have a tendency for believing that causes and effects resemble each other. Thus we expect big noises to be caused by big things, and a major event to have a major cause. However it is not uncommon for a little thing or what in normal circumstances would be a minor incident to have a major impact – such as in Chaos or Catastrophe Theory.

Superstitions are often a false belief in cause and effect relationships. Thus people believe in lucky charms because they remember incidents where they were lucky in the presence of the lucky charm, but forget incidents when they were not lucky despite being in the presence of the lucky charm or were luck when not having the charm.

Some common clear thinking errors (1 of 2):

◦ Over simplifying, including black and white thinking;
◦ Over generalizing on the basis of small samples;
◦ Comparing apples with oranges;
◦ Ignoring relevant evidence;
◦ Attributing effects to a single cause when there are multiple contributory factors;
◦ Confusing cause and effect;

Some common clear thinking errors (2 of 2):

◦ Hindsight bias;
◦ A tendency to put other people’s behavior down to their personality but our own behavior down to circumstances;
◦ Having negative expectations, or being overly optimistic;
◦ Rationalization;
◦ Failing to think through consequences.

We believe we are more objective and less prone to distorted thinking and external influences that most other people.

The basic principles of Clear Thinking are often not applied, partially as a result of ignorance of what they are, but more so for psychological reasons. Thinking is hard and threatens our ego.

Arrogance and intolerance severely limit many people’s, possibly our own, ability to think clearly.

We are conditioned by our social background and upbringing. Most people fail to recognize or appreciate this and their thinking is seriously constrained and biased as a result. However if we acknowledge and apply the basic principles of Clear Thinking and Common Sense, we can overcome our social conditioning. In particular we should readily recognize that there is nothing inherently superior in our own culture, and that all cultures are simply different, though some may be more successful than others, and some may be more open and attuned to accepting the principles of Clear Thinking.

We are conditioned by our particular experiences. Just as with our social conditioning, we need to acknowledge that our personal experiences are not necessarily typical, and we must keep true to the principles of Clear Thinking and Common Sense.

Egocentric thinking is viewing everything in relation to oneself. It impedes critical thinking because egocentric people are closed minded to the thoughts and ideas of others. Many egocentric people are not aware that they are significantly more self-centered than others. You should always be on the lookout for ideas from others, and you will find your own ideas are often significantly improved through modifications as a result of ideas coming from others.

People do not like being seen to be wrong. As a result they go out of their way to justify their existing beliefs, and this seriously clouds their judgment and prevents clear thinking.

Much of what people think of as reasoning is looking for arguments that justify what they already believe.

People often evaluate the validity of an argument based on whether or not they wish for the conclusion to be true, rather than on whether or not the argument itself stands up in terms of premises and argument structure leading to the conclusion. It is easier for them to make a judgement about the conclusion than it is to follow and assess the validity of the argument.

People are most likely to listen to and accept logical arguments when the subject matter is seemingly complex and they have not firmly made up their minds. Once they have made up their minds their focus then shifts to defending their viewpoint through rationalization.

Seeing a fault as something to be fixed rather than a problem to be overcome limits us. If you think of a fault as a problem to be overcome you may find you don’t need to fix the fault at all, but can find a more effective way of overcoming the problem. Thought of in this way faults sometimes become opportunities in that you find better ways of doing things than you might otherwise have done.

People often simply stick to approaches that they are familiar with rather than think about what might be best in the particular circumstances.

People all too often develop a theory based on just a few facts and then proceed to rationalize further facts against the presumption that the theory is correct.

Being able to explain the origin of a type of behavior does not justify it. Just because someone had a hard up bringing does not justify their becoming a murderer or a thief. There are many people who have had a hard up bringing who have not become a murderer or a thief.

What is perceived to be ‘normal’ in our society or culture is usually specific to our society or culture, and in no sense is it some objective measure of normality. Whether or not society in general, or we as individuals, should try to prohibit or punish behavior that is away from the norm should be dependent upon the damage it could physically do. Generally we should err on the side of tolerance and freedom of thought and action where it doesn’t harm others in a physical sense or in a severe psychological sense.

Future success is often inhibited by our making procedures to formalize what generated a previous success. Circumstances are continually changing and what is necessary for future success is likely to be different to what was necessary for past successes. By all means understand and document what went well and what went badly in the past, but the more you proceduralize it the less flexible it will be. Success often breeds failure.

Don’t believe everything you read. Be particularly wary of information gleaned from the internet. It is not all factually correct. Even if information appears in many different places on the internet, it is possible it is merely the same information from a faulty source which has simply been repeatedly copied.

Just because something can’t be proven to be false this does not mean it is reasonable to believe it is true. However many people justify their belief in absurd ideas on the fact that they cannot be proven to be false. You can’t prove that there are no pixies but this doesn’t mean it is reasonable to believe there are.

Many people use particular personal experiences, or recalled stories, as short cuts to thinking. The very fact of being able to bring to mind a particular memory leads people to overestimate the likelihood of it or similar other events occurring. People often justify their decisions through use of particular examples even though they may be highly unrepresentative.

Our gut reactions can be useful, however they can also mislead. A gut reaction can be our subconscious weighing factors up in a way our conscious mind is unable to do so. However our gut reactions can also be our prejudices overriding our rationale judgments.

Some characteristics of arguments where there is a lack of application of clear thinking principles:

◦ A lack of any structure to addressing the issue, with a scatter gun approach to addressing the different aspects of the issue;
◦ Over simplifications;
◦ Questionable premises being used without justification;
◦ Unsaid assumptions which are critical;
◦ Use of specific rare examples with the implication they are commonplace;
◦ Inclusion of information or considerations which are irrelevant.

Most people think they have good thinking skills. They don’t. And if you do have good thinking skills you will already recognize the need to be continually looking to improve them still further.

Becoming an effective thinker requires the continual questioning of your own thinking and ideas as well as questioning the thinking and ideas of others. This will separate you from the crowd.

Write down your thoughts and arguments. What might seem to make sense in your mind may not do so once written down.

Errors of judgment are often systematic rather than random. They are more often the result of biases which can be avoided than they are the result from any inability to take account of the factors in front of you. If you learn about common fallacies and biases, and watch out for them in your own thinking, you will be able to apply good judgment – as best you can given the circumstances and information available to you – most of the time.

When faced with an argument leading to a conclusion, in order for you to understand the argument it is important you are able to separate the structure of the argument from the content of the argument. If either the structure or the content is faulty then the argument is faulty.

Seek out conflicting and alternative views. Talk to people about your ideas and encourage them to pick out weaknesses. Try to get someone to act as a devil’s advocate, or try to do so yourself. If you disagree with a view be sure you can clearly articulate why. Hidden away in conflicting or alternative views are usually ideas that can improve your own ideas and views, either to modify them or to enable you to articulate more clearly their strengths.

We are at best only vaguely aware of how strongly we are conditioned by our culture. By looking to understand other cultures, and accepting that they are as valid as our own, we learn to be more open-minded.

Improve your vocabulary. Good thinking requires a rich language with plenty of subtlety. The more extensive your vocabulary the greater the potential for your thoughts.

Inconsistency is a sign that something doesn’t line up. It is usually a sign that some of your current assumptions about how things are need refining. Thus if someone you thought of in simplistic black and white terms (he’s a bad person) does something that is ‘out of character’ (something kind), it is more likely to be a sign that your assessment of them is too simplistic (like everyone else, they have good and bad points) rather than some hidden motive that really fits in with your existing assessment (their kindness was really an act of deviousness).

If you want to be right as much as possible, then you have to stop caring about being right in any particular circumstance. It is only by accepting that you might be wrong, and thus listening objectively to arguments for and against, that you will be more likely to be right in the future.

Avoid making judgments whilst listening or gathering information or receiving sensory inputs. There is a time for understanding facts and a time for analyzing the facts to draw conclusions. Don’t mix the two. The longer you can delay judgment the more informed your conclusions will be.

Remember there are multiple viewpoints with respect to most situations. Different people will often have different viewpoints, and other people’s viewpoints will often be just as valid as our own. When someone has a different viewpoint to yourself, try to understand why. If you understand the rationale for them having the opinions they have, you will gain an understanding that may help you to improve your own viewpoint.

Approaching issues with clear thinking is no guarantee you will find satisfactory solutions, but it significantly increases the chances of coming up with the best solutions that are available in the circumstances.

We often don’t notice our biases, and they can be hard to prevent. The best we can do is learn to recognise the circumstances in which mistakes and biases are more likely to occur and try harder to think things through if the consequences are significant.