Ethics and Culture

Ethics and Culture is a blog by Andrew  J. Spencer.  (@SpenceSpencer01)

  • Blog
  • About
  • External Publications
  • Search

How to Think - A Review

August 14, 2018 by Andrew Spencer in Book Review, Ethics

It is an understatement to argue that our nation and, indeed, the world is significantly divided. This is not a new phenomenon, really, though the nature of the division is somewhat different. Anyone who lived through the social polarizations of the Vietnam era in the US is likely to recognize some similar patterns of division, especially in the apparently significant division of thought between younger and older generations.

download (3).jpg

However, as Neil Postman shows in his classic volume, Entertaining Ourselves to Death, our culture has cultivated an alternative epistemology by producing and consuming media that shape us in ways that tend to undermine our ability to sustain cogent thought for extended periods of time. My review of that book left more questions than answers about how to overcome this seismic shift in the way we know.

In his book, How to Think: A Survival Guide for a World at Odds, Alan Jacobs actively tackles that challenge, offering an approach to thinking that promises to begin to unravel the tangled know to social dissonance.

Summary

After outlining the problem and its significance in the introduction to his book, Jacobs proceeds to offer some helpful considerations of the nature of thinking and how to do it better. For example, he begins by arguing that thinking must be done in community. Despite the intellectual isolation that often gets attributed to Descartes––I think, therefore I am––Jacobs shows that solitary thinking, divorced from the community, results in antisocial rationalities that often lead to internal conflicts within someone’s vision of the world. Thinking together helps form people for community and sharpen thinking to prevent rational inconsistencies.

Part of thinking together, as Jacobs notes, is ensuring we come to an understanding of the position of others before we respond. Much of our division is the result of people actively misrepresenting their intellectual opponent’s position. This is enabled by our contemporary social climate because there is a prevalence of repulsion to outgroups, whose status of being gross justifies people’s ignorance of their position. For example, many academics (by their own writing) actively despise orthodox Christians and the feeling is reciprocated in many cases, not least because of a regular pattern of condescension and abuse. Those who think will have to overcome our tribalism and seek to understand the position of humans with whom we disagree.

Add to the social dynamic the confusion of communication forums and you have a recipe for incomprehensibility. For example, there are few forms of communication that have a defined audience. The internet makes it possible for someone’s offhand comment or argument shaped for a particular hearer to be dissected, masticated, and hurled back at the writer with incredible bile. For example, a few years ago, TGC contributor, Gaye Clarke write an article about her transformation regarding her views on race and humanity. The article was, fairly plainly, intended to help white evangelicals remove their racial blinders. The language she used, therefore, did not match the latest terminology and Clarke was trolled, abused, and harassed by activists who find her terms repugnant. The article was removed, the woman defamed, and the prejudices of Clarke’s intended audience against “Social Justice Warriors” was confirmed. The conversation has no defined borders. Similarly, the “Sea Lion” phenomena, is when someone overhears (literally or on the internet) a comment not intended for them and persistently harasses the participants in the conversation demanding a response. The technique does much to further division and little to aid communication.

Division is augmented and fertilized by attempts to change and control vocabulary. The standard terminology from five years ago is this year’s hate speech. Or, certain terminology is considered to be permitted only to people within a special demographic. The point is rarely to further human knowledge, but more often to create a power dynamic that disadvantages someone from an out group. For example, the term social justice arose from Roman Catholic literature, but has since been coopted to imply a whole host of anti-human policies. Likewise, the political left is getting increasingly belligerent in their insistence that the only “pro-life” position is full socialism. Jacobs show that words matter, how we use them is important, and that thinking people have to sometimes get beyond delimiting terminology to actually examine differing the support for other positions.

Another critical aspect of Jacobs’ treatise is his undermining the idea that an “open mind” is the ideal state for thinking individuals. While he spends multiple chapters encouraging people to carefully consider other positions and to active reevaluate their own, he is also clear in arguing the point in seeing is not to go on seeing through things, but to actually see some things clearly. Channeling Chesterton, Jacobs argues that the only purpose of an open mind is to close on something solid, like a mouth. So, being a person that thinks does not mean being an ideological drifter.

Finally, How to Think is encouraging, even after all the work Jacobs recommends, because it shows that being a thinking person is well worth the effort. Becoming better thinkers is the only way we are going to get out of the mess we are in.

Conclusion

How to Think is a worthwhile book. It is relatively short, concise, but very important. Although I came into the book agreeing with Jacobs—especially about the importance of thinking—there were multiple times where his examples stepped on my toes and made me reconsider the way I argue and respond to arguments.

For those who want to reach others—to really engage and persuade—this is the sort of volume that can help someone break through barriers and, perhaps, lead even hostile voices on the opposite side of the issue change their minds. Or, at worst, even if it doesn’t help us persuade, it can help us understand and therefore reduce the frustration with our ongoing ideological deadlock.

How to Think: A Survival Guide for a World at Odds
By Alan Jacobs
Buy on Amazon
Featured
Yes, Jesus Was Nailed to the Cross. It Matters.
Apr 15, 2025
Yes, Jesus Was Nailed to the Cross. It Matters.
Apr 15, 2025

There’s no reason to doubt that Jesus was nailed to the cross. Ultimately, I trust what Scripture says about Jesus’s crucifixion because I also trust what it says about his resurrection. And that’s what we should be celebrating this week.

Apr 15, 2025
Reading Your Bible is a Battle
Nov 11, 2024
Reading Your Bible is a Battle
Nov 11, 2024

Reading your Bible is a battle. There’s a reason why Paul lists Scripture as the sword of the Spirit in his discussion of the armor of God (Eph. 6:17). More even than that, Scripture reveals God’s character and is, thus, central to worshiping well (Psalm 119). That’s why reading the Bible is a battle.

Nov 11, 2024
God's Grandeur On Display
Oct 15, 2024
God's Grandeur On Display
Oct 15, 2024

God of All Things thus deepens our experience of the world as we study and live. Its short chapters and engaging prose are suitable for a wide audience. The many connections with real, physical object lessons have deepened my appreciation of God’s efforts to ensure that the message of his greatness is available for all.

Oct 15, 2024
Is Subtlety in Children's Lit Possible? A Review of "Impossible Creatures"
Oct 8, 2024
Is Subtlety in Children's Lit Possible? A Review of "Impossible Creatures"
Oct 8, 2024

As stories go, it’s reasonably entertaining. It’s no wonder this book is popular—it hits all the key notes of our zeitgeist. Climate anxiety, empowerment of children, wealthy people are evil, and wonder at the world.

Oct 8, 2024
Worth Reading - 10/4/24
Oct 4, 2024
Worth Reading - 10/4/24
Oct 4, 2024

Some links worth reading this week: 1. Philip Jenkins claims that empires influence religions; 2. Why we probably need less news; 3. Many elite college students have never read a book; 4. The value of the five-paragraph essay in an world with generative AI; 5. A podcast about youth sports, the family, and the future of the earth.

Oct 4, 2024
Back to the Future: The Resurgence of Ancient Cultural Trends
Oct 1, 2024
Back to the Future: The Resurgence of Ancient Cultural Trends
Oct 1, 2024

Full Circle reminds us of the continuity of human culture and that there is nothing new under the sun. As a result, it’s a helpful source for understanding the times so we can make the best use of our time in these evil days.

Oct 1, 2024
lewis book cover.jpg
Sep 20, 2024
Worth Reading - 9/20/24
Sep 20, 2024

Some links worth reading this week: 1. The need for Protestant ethicists; 2. Is it ok to lie to "own the libs?"; 3. We need more historical nuance; 4. An account of rejecting personal autonomy; 5. An interview about metamodernism.

Sep 20, 2024
Don't Subscribe to Church. Belong to Church.
Sep 17, 2024
Don't Subscribe to Church. Belong to Church.
Sep 17, 2024

“Online church” is a temporary patch on a leaky roof. It can get someone through a rainy season, but it was never meant to last for decades. We should never try to argue that watching a livestream is a worthy substitute for church attendance. To do so is to reduce the church to something we subscribe to rather than a community we belong to.

Sep 17, 2024
Worth Reading - 9/13/24
Sep 13, 2024
Worth Reading - 9/13/24
Sep 13, 2024

Some links worth following this week: 1. Patrick Miller argues against school-provided screens; 2. Alan Jacobs thinks about the pursuit of the enchantment in the world; 3. Matthew Arbo makes a case for more Protestant theological ethicists; 4. An engaging discussion of Robert Caro's biography of Robert Moses; 5. Brett McCracken reviews a forthcoming documentary that riffs on Bowling Alone; 6. An interview with James Davison Hunter.

Sep 13, 2024
What Is it Good For?
Sep 10, 2024
What Is it Good For?
Sep 10, 2024

As we navigate thousands of decisions about consumer goods, entertainment, and even volunteer opportunities, we would all benefit from spending a bit more time to ask whether what we are considering fulfills the main purpose of life: to glorify God and enjoy him forever.

Sep 10, 2024
August 14, 2018 /Andrew Spencer
Review, Alan Jacobs, Critical Thinking, Argumentation, Logic, Culture, Cultural Engagement
Book Review, Ethics
  • Newer
  • Older

Powered by Squarespace