In today’s world, it is quite common to be told that you should “think for yourself.” It is funny, then, that you usually hear this sort of encouragement when somebody is trying to tell you what to think. News channels claim to give “just the facts” before letting “you decide.” Politicians implore us not to listen to their opponents’ propaganda, but to “think for ourselves” and vote for them. Advertisers flatter the choosy customers who “know what they want” while informing them as to what they want.
It is not surprising, then, that we rarely hear encouragement to think carefully, think clearly or to think deeply. Of course, this would imply that thinking is something that could be careless, murky, or shallow; that is, that there is a difference between good and bad thinking, or at least between better and worse thinking. Now, there are times when the sentiment or idea expressed by the phrase “think for yourself” and the like (e.g. “free your mind”) would seem to imply that there is no such difference; or for instance that the only difference between good and bad thinking is just whether it is “free” and “for yourself” or not. But if you are not thinking “for yourself,” then you must be thinking for someone else. If you are letting someone else think for you, then you are simply not thinking at all, or you are thinking for yourself that you should think whatever that person thinks you should think. Likewise, if you are thinking for someone else, then you are thinking for yourself what you think that person should think. In any case, therefore, it seems that, so long as you are thinking at all, you are “thinking for yourself” in any literal sense of the phrase.
But perhaps when people tell you to “think for yourself” they really just mean to advise you not to depend on the advice of others. In this case, if you were to depend on their advice, you should not depend on their advice. Rather, you should think for yourself about whether or not to depend on others’ advice (but not, of course, because they advised you to…). One step in this direction might be to compare thinking to other activities with respect to this well-worn advice. For example, if someone advised you to repair your car’s engine or brakes by yourself, would that be good advice? That depends on your skill and experience at automobile repair, and what your actual goal is under the circumstances. Let’s assume your goal is to get your car running and in a road safe condition. Then, if you are a skilled mechanic, you may save a good deal of money and gain the peace of mind knowing the job was done well if you do the job yourself. Or, if you are training to be a mechanic, the problem is within your capability to handle, and you could gain valuable experience by doing it yourself, then it might be a good idea to get your hands dirty. But, if you have little or no knowledge of automobile repair, or lack the proper tools, then it would be unwise to attempt the repair yourself. You would be better off seeking the help and advice of an expert.
Likewise, in the case of most other activities, it seems that it is not always a good idea to try to do it yourself without seeking the advice or assistance of others. It is usually not advised to defend yourself in court without legal representation, and even professional lawyers seek legal assistance in most cases. Under normal circumstances, you would not want to treat yourself for an illness without consulting a doctor. Nor would you want to invest a large amount of money without consulting a financial advisor, and professional bankers themselves are constantly tuning in to the opinions of others via sources like the Wall Street Journal.
So, is there a significant difference between thinking and other kinds of activities that would explain why it is that, though in most of the other cases you would only attempt them all by yourself under special circumstances, it should always be advisable to do so when thinking? Well, the first thing we should notice is that all these other activities essentially involve thinking. Indeed, all intelligent activity starts with thinking. If you try to make a list of activities that do not involve thinking at all, you will find yourself including such things as blinking your eyes, scratching your nose, and belching. It is questionable whether such things even count as activities. On the other hand, we do hear of people performing quite brave and noble acts of heroism “without thinking,” as when someone sees a child drowning and immediately jumps into action to save them without considering the danger. You may have done such a deed yourself. Conversely, many of the less admirable deeds that we later regret are also remembered as done “without thinking.” Perhaps such deeds (whether good or bad) were really the result of a “split-second decision” where little or very fast thinking was involved. Or, perhaps no thinking was involved at all, and it was purely instinct and “second nature,” as we say. These kinds of deeds, which are done with little or no thought involved, have usually been taken by self-reflective people as significant in revealing important features of one’s nature or character, precisely because so little thought is involved in carrying them out. The self-reflection required to notice these things, however, involves a great deal of careful thinking.
So it seems that almost any real activity that is not a natural result of our character, rather from developed habits (good or bad) or simply inborn human nature, involves thinking. Usually, the more novel or foreign to our natural habits the activity, the greater the amount of thinking that is required to perform it. When we begin to learn some new skill, like riding a bike, driving a car, or speaking a new language for example, it requires a great deal of thinking each step of the way in order to do it well. It is true that as we improve in the skill, we are able to perform the activity more easily, smoothly, and naturally without thinking it through so carefully each time. But nobody would advise driving your car or speaking without thinking at all, as doing so is likely to land you in deep trouble.
So thinking, it seems, is unique among most other activities in that it is an activity that is intimately connected to and required for performing almost any other activity well. And since thinking is intimately involved in the performance of any other activity – especially in learning any new thing – it follows that doing anything well requires the ability to think well. Our thinking skills, therefore, play a central role in any other skills we might acquire, or require, in our lives.
More to the point, a skill in and of itself is not necessarily a good thing. Much depends on how we decide to use it. On a global, sociological level, recent history has shown that our collective technological skills have become a double-edged sword, perhaps causing as many problems as they have solved, when we consider the destructive power of modern weaponry, the growing environmental crisis, and other threats to public health and safety related to the ways we have decided to use these skills. On a personal level we can think of many skills which, if used unwisely, can be more of a curse than a blessing. A person may master a martial art, but with a bad temper he might end up wishing he never had such skills. We read about criminal masterminds, many of whom are skilled businessmen would have earned a very impressive living through honest means, and wonder what went wrong.
The key factor in all this lies in making decisions about how to use our skills, and for which purposes. Decision-making, in its turn, is one activity that always requires thinking. In fact, you might say that thinking is making decisions – decisions about what to believe, what to do, what to value, how to prioritize values, and even whether or not you are in a favorable enough position to make a decision about something in a given time and situation.