3 Outcomes of Thinking
Although there is almost nothing as basic as thinking, there are always ways to improve your thinking skills. This is especially important for Christians: you and I are called to read, meditate on, accurately interpret and apply Biblical texts that are often complex. Thinking well takes time and effort, but it is natural to try to short circuit the thinking process by moving too fast. One of my favorite secular authors who writes on how to think better is Edward De Bono. In one of his books I have been slowly working through, he helpfully lays out 3 distinct outcomes of thinking. Knowing which outcome you are seeking will keep you from trying to do all three at once and thereby make your thinking rushed or less clear.
There are many possible outcomes of thinking, but we can simply them into three types of outcome:
Edward De Bono, Teach Your Child How to Think pp 101
- Better map (exploration)
- Pin-pointing needs
- Specific answer
Getting to the desired answer takes time
When you sit down alone or with others to think or study, your ultimate goal is often some specific answer. Whether addressing a theological question or making a family decision, you and I very rarely think for no other purpose than to think. We have problems to solve, answers to discover, arguments to assess, decisions to make. However, when dealing with complicated questions or problems, the desired answer may take a long time to reach. If you spend hours or days thinking carefully through a topic and you haven’t reached a conclusion, is that effort wasted?
De Bono helps us out by giving two other outcomes of thinking beyond simply coming to an answer. Sometimes thinking about a topic gives you a “better map”. This metaphor points to the fact that sometimes you and I need to think about a topic just to understand it better. To make sense of the issues surrounding it. To understand what other people have said about it. By exploring a topic mentally, even if you haven’t come to a conclusion, you should have a better idea of the alternate options (or alternate interpretations in the case of most Bible study) and to simply learn more. Rushing to an answer or conclusion without actually exploring the topic can, in the end, cause you to make a poorly informed decision.
The other outcome of thinking besides getting an answer is “pin-pointing needs”. As you seek to answer complicated questions, oftentimes the process of thinking yields further questions to answer. Additionally, you may find that you don’t actually have the information you need to answer the question at hand. In this way, you can figure out what specific roadblocks exist that hinder you from reaching an answer. The key word here is specific. One the most beneficial outcomes of thinking in my experience is going from a general question or problem to specific, narrowed down information needs or further questions you must answer in order to come to a solution. Complicated and nuanced issues are unlikely to be solved in half an hour of reflection. But, in that time of thinking, you most likely can pin-point a “next step” to take to help answer that question.
Robust thinking leads to robust answers
Why is all this important? You and I live in a time and place where, through social media especially, opinions and propositions are being thrown out at lightning speed. However, the actual difficult problems facing us almost certainly cannot be solved in 280 characters. In our fast-food culture, it can be tempting to want answers now. You can be tempted to say “just tell me what I need to do so I can get started.” Such pragmatism is the enemy of careful thinking and nuanced analysis.
De Bono’s three outcomes of thinking is an excellent counter to the craving for quick, tweetable answers. Instead of focusing on solving a complicated problem as fast as possible, maybe you need to spend some time making a better map. Understanding the factors contributing to the problem. Or perhaps your goal should be to take a large, abstract problem and figure out more concretely what information you need to come to a robust conclusion. Ultimately, the goal is not to simply come out with “an answer”, but to actually have a defense for why that answer is true or why it will work.
Implications for the Christian life
1. Difficult theological questions require longer reflection
Meditating on God’s word uses all three of these thinking outcomes. Some days you might need to spend time simply reading scriptural texts to understand what God actually says. Other days, you might need to go find specific passages and analyze them to see what specific interpretive difficulties you must overcome. And ultimately, at some point you will have to come to a conclusion on what you think the Bible is teaching about a topic or in a specific passage.
However, just because the end goal is to know what God’s word is saying and to live it out does not mean you always reach this goal in the blink of an eye. For difficult passages and theological questions, don’t be afraid to take some time to prayerfully think it through. Be okay with leaving a text saying “I don’t know. I need to think about that more.” Rushing to a conclusion might make you feel better, but you might be missing something that you could have observed if you had taken more time to think or study. As a rule of thumb, the more uncertain a passage or the more viable interpretations of a passage exist, the longer you should take thinking it through.
2. Don’t just give people the answer. Help them think through it Biblically.
Just giving someone “the answer” oftentimes robs that person of actually internalizing the truth. Rather than rushing to give a conclusion, first give them the Biblical texts you need to answer the question. Sketch out a map for them to fill in. Or, if comparing different alternative interpretations, show them where the specific points of disagreement are. You can of course give them your personal conclusion, but by showing them the thought process you used to reach it, you make them better able to think through it themselves.
3. Theological disagreement should be specific with limited “straw manning”
One of the clearest tell-tale signs that someone has not done enough thinking is if you hear them straw manning people they disagree with. There is no logical fallacy easier to commit in our vapid culture than simply straw manning a position you don’t understand to prove your own beliefs that you have not thought through. This is particularly dangerous when theological disagreements occur in the Church.
If you disagree with someone but can’t communicate why you disagree, you probably haven’t filled out a robust map of the issue. If you can’t specifically pinpoint the areas both of agreement and disagreement between positions, you probably don’t actually understand why the disagreement exists. Having an answer, even a dogmatic answer, is not necessarily a sign of good thinking. Rather, being able to robustly explain all sides of a theological disagreement, show where the “sticking points” are, and then demonstrating the truth of your own conclusion are much more likely to demonstrate coherent and careful thought.
Click here to read previous “Book Quote of the Week” posts. If you found this post helpful, share on social media and subscribe below.