(Student’s Full Name)
Question: What does it mean to think critically about the world today? To what extent is such critical thought an important guide for action?
Critical Response to Maggi Nelson’s “Great to Watch,” Karen Armstrong’s “Homo Religiosus” and Karen Ho’s “Biographies of Hegemony”
“[The ultimate] could not be accessed by rational, discursive but required a careful cultivated state of mind(Armstrong 18)”
The above quotation represents the viewpoint of one academic as it pertains to critical thinking. However, as one read and analyzes the canon of literature available on the subject, one will discover that there are varying opinions related to the task of critical thought in today’s world. Additionally, there are scholars who argue about the necessity of action as a component to critical thought. In Maggi Nelson’s “Great to Watch,” the writer discusses the importance of deep, contemplative thought, removed from action, during the critical thinking process, especially when watching images in the media. On the other hand, Karen Armstrong’s “Homo Religiosus” places more emphasis on the action component of critical thinking in order to make the task of critical thinking more meaningful, especially as it relates to the topic of religion and spirituality. However, Karen Ho’s “Biographies of Hegemony,” Ho relies on both deep, contemplative thought and performing a participatory role in the recruitment process, initiated by leading investment banks at her university to determine the strategy used by Wall Street to convince Ivy League students change their initial career choice to pursue a career in investment banking. Nonetheless, a careful reading and assessment of the writings of Nelson, Armstrong, and Ho it can be argued that critical thinking in the world means to take a step back and carefully analyze a situation without and/or despite distracting interferences. Furthermore, when necessary, a component of action is important to make this critical thought meaningful.
In Nelson’s essay, it is implied that critical thought is intended to uncover injustices by allowing one to avoid the two extremes that are depicted in the media. It appears as if this rejection of the two extremes has led Nelson to question the public’s obsession with placing harm on other persons. In addition, the academic challenges the media’s attempt at deliberately placing individuals in positions of shameful situations. Nelson’s questioning of the manner in which the media appears to uncover the injustices of a media that fails to desensitize the public to gore and violence. The critical analysis of the manner in which the media depicts images permits the scholar to argue against the “‘logic of exposure’” that put forward the notion that continued exposure to gore and violence will put an stop the vicious cycle of doing wrong (qtd. in Nelson 301). Furthermore, Nelson articulates the point that it would worsen the state of paranoia; thereby, causing one to think she cannot be removed from the state of paranoia. The scholar supports the idea that an individual examines an image depicted by the media by simply allowing herself to ruminate while she has her environment mentally “surveyed” (Ho 174).This idea definitely goes against the notion that one needs to be “practical” and active while engaged in the task of critical thinking (Armstrong 16).
On the other hand, Karen Ho appears to connect the critical thinking with the component of action. For instance, Ho describes her experience of both “observing and participating in the recruitment process” that was facilitated by the leading investment banks at Princeton University (173). In addition, the writer explains how she had to endure the various recruitment meetings. However, as mentioned previously, the writer still stuck to her role as an impartial observer joined as she mainly stayed out of the way of the other students who wanted to get the attention of the other investment bankers. Ho noticed that the investment bankers who were present at the first meeting that she had attended were encircled by undergraduates. Nevertheless, the academic was determined to be an impartial observer by remaining behind the speaker. In doing so, Ho refused to have any personal interaction with the investment bankers at the meeting. This action on the part of Ho aligns itself with the recommendation of Nelson who advises that in the task of critical thinking one needs to be “‘standing back and thinking’” (qtd. in Nelson 307). On the other hand, this contradicts Armstrong’s argument that the task of critical thinking is not a “set of doctrine” but “hard, disciplined work” (18). The scholar’s deliberate decision to remain an impartial observer while engaging in the recruitment process was influenced by the fact that she wanted to comprehend the thinking behind the recruitment process, which initiated by the investment banks on Wall Street. While at these recruitment meetings, Ho discovers that the investment bankers recruiting students from Ivy League universities, such as Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and Stanford, to be inculcated with a set of values that allow them to have an elitist outlook. For instance, Ho explains how a Harvard graduate understands that significance of being the most excellent and accomplished. Additionally, a Harvard graduate is also aware that the emphasis on being the most excellent gives the investment banks at Wall Street the opportunity to be placed in advantageous position compared to their competitors. The recruiters are quite effective at inculcating an elitist mindset in the students when they give Ivy League students the opportunity to experience the luxurious lifestyle of an investment banker. Ho quotes from the Daily Princetonian that mentions that recruiters allow Ivy League stay at the most expensive hotels and party at the most exclusive locations. Ho argues that when investment bank recruiters continue to hire Ivy League graduates then these bankers are allowing Wall Street to construct and maintain the hegemony located there.
Like Ho, Karen Armstrong, believes that action needs to be an essential component of critical thinking. Armstrong explains that a belief system is more than just “theoretical speculation” (16). Furthermore, Armstrong uses Buddhism as an example to highlight the point that critical thinking requires one to be engaged in a form of action. The writer explains that nirvana, an important concept in Buddhism, was achieved as a result of a lifestyle that embodies the principles of the doctrines connected with this concept. In other words, an individual has to engage in the act of living in order to experience the true benefits of critical thinking. This idea appears to align itself with the thinking of Karen Ho who decided to both “observe and participate in the recruiting process” (Ho 173). On the other hand, the ideas expressed by Armstrong appear to contradict Nelson’s who values the act of “rumination” (Nelson 307).
On the other hand, there is value in resisting the urge of being forced into action without thinking first. Nelson, using the example of an audio-visual artwork, I-Be Area, explains how well–placed distractions can “make an intense demand” on one’s focus (310). The scholar explains that the images in I-Be Area remain too well executed to come across as being scattered or disorganized. Nelson noted that it demands intense focus to mentally track all of the scenes all throughout its presentation. It can be argued that the creature of the audiovisual artwork is forcing the individual to think and to be placed in a state of contemplation. This audio-visual artwork is intended to place the attentive viewer in the very moment and does not allow him to be focused on the past or future. Therefore, it can be said that Nelson is positing that the most essential task of critical thinking is to allow one to be aware of the present through deep contemplation and attentiveness. Conversely, this argument tends to contrast itself with the one put forward by Armstrong who argues that critical thinking should be removed from a “practical regimen” (Armstrong 16). On the other hand, Nelson’s argument appears to be supported by Ho, who engaged herself in the recruitment process by being “[d]etermined to join” the undergraduates who wanted to be employed by the leading investment banks (Ho 174). Nevertheless, Ho also appears to oppose the argument presented by Nelson by passively surveying or observing what was taking place around her as she attempted to make a critical decision regarding being employed by an investment bank .
In conclusion, based on an assessment of the writings of Nelson, Ho, and Armstrong it can be argued that although the most important aspect of critical thinking is deep contemplation, the action component is still important in order to make critical thinking meaningful (Nelson 307). When an individual is placed in a position of attentiveness then he will most likely think critically about any message that is being conveyed within or outside of the media. When a person’s mind is attentive then she will be more likely to make an informed and fair assessment of the messages that he is exposed to on an ongoing basis. When a person is disciplined in such a manner then she is most likely to think critically irrespective of being placed in an environment filled with distractions. On the other hand, action is relevant in order to make theoretical concepts that have been figured out through the process of contemplation more practical and, hence, more advantageous to the individual. Additionally, the action component of critical thinking enables a person to be an unbiased or impartial observer as he operates as an insider to determine the validity of an argument or message.
Works Cited
Armstrong, Karen. “Homo Religiosus.” PDF file.
Ho, Karen. “Biography of Hegemonies.” PDF file.
Nelson, Maggie. “Great to Watch.” PDF file.
