Hi Jere,

Thank you for your thoughtful comment, and my apologies for not seeing it before today.

I’m hoping to write something that is accessible enough for anyone to read, and I have a few audiences in mind. I currently see the main audience for book one (which includes this critical thinking chapter) as people concerned about the ecological crises we face and/or the deterioration of democracy, but unsure of how to help address them. This audience would already believe that these issues are serious enough to take action, and so wouldn’t need the sort of systems analysis I’d provide in book two in order to get started, but could use some analysis and frameworks for engaging in a meaningful way. This audience sounds like it matches the group you belong to. But I also see an important audience being current climate activists looking to build a larger and more effective movement (perhaps the leadership group you described). I think of everyday people as those who have an average amount of social power (i.e. don’t possess immense wealth or political influence) and an average amount of civic inclination (i.e. they don’t consider themselves activists or take much political action beyond voting).

In the chapter, I describe critical thinking as a matter of levels, like lots of things in life. We can continually improve. The current draft of the chapter begins by discussing why critical thinking and holistic knowledge are essential for making the transition to sustainable and democratic societies. Public support depends on our ability to reasonably navigate major questions about our way of life, technological feasibility, ethics, etc. I think that the more people who adopt a critical thinking identity and work on the skills an dispositions involved, the better our chances of realizing the transition. This is both a matter of our individual commitment but also–crucially–developing this identity through collective action and establishing widespread education and discussion networks. I describe the major benefits I get in my life from trying to develop this sort of identity, so hopefully that helps to ground the other arguments as you suggested.

Regarding the projects you were trying to evaluate, I have a few thoughts. First I’d commend you on planning to take action–many people haven’t yet gotten to that stage, so we shouldn’t take for granted how great it is to be prepared to act. I’d say that how you evaluate these projects depends on your overall analysis of what our problems demand and how society must change in general, as well as your ability to gather relevant information about each project (which depends on the quality of your analytical process, your confidence that you can perform that process, the time you have available, etc.). It can take a lot of work to figure out what to do, though we each have our own ideas about when we’ve done enough analysis. Perhaps you can work with like-minded friends nearby to share the intellectual work and collectively answer your questions. You mention how these projects make you feel and whether you feel up to the task of evaluation, and that’s key–emotions play a major role in how we think and what actions we take, and I’m making sure to discuss that throughout the draft of book one.

I’d be interested to hear more about what causes you to feel scared about cultivating a critical thinking identity. Perhaps you can let me know in an email.

Aaron