A lot of traffic flows on and in the media these days. Opinions come in various hues and shapes.
All media are awash; Print, Electronic and Social. The Social media is particularly contentious.
Some just post so other people may know they are around. They don’t affect anybody or attempt to wave public opinion. They are just having fun.
Those ones don’t bother me.
My concern are the ones who try to affect other people’s opinions with their own. These too vary in their presentations, mostly depending on what they hope to achieve. They have great effect on public opinion and actions but in different ways.
This clan of thinkers can be categorized into two; The Critical and The Controversial.
The mindset of the critical is to objectively analyze and evaluate an issue with a view to forming a judgment that is set to solve the problem. The Controversial also does some analysis (albeit unobjective) and evaluation but the outcome does not aim to solve the problem.
A critical mind must be able to reflect on ideas and information, form independent thoughts and connect concepts. His thought patterns are usually dispassionate and non-patronizing.
Certain factors determine whether you are critical or just simply controversial. Many so called social critics today are just simply controversial. In politics especially, many of the commentators are plainly controversial without any positive contribution to the issues at hand.
Understanding logical connections between ideas and issues is very important. No idea or opinion is unconnected with other ideas. The ability to connect the different ideas and opinions, and sifting objectively, differentiates the Critical from the Controversial.
Observation, analysis and interpretation of information and ideas gives the critical mind a bird’s eye view of situation at all times. He is able to identify, construct and evaluate arguments, especially those that don’t agree with his point of view. The controversial does not broach a contrasting point of view.
The controversial does not see inconsistencies and common mistakes in reasoning. He sees only his own side of the divide.
The critical identifies the relevance and importance of opposing ideas as well as reflects on the justification of his own beliefs and values.
The controversial, in his attention seeking best, musters opinions and ideas likely to cause public disagreement and contention.
In contemporary politics and media environment, many a positer are involved in controversy rather than criticism. A lot are interested in pleasing a superior or principal somewhere who dictates the tune of their piper. They never see anything in any opinion that doesn’t agree with theirs. Some go as low as run invectives and insults on dissenting opinions. They end up heating up the polity rather than righting wrongs.
In coming to the public domain thereof you need to make a choice either to be the critical or the controversial.
When you read that your favorite columnist or commentator ask yourself “Is he critical or controversial?”.
The controversial aims to bring down without an inkling how build but the critical deciphers the panacea to what the trouble is.
In playing opposition in politics, so much energy is expended rousing up controversy. Hence so little is achieved despite so much work done.
Having the valour of a critical mind avails at all times.
So, folks, the choice is yours.
When next you write or speak, decide whether you want to be critical or just simply controversial.
When next you read your favourite columnist, consider whether he is being critical or controversial?
I always choose to be CRITICAL.
