Are humans losing the ability to think for themselves?

Question

I have a condition known as high functioning Aspergers syndrome (go to http://www.udel.edu/bkirby/asperger/ for more info). This means that I have trouble reading peoples emotional state, however I can clearly read social trends (that is something I have no trouble with) and since I am not pulled along with every fad and new idea I can stand back and observe.

What I have observed is that people are losing the ability to think for themselves as our global networks grow larger. People seem to be going along with any new idea or fad and ignoring the evidence (which has never been closer to hand) for whatever reason (this is the part I cannot read).

My question is are people losing their ability to think, giving it up to those who are no more qualified than to ask "Would you like fries with that?"? And why (or not) would this be the case that people are not looking for the information that they need and re-disseminating information that is worthless?

I thank you in advance.

Answer 1

To lose a thing you need have it first. Generally people are not given what they need to develop cognitively and more often than that needed positive is the unneeded negative for their development. The description for that is much too great for this little area so I shall post some links to cognitive science.

http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cogsys/piaget.html

Stages of Cognitive Development. Piaget identified four stages in cognitive development:

Sensorimotor stage (Infancy). In this period (which has 6 stages), intelligence is demonstrated through motor activity without the use of symbols. Knowledge of the world is limited (but developing) because its based on physical interactions / experiences. Children acquire object permanence at about 7 months of age (memory). Physical development (mobility) allows the child to begin developing new intellectual abilities. Some symbollic (language) abilities are developed at the end of this stage.

Pre-operational stage (Toddler and Early Childhood). In this period (which has two substages), intelligence is demonstrated through the use of symbols, language use matures, and memory and imagination are developed, but thinking is done in a nonlogical, nonreversable manner. Egocentric thinking predominates

Concrete operational stage (Elementary and early adolescence). In this stage (characterized by 7 types of conservation: number, length, liquid, mass, weight, area, volume), intelligence is demonstrated through logical and systematic manipulation of symbols related to concrete objects. Operational thinking develops (mental actions that are reversible). Egocentric thought diminishes.

Formal operational stage (Adolescence and adulthood). In this stage, intelligence is demonstrated through the logical use of symbols related to abstract concepts. Early in the period there is a return to egocentric thought. Only 35% of high school graduates in industrialized countries obtain formal operations; many people do not think formally during adulthood.

Many pre-school and primary programs are modeled on Piaget's theory, which, as stated previously, provides part of the foundation for constructivist learning. Discovery learning and supporting the developing interests of the child are two primary instructional techniques. It is recommended that parents and teachers challenge the child's abilities, but NOT present material or information that is too far beyond the child's level. It is also recommended that teachers use a wide variety of concrete experiences to help the child learn (e.g., use of manipulatives, working in groups to get experience seeing from another's perspective, field trips, etc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erick_Erickson

Stage One Oral-Sensory: from birth to one, trust vs. mistrust, feeding;

Stage Two Muscular-Anal: 1-3 years, autonomy vs.doubt, toilet training;

Stage Three Locomotor: 3-6 years, initiative vs.inadequacy, independence;

Stage Four Latency: 6-12 years, industry vs.inferiority, school;

Stage Five Adolescence: 12-18 years, identity vs.confusion, peer relationships;

Stage Six Young Adulthood: 18-40 years, intimacy vs.isolation, love relationships;

Stage Seven Middle Adulthood: 40-65 years, generativity vs.stagnation, parenting;

Stage Eight Maturity: 65 years until death, integrity vs.despair, acceptance of one's life.

Answer 2

The masses have ALWAYS been led by the few. This is nothing new. Thinking is hard work. It takes a lot of practice and demands the willingness to challenge one's own thinking. These are rare qualities - now and in the past.

Socialism, Communism, Nazism and related ideas are easy concepts to sell to the unthinking masses. That was the history of the 20th century (and hundreds of millions died and billions suffered as a result). Today, Islamic fanaticism is leading a large body of unthinking masses down the same road. History truly does repeat itself.

Sadly, 'modern' public education seems to be contributing to the trend you believe is present. Critical thinking is almost totally absent in public educational training (even at the college level) and the programming of children's minds to believe that 'how they feel' is the only important basis needed to justify their actions/beliefs is becoming too commonplace. Few seem to appreciate that "that is how I feel" is not a justification for taking a position but an acknowledgment of total failure to think clearly prior to taking that position.

Best wishes.

Answer 3

This is not new. This is a old as civilization. Today's civilized humans are not more disfunctional than any before them.

Humans have always been suckered into fads or social trends. It's not a recent condition. Those who went Ga Ga over Princess Di join the same group as those who jumped on the Jackie O bandwagon, or the Martha Washington bandwagon, or the Queen Victoria craze. Before modern "celebrity" stars arrived, Benjamin Franklin, Wild Bill Hikock, and Mozart garnered attention. And Cleopatra was five steps ahead of Angelina Jolie. So don't let the narrow window of modern observation fool you into thinking this is new. It's not, nor is it any better or worse than before.

Answer 4

I'd question whether it's that we're thinking less for ourselves or that we live in an age where thoughts are more easily transmitted to the population... such as on this website. 50 years ago, you could only give your opinion of the world if you had achieved enough to get on tv or write for a newspaper. Today you barely need to know how to write to be able to let millions of people know what you believe. And unfortunately our schools may not be equipt yet for the effects of this. My school didn't teach us to critically question because by the time anything got to me, it had already been critically questioned thousands of times. Today I have to critically question virtually everything, because it's quite possible that I'm the first person so read this article or hear this person talk... technology allows it.

So maybe it's not that we really think less now, it's that we're required to think more, and we still are stumbling.

Answer 5

I believe from living a sheltered life resulting from years of capitalism, folks in America (speaking very generally) have lost a connection to the natural world; consumerism consumes more than just natural resources; in America, it's a way of life. There exists also an artificial expectation of producing and being productive as if relaxing and enjoying life is taboo. I feel like I exist in a machine-world where everything's for sale and nothing of value - has value. Great question ~

Answer 6

Many seemingly are choosing to allow others to determine their thinking. When someone takes something "by faith," they have relinquished a great deal of their critical thinking ability. The word "faith" seems to have considerable strength when explaining a point of view. A person "of faith" can even contradict scientific fact and others will accept that. Many are afraid to counter a person who "has faith."

When persons willingly calls themselves "dittoheads" they are acknowledging the fact that they are allowing someone else to think for them. Speech with bravado, no matter how unreasonable, also seems to influence thought.

Any point of view, no matter how unreasonable, is being empowered to a greater extent through technology. It's easier now to find like-minded people who are also unreasonable. For example, the Internet is full of blogs each of which represents a specific and narrow point of view. A thinking person would read all points of view and try to find reason in what they read--making up their own mind if there's anything to be learned. Unfortunately, blogs tend to attract people who need empowerment and blogs give them that. They don't bother to find reason in the other side's point of view.

There is some reason to believe that humans are losing their ability to think for themselves.

Answer 7

First the government has become part of our thought process. They make rules and regulations that over rule our own thoughts. Second, I think that with the computer age we have become lazy. When I was in school if I needed to do research it involved searching through many books, and magazine Then I had to make decisions about what and how to use all I gathered. TV tells us what to eat, wear, what meds to take, etc and everyone wants to believe that they are feed true info. So we have lost our own reasoning and independents

Answer 8

I dont think they are losing the ability, people just choose not to use it. It often seems easier to just go along and accept what "everyone else" is doing rather than stand up for what an individual believes is right.

Answer 9

Yes, I think that Critical Thinking skills are being actively eroded by popular media, even as it becomes more important that we are able to differentiate between the truth and propaganda... Aaron Spelling and Mark Burnett, among others, should be tried for Crimes against Intelligence.

Answer 10

I think most people don't think for themselves that is why there is so much evil and bad in this world. People never think! Period!