This was a very interesting book on the power of thought and critical thinking and how much it can affect our lives. Ultimately I felt it was a little too intellectual and misses some of the nuance of the conversation.

This review is a podcast episode where I discuss the book with a friend who also read it. We found it to be wonderful, insightful, and well worth reading.

As an educator it's my job to teach my students how to think critically. However, in this day and age a lot of adults seem to need a refresher on this skill. I feel like from the moment I wake up, to the moment my head hits the pillow I am constantly barraged with information. Whether it be on tv, driving or reading a newspaper. .Information is given without the caveat that the person absorbing the information needs to think critically about it! Anything that Jacobs writes is great, and this book didn't disappoint.
I received a copy of this book from the publisher via NetGalley so I could read it an give it an honest review.

A quick, yet rich look into the way humans think, and how we can be better at it. Very interesting read.

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2017-12-31-0000/how-to-think-alan-jacobs-review

Alan Jacobs' HOW TO THINK has been recommended by David Brooks and Jacobs was interviewed in The Atlantic magazine where he summarized his argument about how "in a pluralistic society, people struggle to deal with difference;" he continued by bemoaning our tendency to label others as belonging or not belonging and arguing that is "the number-one impediment to thinking." The text itself is rather short, with some chapters titled "Attractions," "Repulsions," and "Beginning to Think" where he quotes Henry James and then says "we just need to learn how to be more aware, how to act more responsibly." McKibben raises some of the same points ("I think you’re wrong, but you may be right") in a more fanciful way in Radio Free Vermont.

Links in post:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/alan-jacobs-how-to-think/542430/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/10/opinion/the-art-of-thinking-well.html?_r=0
http://treviansbookit.blogspot.com/2017/11/radio-free-vermont-by-bill-mckibben.html

“We suffer from a settled determination to avoid thinking. Relatively few people want to think. Thinking troubles us; thinking tires us. Thinking can force us out of familiar, comforting habits; thinking can complicate our lives.”
– Alan Jacobs

It’s hard to keep an open mind. But in Alan Jacobs' new book, he stresses the importance of continuing to think about things.

You might wonder if a book about thinking would keep you engaged. It most definitely will. Jacobs points out aspects that we may not have considered deep enough before, such as how social our thinking is. Thinking is much more of a social activity than we give it credit for. Jacobs says that no one thinks independently of other human beings. What we think is a response to what someone else has already thought and said.

Jacobs also points out that thinking requires us to trust other people. Don’t assume everyone is out to harm or manipulate you. Stop seeing a person as “the other.” Instead, see them as “my neighbor.” That will help you treat them well and not mock them.

Jacobs even guides us through the difficulties that can arise when we change our mind about something, but our friends do not: Keep remembering the many things you still have in common. Don’t get overexcited about the differences.

He includes an Afterword, The Thinking Person's Checklist, although he warns us that this list nor the book itself is intended to be used as a set of techniques. It's more of a "to be" list than a "to do" list. Here are a few items from that checklist:

"When faced with provocation to respond to what someone has said, give it five minutes. Take a walk, or weed the garden, or chop some vegetables. Get your body involved: your body knows the rhythms to live by, and if your mind falls into your body’s rhythm, you’ll have a better chance of thinking."

"Remember that you don’t have to respond to what everyone else is responding to in order to signal your virtue and right-mindedness."

"Seek out the best and fairest-minded of people whose views you disagree with. Listen to them for a time without responding. Whatever they say, think it over."

Whatever you think about, don’t stop. Keep thinking.

“Thinking does not have a destination, a stopping point, a ‘Well, we’re finally here.’ To cease thinking, as Thomas Aquinas explained, is an act either of despair—‘I can’t go any further’—or of presumption—‘I need not go any further.’ What is needed for the life of thinking is hope: hope of knowing more, understanding more, being more than we currently are."

I highly recommend How to Think.

My thanks to NetGalley for the review copy of this book.

I think this is an important book to put in the hands of high school and college students. Highly recommended.

HOW TO THINK BY ALAN JACOBS
I know what you are thinking (pun intended): a 150 page book on “How to Think” ought to be pretty straightforward. Do this, don’t do that, avoid this, do more of that, etc. Just like a million other self-help books. A few anecdotes, a nice dash of pop-science and evolutionary biology and Boom! best seller and TED talks galore.

Alas, How to Think by Alan Jacobs offers a different approach. First off, Jacobs starts with something of a buzz kill: most of us don’t really want to think and for good reasons. Thinking is hard, it can be stressful, uncomfortable and result in conflict with friends and relatives.

What our brains really crave is socially approved consensus. We like to pick a group and stay comfortably within their perspective. Every time we toe the line we get a jolt of pleasure. Every time we stray we get angry feedback.

Not sure about what to say or think? Don’t know or don’t know enough? Stick with the group!

Ah, I can hear you saying. The trick is to be independent. “Think for yourself.” Have an open mind.

No so fast, again Jacobs punctures these cliches by outlining how thinking is inescapably social and that there is not a clear connection between ‘independence” and being correct. Having an open mind only gets you so far if it doesn’t eventually close around something.

So this is all a set-up for a three step process to proper thinking, right? This is where Jacobs reveals his heretofore undiscovered key (which happens to be available as an online course for a low, low price for readers).

Nope. In fact, Jacobs says that you can’t get to good thinking through a set of invariable rules. Thinking is an art not a science. Some self-help guru!

Instead, what Jacobs (who, to be fair, is a cultural critic and teacher) does is poke and prod and circle and ruminate on things like virtue, character, and prudence; and the experiences of thinkers and writers, and yes, sometimes even scholars. People like C.S. Lewis, John Stuart Mill and Henry James (plus, a contrarian discussion of Wilt Chamberlain).

But here’s the thing. If you are a literate and humane person, you soon begin to enjoy Jacobs’ admittedly oblique, discursive and conversational approach. You give up the need for a overly simplified 12-step program with handy lists and catchy acronyms. You appreciate the style of an engaging conversation with a smart friend at a comfortable coffee shop instead of the lecture slash informercial.

And what Jacobs tells you is that there are traps and hurdles in the way to better thinking. Group thinking is a real temptation. It is easy to act as if everyone not comfortably in your group is the Repugnant Cultural Other (RCO). On the flip side, it is easy to pretend that science is the solution (or that better thinking is nearly impossible) and that getting rid of your emotion, your bias and your stereotypes will set you free.

But, contra some, Jacobs thinks real progress is possible. To do so, one must first seek to develop a certain kind of character; to be a certain kind of person. Logic and analysis, yes, but also emotion and social commitments. A whole, healthy person thinks best.

Self-awareness plays a role as well. Recognize when you are placing someone in the role of an RCO. Recognize when you are in a group that brooks no dissent, that punishes free debate and opinion from people of goodwill. Seek membership in a community of like-hearted people not necessarily those that think alike.

And there are tactics and processes that can help. Look for the best of those you disagree with; the best arguments, the most attractive messengers, the most sensible perspectives, etc. Look to accurately and fairly describe their arguments before offering your own. Try out their language and perspective as a way to get inside their skin and see the world through their eyes. Like a method actor, understand how if you were in their shoes you might see the world the same way. Plus, if you get rilled up and want to launch into refutation mode before the person has even finished speaking, wait five minutes. Don’t comment angry.

Recognize that the world we build out of keywords, metaphors and myths are necessary in many ways. A world without these building blocks, shortcuts or mental furniture is a exhausting and maddening one.

But they can be dangerous, so develop a healthy skepticism and sense of humility about your worldview and opinions. Don’t allow the narratives and mythology of your community to so fade into the background as to be invisible and never questioned. Think about the blindspots of your patterns and habits.

And this brings us full circle. Thinking is hard. Finding the balance between “intractably stubborn” and “pusillanimous and vacillating” takes time and effort. You can’t be paralyzed by indecision or constantly be reinventing your mindset, but you also don’t wan’t to be so rigid that you can’t learn, change or adapt. It is again, more art than science.

What in many ways lies at the bottom of How to Think is risk. Are you willing to risk being wrong? Are you willing to risk the ostracization of your group? Are you willing to risk learning that the heretofore labeled RCO is closer to you than you would like to admit?

The penultimate chapter ends with what strikes me as a fundamental step in this journey/process: cultivating a healthy skepticism about our own motives and generosity towards the motives of others.

Oh, and for those of you that just have to have one. In the Afterword, Jacobs offers The Thinking Person’s Checklist with … yep, 12 steps.

But he didn’t say they were easy.

This book felt like it collected a broad range of already-out-there knowledge and put it nicely together in one spot. While there was nothing that absolutely floored me or even made me give a silent "Woah", it still kept my attention, primarily because I couldn't stop agreeing with the author. I think that many people will find this book helpful, at least in that it serves as a breath of fresh air, an escape from the hysteria that is our world nowadays. Sometimes the writing seemed a little scattered and it was hard to follow the author along from one point to the next. However, this doesn't detract too much from the book and I would definitely feel comfortable recommending it friends and family.

Alan Jacobs thinks we have a thinking problem. I think he’s right. Not that we cannot think, but as a society, we would rather not and actively avoid it. Thinking requires too much of us. Thinking will change us and often will cause us trouble. This isn't a guide to logical thinking. He walks us through the process of thinking through issues in the comment section like hostility of our society. If you want to slow down and really think and are concerned with discovering truth, this book is for you.

How to Think is an important book for our times. The world of social media has made thinking much more difficult. We create echo chambers of online communities that agree with us and shout down and ostracize anyone who doesn't walk the line. It is so easy to categorize anyone who disagrees with us as the enemy, dismiss them, block them, and banish them from your feeds. But learning to think involves a “skepticism about our own motives and generosity toward the motives of others." You have to care about the truth more than your social position. There always has been, a social aspect to our thinking. No one comes to any conclusion as “an independent thinker”. Whether through face to face discussion, books, or teachers, we don’t come to ideas on our own. All of these factors come to play, and they can either be used for good thinking or to shut it down.

Thinking is also more than coldly calculating all possible options like a super computer. We are human beings, not machines. Clear and good thinking requires the rational, logic, but there is the emotional aspect involved as well. Knowing the truth is important; so is loving your neighbor. All logic and no compassion, or all emotion and no social element or empathy for those you disagree with will shut down thinking. The search for truth requires the courage to admit you are wrong, or to say your friends and family are wrong.

I didn't agree with all his conclusions, but I am still thinking them over.

Thanks to NetGallery.com for the review copy.

A quick read, yet an outstanding, thought-provoking book that everybody would do well to read, especially in confusing times such as these. It's nearly impossible to find an honest, accurate news source easily accessible by the majority. So, we are left to try to make sense of their lies and fictional tales. If people would stop and think before allowing themselves to be whipped into an emotional frenzy by people with an agenda to do just that, many would be able to separate fact from fiction, remain calm and carry on.

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MR8V850?tag=3755-20"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-7606" src="http://byfaithweunderstand.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/cover.jpg" alt="" width="379" height="500" /></a>I read pretty much anything Alan Jacobs publishes. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MR8V850?tag=3755-20"><em>How to Think: A Survival Guide for a World at Odds</em></a> was yet another great read.

This book is Alan Jacobs not half-baked but maybe 90% baked, and it’s still a fantastic read. It felt to me like one long essay, very much in the Jacobs style, which means a lot of trenchant intellectual commentary, delivered smoothly, on interesting stories. But whereas Original Sin, which was very much in the same vein, felt to me like it drove me to a point and wrapped a theological bow around it; this topic—good thinking—is simply too large for this small book to handle with anything feeling like finality (that’s what I mean by 90%). If this book had been titled “How to Keep Cool in a World of Social Media Firestorms,” it might have felt more complete. Jacobs does deliver numerous insights for the social-media-addled. (For example, “Remember that you don’t have to respond to what everyone else is responding to in order to signal your virtue and right-mindedness.”)

But his self-critical exploration of intellectual honesty, an exploration which skirts the realms of the theological, was the most valuable part of the book for me. He brings thinkers back to love, a theme he explored in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001Q3KG9A?tag=3755-20"><em>A Theology of Reading: The Hermeneutics of Love</em></a>. Here Jacobs offers no final answers. We can’t keep an open mind at all times; he knows that and proves it with verve. But when it comes to thinking, there is no algorithm by which we can necessarily determine whether we are guilty of kowtowing to some Inner Ring or are part of genuine community, no way to know with certainty whether we are susceptible to narrow influences or are truly <em>loving</em> thinkers. Life is, or ought to be, a pursuit of that knowledge, even if we’ll never perfectly achieve it. “You simply can’t thrive in a state of constant daily evaluation of the truth-conduciveness of your social world,” Jacobs says, “any more than a flowering plant can flourish if its owner digs up its roots every morning to see how it’s doing.”

If Jacobs perchance reads this review, he ought to know that I read most words he writes publicly—and that I think this once he missed a great opportunity to quote Stanley Fish. Fish has a story he appeals to a number of times in his writings that is much like the Phelps-Roper story. It features a member of the Aryan Nation who finds himself instantly disaffected with his erstwhile crowd when one of its leaders gives a speech consigning those with cleft palates to the gas chambers. This man’s daughter had a cleft palate. What Fish points out is that people who change from one worldview to another don’t change wholesale; they pivot on at least one point they held before. In this case, the man loved his daughter and this was his pivot point. I think Jacobs could have explored this story with great depth—and could have deepened his own case by using it. In it again love is key to thinking.

One more thing: I’m a Christian, and Jacobs is a Christian, and says so in this book. I think Jacobs could have gotten away with more Christianity. Augustine, for example, surely could have figured prominently in a book on how love is essential to right thinking. And, for that matter, the Apostle Paul.

Original concepts, well written. Jacobs presents logical ideas and observations giving readers new insights into the workings of peoples minds.