Relevant Differences

It is crucial to the aspect of critical thinking to be able to ascertain relevant differences.

The classic "apples and oranges" metaphor is often utilized to express the differences between two ideas or actions etc. It isn't enough that two things are different however, it is important that people be able to judge how the comparisons are relevantly different.

If the topic is what one should consume for their daily intake of vitamin C, then the relevant difference is the vitamin C content of oranges as compared to apples, for instance. Or if the topic is what makes the best ingredients for baking, apples have the edge because the texture of apples is what is relevant to the discussion.

But critical thinking isn't limited to relevant differences, but relevant similarities as well. Comparing apples and oranges we find many similarities; they're both fruit, they grow from trees, they're grown by farmers. Thus if the topic warrants it, these relevant similarities should not be ignored.

Critical thinking skills become paramount when the issues of hypocrisy or double standards arise. If a smoker professes his or her convictions that smoking is harmful, yet continues smoking--does the smoker's smoking have any relevance to the validity of his or her convictions?

Logic says that the behavior of the smoker hasn't any bearing on the validity of whether or not smoking is harmful. Smoking would be harmful or not regardless of whether the smoker smokes. Likewise, the sincerity of the smoker's convictions should not be question because the smoker smokes. They may truly and sincerely believe that smoking is harmful but are unable to adhere to the safer standard of abstaining from smoking.

Of course not everything is as cut and dry as smoking and its harmfulness, but that is why developing and using one's critical thinking abilities are critical in a world full of confusion.