CRITICAL THINKING AND SCHOOL SHOOTINGS

With the tragic shooting at the school in Florida last week, the focus in the USA has arisen again about how do we stop this kind of senseless murdering. This happens after every such event. Why? Probably because the usual superficial non-systemic thinking focuses on one variable, the guns. Those who so focus think that because the bullets come out of the gun, the gun is the culprit. Therefore all we need to do to stop violence of this sort, mass murders, domestic terrorism, etc. is to stop gun sales. Simple as that. Stop anyone and everyone from having guns and the problem is solved. If only the world was that simplistic! But alas, it is not.

Actually this thinking extremely limited thinking stops us from engaging in real thinking about the subject. As a form of fallacious thinking it operates from the limited view that events are caused by a singular cause. That kind of thinking is not only narrow-minded, it is childish, a form of simplistic linear-thinking, and therefore ineffective.

For more adult way of thinking we have to think systemically. What is the system within which the shooting occurred? What other variables are involved in what happened? Once people are able to think systemically, we can then begin to think in terms of the leverage points in the system, that is, where even a small change can have transformative influence. We can also begin developing an integrated multi-dimensional approach.

Guns, of course, are often the instrumental means whereby someone wounds and kills. Yet sometimes the instrument is a car, a bomb, a knife, a machete, etc. If the solution is to eliminate the instrument used, we would have to stop selling cars, trucks, knifes, chemicals, electronics, etc. Yet are the guns the critical causation factor here?

The instrument of destruction whether a gun, bomb, or car is in the hands of some human. So let’s back up to the person who does the harm. Who are these people? Motivationally what’s driving them? What are the social influences that affect them? Now we have many, many more variables to that play a role: Personal psychology: the mental health of the person. Social context: the health and well-being of that community: social media, movies, drug culture, gang culture, etc. Creating more of a sense fo connectedness, social responsibility to and for each other. Social responsibilities: those around the person who know him or her best. Are they

speaking up? Radical ideology: is the person influenced by terrorist philosophy or groups, extreme groups promoting hate (Neo-Nazis, etc.). Enforcement community: police, FBI, other authorities: integration of information, thoroughness in checking up on leads. Legal requirements: regarding background checks, laws. Are they enforced? Security for public events: schools, parades, airports, malls, etc.

Over-simplistic thinking focuses on one aspect of a problem, assumes that is the sole or primary factor and then over-generalizes it, formats it as “it is this or terrorism.” The argument shuts down real thinking because people take sides and argue for a position without giving thoughtful consideration to all of the other factors.

Fact: Complex problems are never solved by simple solutions. I wish they were. But wishing does not, and will not, make it so. We have to expand our thinking, our considerations, and operate from a more holistic view. We also have to learn to listen to all of the views in order to put together an integrated systemic approach as the solution. That means that “solving it once and for all,” which is the cry that is now being heard on all of the news networks, has to involve a multi-dimensional approach. Police cannot do it alone, nor teachers, not law-makers, no parents, etc. People from many different areas have to come together to work collaboratively together. In fact, the lack of collaboration is a major culprit.

Single causational thinking looks for the “golden bullet,” “the magical formula,” “the one thing that will solve the problem.” All of that is over-simplistic and actually makes solving the problem more difficult. We have to work together. And that means listening and seeking first to understand each other. And far too many who are supposedly trying to solve the problem are not doing that. Listen to the cable news programs and hear them arguing, condemning, judging, name-calling, etc. and not listening, not collaborating. Instead, they are polarizing and politicizing. One of the real questions in this debate is — When we will learn that solving complex problems is all about collaborating.

Want more? See the book I wrote with Ian McDermott, Collaborative Leadership (2016)