example of resistance in critical thinking

• Career Advice
• Job Search & Interview
• Productivity
• Public Speaking and Presentation
• Social & Interpersonal Skills
• Professional Development
• Remote Work

Eggcellent Work

12 common barriers to critical thinking (and how to overcome them).

As you know, critical thinking is a vital skill necessary for success in life and work. Unfortunately,  barriers to critical thinking  can hinder a person’s ability. This piece will discuss some of the most common  internal and external barriers to critical thinking  and what you should do if one of them hinders your ability to think critically.

Table of Contents

Critical Thinking Challenges

You already know that  critical thinking  is the process of analyzing and evaluating a situation or person so that you can make a sound judgment. You normally use the judgment you derive from your critical thinking process to make crucial decisions, and the choices you make affect you in workplaces, relationships, and life’s goals and achievements.

Several  barriers to critical thinking  can cause you to skew your judgment. This could happen even if you have a large amount of data and information to the contrary. The result might be that you make a poor or ineffective decision instead of a choice that could improve your life quality. These are some of the top obstacles that hinder and distort the ability to think critically:

1. Using Emotions Instead of Logic

Failing to remove one’s emotions from a critical thinking analysis is one of the hugest barriers to the process. People make these mistakes mainly in the relationship realm when choosing partners based on how they “make them feel” instead of the information collected.

The correct way to decide about a relationship is to use all facts, data, opinions, and situations to make a final judgment call. More times than not, individuals use their hearts instead of their minds.

Emotions can hinder critical thinking in the employment realm as well. One example is an employee who reacts negatively to a business decision, change, or process without gathering more information. The relationship between that person and the employer could become severed by her  lack of critical thinking  instead of being salvaged by further investigations and rational reactions.

2. Personal Biases

Personal biases can come from past negative experiences, skewed teachings, and peer pressure. They create a huge obstacle in critical thinking because they overshadow open-mindedness and fairness.

One example is failing to hire someone because of a specific race, age, religious preference, or perceived attitude. The hiring person circumvents using critical thinking by accepting his or her biases as truth. Thus, the entire processes of information gathering and objective analysis get lost in the mix.

3. Obstinance

Stubbornness almost always ruins the critical thinking procedure. Sometimes, people get so wrapped up in being right that they fail to look at the big picture. Big-picture thinking is a large part of critical thinking; without it, all judgments and choices are rash and incomplete.

4. Unbelief

It’s difficult for a person to do something he or she doesn’t believe in. It’s also challenging to engage in something that seems complex. Many people don’t think critically because they believe they must be scholarly to do so. The truth is that  anyone  can think critically by practicing the following steps:

• 1. Gather as much data as possible.
• 2. Have an opinion, but be open to changing it.
• 3. Understand that assumptions are not the truth, and opinions are not facts.
• 4. Think about the scenario, person, or problem from different angles.
• 5. Evaluate all the information thoroughly.
• 6. Ask simple, precise, and abundant questions.
• 7. Take time to observe.
• 8. Don’t be afraid to spend time on the problem or issue.
• 9. Ask for input or additional information.
• 10. Make it make sense.

5. Fear of Failure or Change

Fear of change and failure often hinders a person’s critical thinking process because it doesn’t allow thinking outside the box. Sometimes, the most efficient way to resolve a problem is to be open to changing something.

That change might be a different way of doing something, a relationship termination, or a shift of positions at a workplace. Fear can block out all possible scenarios in the critical thinking cycle. The result is often one-dimensional thinking, tunnel vision, or proverbial head-banging.

6. Egocentric Thinking

Egocentric thinking is also one of the main barriers to critical thinking. It occurs when a person examines everything through a “me” lens. Evaluating something properly requires an individual to understand and consider other people’s perspectives, plights, goals, input, etc.

7. Assumptions

Assumptions are one of the negative  factors that affect critical thinking . They are detrimental to the process because they cause distortions and misguided judgments. When using assumptions, an individual could unknowingly insert an invalid prejudgment into a stage of the thought process and sway the final decision.

It’s never wise to assume anything about a person, entity, or situation because it could be 100 percent wrong. The correct way to deal with assumptions is to store them in a separate thought category of possibilities and then use the data and other evidence to validate or nullify them.

XYZ  might  be why ABC happened, but there isn’t enough information or data to conclude it. The same concept is true for the rest of the possibilities, and thus, it’s necessary to research and analyze the facts before accepting them as truths.

8. Group Thinking

Group thinking is another one of the  barriers to critical thinking  that can block sound decisions and muddy judgments. It’s similar to peer pressure, where the person takes on the viewpoint of the people around him or her to avoid seeming “different.”

This barrier is dangerous because it affects how some people think about right and wrong. It’s most prevalent among teens. One example is the “everybody’s doing it (drugs, bullying), so I should too” mindset.

Unfortunately, this barrier can sometimes spill over into the workplace and darken the environment when workers can’t think for themselves. Workers may end up breaking policies, engaging in negative behavior, or harassing the workers who don’t conform.

Group thinking can also skew someone’s opinion of another person before the individual gets a chance to collect facts and evaluate the person for himself. You’ve probably heard of smear campaigns. They work so well against targets because the parties involved don’t use the critical thinking process at all.

9. Impulsivity

Impulsivity is the tendency to do things without thinking, and it’s a bona fide critical thinking killer. It skips right by  every  step in the critical thinking process and goes directly to what feels good in the moment.

Alleviating the habit takes practice and dedication. The first step is to set time aside when impulsive urges come to think about all aspects of the situation. It may take an impulsive person a while to develop a good critical thinking strategy, but it can work with time.

10. Not Knowing What’s Fact and Opinion

Critical thinking requires the thinker to know the difference between facts and opinions. Opinions are statements based on other people’s evaluative processes, and those processes may not be critical or analytical. Facts are an unemotional and unbiased piece of data that one can verify. Statistics and governmental texts are examples.

11. Having a Highly Competitive Nature

A “winning” mindset can overshadow the fair and objective evaluation of a problem, task, or person and undermine critical thinking. People who  think competitively  could lose sight of what’s right and wrong to meet a selfish goal that way.

12. Basing Statements on Popularity

This problem is prevalent in today’s world. Many people will accept anything a celebrity, political figure, or popular person says as gospel, but discredit or discount other people’s input. An adept critical thinker knows how to separate  what’s  being said from  who  said it and perform the necessary verification steps.

• The Ultimate Guide To Critical Thinking
• Is Critical Thinking A Soft Skill Or Hard Skill?
• How To Improve Critical Thinking Skills At Work And Make Better Decisions
• 5 Creative and Critical Thinking Examples In Workplace
• 10 Best Books On Critical Thinking And Problem Solving
• 12 Critical Thinking Interview Questions and Scenarios With Sample Answers
• How To Promote Critical Thinking In The Workplace

How To Overcome Barriers in Critical Thinking

If you can identify any of the above-mentioned  barriers , your critical thinking may be flawed. These are some tips for overcoming such barriers:

1. Know your flaws.

The very first step toward improving anything is to know and admit your flaws. If you can do that, you are halfway to using better critical thinking strategies.

2. Park your emotions.

Use logic, not emotion, when you are evaluating something to form a judgment. It’s not the time to think with your heart.

3. Be mindful of others.

Try to put yourself in other people’s shoes to understand their stance. A little empathy goes a long way.

4. Avoid black-and-white thinking.

Understand that there’s always more than one way to solve a problem or achieve a goal. Additionally, consider that not every person is all bad or all good.

5. Dare to be unpopular.

Avoid making decisions to please other people. Instead, evaluate the full lot of information and make the decision you feel is best.

6. Don’t assign unjustified merit.

Don’t assume someone is telling the truth or giving you more accurate information because of his or her name or status. Evaluate  all  people’s input equally.

7. Avoid judging others.

Try to keep biases and prejudices out of your decision-making processes. That will make them fair and just.

8. Be patient with yourself.

Take all the days you need to pick apart a situation or problem and resolve it. Don’t rush to make hasty decisions.

9. Accept different points of view.

Not everyone will agree with you or tell you what you want to hear.

10. Embrace change.

Don’t ever be afraid of changing something or trying something new. Thinking outside the box is an integral part of the critical thinking process.

Now you know the answers to the question,  “What are the challenges of critical thinking?”  Use the information about the  barriers to critical thinking  to improve your critical thinking process and make healthier and more beneficial decisions for everyone.

• Critical Thinking vs Problem Solving: What’s the Difference?

Is Critical Thinking Overrated?  Disadvantages Of Critical Thinking

• 25 In-Demand Jobs That Require Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills
• Brainstorming: Techniques Used To Boost Critical Thinking and Creativity
• 11 Principles Of Critical Thinking  

Jenny Palmer

Founder of Eggcellentwork.com. With over 20 years of experience in HR and various roles in corporate world, Jenny shares tips and advice to help professionals advance in their careers. Her blog is a go-to resource for anyone looking to improve their skills, land their dream job, or make a career change.

Further Reading...

Ultimate Guide to Setting SMART Career Objectives (with Examples)

5 Creative and Critical Thinking Examples In Workplace  

No Comments

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

How To List Skills That I Taught Myself On Resume

12 critical thinking interview questions and scenarios with sample answers  .

Where Creative Ideas in Distance Ed Come Together

Fear, Anger, and Denial—How do critical thinkers deal with barriers during a crisis?

Have you ever made a bad choice in life? Most of us have at some point and if we go back and analyze what went wrong, we often find that there was some barrier to our critical thinking keeping us from making the best choice among the alternatives that we have. To understand and spot the barriers is important because we can often develop strategies for dealing with these roadblocks to good decision making.

Today I will focus on just a few with examples that highlight how we are currently dealing with the COVID 19 outbreak. The barriers that have surfaced are fear, anger, denial, egocentrism, and Sociocentrism. Each one of these barriers can have a significant impact on our decision making and with so many important decisions now that must be made, we want to be certain we are making the best possible choice.

Fear is perhaps one of those barriers that are partly ingrained through our evolution. In essence, fear encourages us to act—either rationally or irrationally.  Take for example how people are dealing with the outbreak of the coronavirus. There are many examples of how people are reacting out of fear rather than using critical thinking to work through and find a solution. Whether we are talking about the hoarding of something like toilet tissue or something more dangerous like attacking someone not social distancing, how we react can be traced back to this barrier. Roalfe (1929) posits that “ the real force or menace behind all fear and anxiety is desire” (p. 35). Our desire for safety and security essentially can overwhelm our ability to use our critical thinking to make good choices.

Anger is another of the barriers to thinking. When people are angry they will often ignore important information that might help resolve the root cause of the anger.  Berkowitz and Jones (2004) explain that “anger is often intermixed with the fright so that the fearful persons are all too apt to be angry as well, particularly when they think they cannot escape from the danger” (p. 152). This is particularly pertinent as people react to the COVID 19 crisis.  Many people simply cannot escape an outbreak and they will react with both anger and fear. One not mentioned though is denial.

Denial or repression is perhaps more dangerous than our initial impulse of anger because we can rationalize ourselves into believing something that is not factual rather than dealing with the issue. Whether it manifests in refusal to take protective measures or leads to risky behavior, the outcome can be detrimental not just to the person, but to others as well. Even when confronted with the facts, denial can keep a person from making the decisions needed for personal protection. We saw this play out again and again as people carried on as if nothing was really happening, even as the hospitals were flooded with sick and the numbers grew daily.

As critical thinkers, we can use the same methods we use for daily problem solving to help us make the best possible solution, even when dealing with a life-altering outbreak like the current COVID 19 pandemic we are currently going through. The first thing that must happen is the realization that there is a problem. As mentioned above, this can be very difficult when there are so many different voices trying to influence our understanding and how we are wired psychologically. Without the realization of the problem though, there can be no solutions. But how do we decide in such a fractured approach to the possible solutions? El-Hai & Machado (2020) state that

when the problem is not consensually stated to a significant extent, the search for solutions becomes open­ended, with different stakeholders championing alternative solutions and competing with one another to frame ‘the problem’ in a way that directly connects their preferred solution and their preferred problem definition, and, besides, fulfills their own interests and pleases their own values. (p.6)

What this suggests is that we must advocate for ourselves and seek out the best possible information. Whether we are reviewing information from the CDC or our state health department, the voices of the professionals can help us gain the insight we need. Understanding is key because it can help us to explore the alternatives we have available as we move forward towards a solution.

Exploring the alternatives is also important because in this stage we can weigh the pros and cons of how the possible decisions will affect us. This stage can be as complex as any and as reflected in the quote above, how we view the possibilities is impacted by how the issue is framed.

Then we will make the decision and implement the plan. In this stage, there will likely be some uncertainty and how we deal with the uncertainty can impact how willing we are to accept the risk in the decision. A young, healthy person is not likely to see the same risk as an older person with a pre-existing condition. As noted though in the available research, even the young can be impacted by the virus and young people can be potential spreaders of the disease when asymptomatic.

The final step in decision making a review of how well the plan is working. As I write today, the country has started opening back up and the number of cases has started to rise. As critical thinkers, we track our progress and work to make adjustments when needed. The question remains though, will people use social distancing and face coverings as a way slow the disease as the economy restarts, or will some slip into a state of denial?

Berkowitz, L., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2004). More thoughts about anger determinants. Emotion, 4 (2), 151-155. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.4.2.151

El-Hani, C., & Machado, V. (2020). COVID-19: The need of an integrated and critical view. Ethnobiology and Conservation, 9 Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/2404320755?accountid=35812

Roalfe, W. R. (1929). The psychology of fear. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 24 (1), 32-40. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0071654

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

5 Barriers to Critical Thinking

What holds us back from thinking critically in day-to-day situations.

Posted January 18, 2019 | Reviewed by Davia Sills

• What Is Cognition?
• Find a therapist near me

Quite often, discussions of Critical Thinking (CT) revolve around tips for what you or your students should be doing to enhance CT ability. However, it seems that there’s substantially less discussion of what you shouldn’t be doing—that is, barriers to CT.

About a year ago, I posted "5 Tips for Critical Thinking" to this blog, and after thinking about it in terms of what not to do , along with more modern conceptualizations of CT (see Dwyer, 2017), I’ve compiled a list of five major barriers to CT. Of course, these are not the only barriers to CT; rather, they are five that may have the most impact on how one applies CT.

1. Trusting Your Gut

Trust your gut is a piece of advice often thrown around in the context of being in doubt. The concept of using intuitive judgment is actually the last thing you want to be doing if critical thinking is your goal. In the past, intuitive judgment has been described as "the absence of analysis" (Hamm, 1988); and automatic cognitive processing—which generally lacks effort, intention, awareness, or voluntary control—is usually experienced as perceptions or feelings (Kahneman, 2011; Lieberman, 2003).

Given that intuitive judgment operates automatically and cannot be voluntarily "turned off," associated errors and unsupported biases are difficult to prevent, largely because reflective judgment has not been consulted. Even when errors appear obvious in hindsight, they can only be prevented through the careful, self-regulated monitoring and control afforded by reflective judgment. Such errors and flawed reasoning include cognitive biases and logical fallacies .

Going with your gut—experienced as perceptions or feelings—generally leads the thinker to favor perspectives consistent with their own personal biases and experiences or those of their group.

2. Lack of Knowledge

CT skills are key components of what CT is, and in order to conduct it, one must know how to use these skills. Not knowing the skills of CT—analysis, evaluation, and inference (i.e., what they are or how to use them)—is, of course, a major barrier to its application. However, consideration of a lack of knowledge does not end with the knowledge of CT skills.

Let’s say you know what analysis, evaluation, and inference are, as well as how to apply them. The question then becomes: Are you knowledgeable in the topic area you have been asked to apply the CT? If not, intellectual honesty and reflective judgment should be engaged to allow you to consider the nature, limits, and certainty of what knowledge you do have, so that you can evaluate what is required of you to gain the knowledge necessary to make a critically thought-out judgment.

However, the barrier here may not necessarily be a lack of topic knowledge, but perhaps rather believing that you have the requisite knowledge to make a critically thought-out judgment when this is not the case or lacking the willingness to gain additional, relevant topic knowledge.

3. Lack of Willingness

In addition to skills, disposition towards thinking is also key to CT. Disposition towards thinking refers to the extent to which an individual is willing or inclined to perform a given thinking skill, and is essential for understanding how we think and how we can make our thinking better, in both academic settings and everyday circumstances (Norris, 1992; Siegel, 1999; Valenzuela, Nieto, & Saiz, 2011; Dwyer, Hogan & Stewart, 2014).

Dispositions can’t be taught, per se, but they do play a large role in determining whether or not CT will be performed. Simply, it doesn’t matter how skilled one is at analysis, evaluation, and inference—if they’re not willing to think critically, CT is not likely to occur.

4. Misunderstanding of Truth

Truth-seeking is one such disposition towards thinking, which refers to a desire for knowledge; to seek and offer both reasons and objections in an effort to inform and to be well-informed; a willingness to challenge popular beliefs and social norms by asking questions (of oneself and others); to be honest and objective about pursuing the truth, even if the findings do not support one’s self-interest or pre-conceived beliefs or opinions; and to change one’s mind about an idea as a result of the desire for truth (Dwyer, 2017).

Though this is something for which many of us strive or even just assume we do, the truth is that we all succumb to unwarranted assumptions from time to time: that is, beliefs presumed to be true without adequate justification. For example, we might make a judgment based on an unsubstantiated stereotype or a commonsense/belief statement that has no empirical evidence to justify it. When using CT, it’s important to distinguish facts from beliefs and, also, to dig a little deeper by evaluating "facts" with respect to how much empirical support they have to validate them as fact (see " The Dirtiest Word in Critical Thinking: 'Proof' and its Burden ").

Furthermore, sometimes the truth doesn’t suit people, and so, they might choose to ignore it or try and manipulate knowledge or understanding to accommodate their bias . For example, some people may engage in wishful thinking , in which they believe something is true because they wish it to be; some might engage in relativistic thinking , in which, for them, the truth is subjective or just a matter of opinion.

5. Closed-mindedness

In one of my previous posts, I lay out " 5 Tips for Critical Thinking "—one of which is to play Devil’s Advocate , which refers to the "consideration of alternatives." There’s always more than one way to do or think about something—why not engage such consideration?

The willingness to play Devil’s Advocate implies a sensibility consistent with open-mindedness (i.e., an inclination to be cognitively flexible and avoid rigidity in thinking; to tolerate divergent or conflicting views and treat all viewpoints alike, prior to subsequent analysis and evaluation; to detach from one’s own beliefs and consider, seriously, points of view other than one’s own without bias or self-interest; to be open to feedback by accepting positive feedback, and to not reject criticism or constructive feedback without thoughtful consideration; to amend existing knowledge in light of new ideas and experiences; and to explore such new, alternative, or "unusual" ideas).

At the opposite end of the spectrum, closed-mindedness is a significant barrier to CT. By this stage, you have probably identified the inherent nature of bias in our thinking. The first step of CT is always going to be to evaluate this bias. However, one’s bias may be so strong that it leads them to become closed-minded and renders them unwilling to consider any other perspectives.

Another way in which someone might be closed-minded is through having properly researched and critically thought about a topic and then deciding that this perspective will never change, as if their knowledge will never need to adapt. However, critical thinkers know that knowledge can change and adapt. An example I’ve used in the past is quite relevant here—growing up, I was taught that there were nine planets in our solar system; however, based on further research, our knowledge of planets has been amended to now only consider eight of those as planets.

Being open-minded is a valuable disposition, but so is skepticism (i.e., the inclination to challenge ideas; to withhold judgment before engaging all the evidence or when the evidence and reasons are insufficient; to take a position and be able to change position when the evidence and reasons are sufficient; and to look at findings from various perspectives).

However, one can be both open-minded and skeptical. It is closed-mindedness that is the barrier to CT, so please note that closed-mindedness and skepticism are distinct dispositions.

Dwyer, C.P. (2017). Critical thinking: Conceptual perspectives and practical guidelines. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dwyer, C.P., Hogan, M.J. & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills & Creativity, 12, 43-52.

Hamm, R. M. (1988). Clinical intuition and clinical analysis: expertise and the cognitive continuum. In J. Dowie & A. Elstein (Eds.), Professional judgment: A reader in clinical decision making, 78–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. Penguin: Great Britain.

Lieberman, M. D. (2003). Reflexive and reflective judgment processes: A social cognitive neuroscience approach. Social Judgments: Implicit and Explicit Processes, 5, 44–67.

Norris, S. P. (Ed.). (1992). The generalizability of critical thinking: Multiple perspectives on an educational ideal. New York: Teachers College Press.

Siegel, H. (1999). What (good) are thinking dispositions? Educational Theory, 49, 2, 207–221.

Valenzuela, J., Nieto, A. M., & Saiz, C. (2011). Critical thinking motivational scale: A contribution to the study of relationship between critical thinking and motivation. Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9, 2, 823–848.

Christopher Dwyer, Ph.D., is a lecturer at the Technological University of the Shannon in Athlone, Ireland.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Accounting & Finance
• Communication
• Critical Thinking
• Marketing & Strategy
• Starting a Business
• Team Management
• Corporate Philosophy
• Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
• Kokorozashi
• Sustainable Business
• AI Ventures
• Machine Learning
• Alumni Voices
• Yoshito Hori Blog
• Unlimited Insights
• Career Skills

How to Identify and Remove Barriers to Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking: Structured Reasoning

Even a few simple techniques for logical decision making and persuasion can vastly improve your skills as a leader. Explore how critical thinking can help you evaluate complex business problems, reduce bias, and devise effective solutions.

Critical Thinking: Problem-Solving

Problem-solving is a central business skill, and yet it's the one many people struggle with most. This course will show you how to apply critical thinking techniques to common business examples, avoid misunderstandings, and get at the root of any problem.

Contrary to popular belief, being intelligent or logical does not automatically make you a critical thinker.

People with high IQs are still prone to biases, complacency, overconfidence, and stereotyping that affect the quality of their thoughts and performance at work. But people who scored high in critical thinking —a reflection of sound analytical, problem-solving, and decision-making abilities—report having fewer negative experiences in and out of the office.

Top 5 Barriers to Critical Thinking

To learn how to think critically, you’ll need to identify and understand what prevents people from doing so in the first place. Catching yourself (and others) engaging in these critical thinking no-no’s can help prevent costly mistakes and improve your quality of life.

Here are five of the most common barriers to critical thinking.

Egocentric Thinking

Egoism, or viewing everything in relation to yourself, is a natural human tendency and a common barrier to critical thinking. It often leads to an inability to question one’s own beliefs, sympathize with others, or consider different perspectives.

Egocentricity is an inherent character flaw. Understand that, and you’ll gain the open-minded point of view required to assess situations outside your own lens of understanding.

Groupthink and Social Conditioning

Everyone wants to feel like they belong. It’s a basic survival instinct and psychological mechanism that ensures the survival of our species. Historically, humans banded together to survive in the wild against predators and each other. That desire to “fit in” persists today as groupthink, or the tendency to agree with the majority and suppress independent thoughts and actions.

Groupthink is a serious threat to diversity in that it supports social conditioning, or the idea that we should all adhere to a particular society or culture’s most “acceptable” behavior.

Overcoming groupthink and cultural conditioning requires the courage to break free from the crowd. It’s the only way to question popular thought, culturally embedded values, and belief systems in a detached and objective manner.

Next Article

5 of the Best Books on Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving

Drone Mentality and Cognitive Fatigue

Turning on “autopilot” and going through the motions can lead to a lack of spatial awareness. This is known as drone mentality, and it’s not only detrimental to you, but those around you, as well.

Studies show that monotony and boredom are bad for mental health . Cognitive fatigue caused by long-term mental activity without appropriate stimulation, like an unchanging daily routine full of repetitive tasks, negatively impairs cognitive functioning and critical thinking .

Although you may be tempted to flip on autopilot when things get monotonous, as a critical thinker you need to challenge yourself to make new connections and find fresh ideas. Adopt different schools of thought. Keep both your learning and teaching methods exciting and innovative, and that will foster an environment of critical thinking.

The Logic Tree: The Ultimate Critical Thinking Framework

Personal Biases and Preferences

Everyone internalizes certain beliefs, opinions, and attitudes that manifest as personal biases. You may feel that you’re open minded, but these subconscious judgements are more common than most people realize. They can distort your thinking patterns and sway your decision making in the following ways:

• Confirmation bias: favoring information that reinforces your existing viewpoints and beliefs
• Anchoring bias: being overly influenced by the first piece of information you come across
• False consensus effect: believing that most people share your perspective
• Normalcy bias: assuming that things will stay the same despite significant changes to the status quo

The critical thinking process requires being aware of personal biases that affect your ability to rationally analyze a situation and make sound decisions.

Allostatic Overload

Research shows that persistent stress causes a phenomenon known as allostatic overload . It’s serious business, affecting your attention span, memory, mood, and even physical health.

When under pressure, your brain is forced to channel energy into the section responsible for processing necessary information at the expense of taking a rest. That’s why people experience memory lapses in fight-or-flight situations. Prolonged stress also reduces activity in the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that handles executive tasks.

Avoiding cognitive impairments under pressure begins by remaining as calm and objective as possible. If you’re feeling overwhelmed, take a deep breath and slow your thoughts. Assume the role of a third-party observer. Analyze and evaluate what can be controlled instead of what can’t.

Train Your Mind Using the 9 Intellectual Standards

The bad news is that barriers to critical thinking can really sneak up on you and be difficult to overcome. But the good news is that anyone can learn to think critically with practice.

Unlike raw intelligence, which is largely determined by genetics , critical thinking can be mastered using nine teachable standards of thought:

• Clarity: Is the information or task at hand easy to understand and free from obscurities?
• Precision: Is it specific and detailed?
• Accuracy: Is it correct, free from errors and distortions?
• Relevance: Is it directly related to the matter at hand?
• Depth: Does it consider all other variables, contexts, and situations?
• Breadth: Is it comprehensive, and does it encompass other perspectives?
• Logical: Does it contradict itself?
• Significance: Is it important in the first place?
• Fairness: Is it free from bias, deception, and self-interest?

When evaluating any task, situation, or piece of information, consider these intellectual standards to hone your critical thinking skills in a structured, practiced way. Keep it up, and eventually critical thinking will become second nature.

Related Articles

Should you be career cushioning.

Need Help Prioritizing Tasks? Try the Eisenhower Matrix

One-to-one Marketing: The New Age of Parasocial Relationships 

Get monthly Insights

Sign up for our newsletter! Privacy Policy

GLOBIS Insights

• Submission Guidelines
• Our Contributors

Accountability

• Privacy Policy

GLOBIS Group

• GLOBIS Corporation
• GLOBIS University
• GLOBIS Capital Partners
• GLOBIS Asia Pacific
• GLOBIS Asia Campus
• GLOBIS China
• GLOBIS Europe
• GLOBIS Thailand
• G1 Institute
• Ibaraki Robots Sports Entertainment
• KIBOW Foundation

© GLOBIS All Rights Reserved

Translate this page from English...

*Machine translated pages not guaranteed for accuracy. Click Here for our professional translations.

Critical Thinking in Every Domain of Knowledge and Belief

41+ Critical Thinking Examples (Definition + Practices)

Critical thinking is an essential skill in our information-overloaded world, where figuring out what is fact and fiction has become increasingly challenging.

But why is critical thinking essential? Put, critical thinking empowers us to make better decisions, challenge and validate our beliefs and assumptions, and understand and interact with the world more effectively and meaningfully.

Critical thinking is like using your brain's "superpowers" to make smart choices. Whether it's picking the right insurance, deciding what to do in a job, or discussing topics in school, thinking deeply helps a lot. In the next parts, we'll share real-life examples of when this superpower comes in handy and give you some fun exercises to practice it.

Critical Thinking Process Outline

Critical thinking means thinking clearly and fairly without letting personal feelings get in the way. It's like being a detective, trying to solve a mystery by using clues and thinking hard about them.

It isn't always easy to think critically, as it can take a pretty smart person to see some of the questions that aren't being answered in a certain situation. But, we can train our brains to think more like puzzle solvers, which can help develop our critical thinking skills.

Here's what it looks like step by step:

Spotting the Problem: It's like discovering a puzzle to solve. You see that there's something you need to figure out or decide.

Collecting Clues: Now, you need to gather information. Maybe you read about it, watch a video, talk to people, or do some research. It's like getting all the pieces to solve your puzzle.

Breaking It Down: This is where you look at all your clues and try to see how they fit together. You're asking questions like: Why did this happen? What could happen next?

Checking Your Clues: You want to make sure your information is good. This means seeing if what you found out is true and if you can trust where it came from.

Making a Guess: After looking at all your clues, you think about what they mean and come up with an answer. This answer is like your best guess based on what you know.

Explaining Your Thoughts: Now, you tell others how you solved the puzzle. You explain how you thought about it and how you answered. 

Checking Your Work: This is like looking back and seeing if you missed anything. Did you make any mistakes? Did you let any personal feelings get in the way? This step helps make sure your thinking is clear and fair.

And remember, you might sometimes need to go back and redo some steps if you discover something new. If you realize you missed an important clue, you might have to go back and collect more information.

Critical Thinking Methods

Just like doing push-ups or running helps our bodies get stronger, there are special exercises that help our brains think better. These brain workouts push us to think harder, look at things closely, and ask many questions.

It's not always about finding the "right" answer. Instead, it's about the journey of thinking and asking "why" or "how." Doing these exercises often helps us become better thinkers and makes us curious to know more about the world.

Now, let's look at some brain workouts to help us think better:

1. "What If" Scenarios

Imagine crazy things happening, like, "What if there was no internet for a month? What would we do?" These games help us think of new and different ideas.

Pick a hot topic. Argue one side of it and then try arguing the opposite. This makes us see different viewpoints and think deeply about a topic.

3. Analyze Visual Data

Check out charts or pictures with lots of numbers and info but no explanations. What story are they telling? This helps us get better at understanding information just by looking at it.

4. Mind Mapping

Write an idea in the center and then draw lines to related ideas. It's like making a map of your thoughts. This helps us see how everything is connected.

There's lots of mind-mapping software , but it's also nice to do this by hand.

5. Weekly Diary

Every week, write about what happened, the choices you made, and what you learned. Writing helps us think about our actions and how we can do better.

6. Evaluating Information Sources

Collect stories or articles about one topic from newspapers or blogs. Which ones are trustworthy? Which ones might be a little biased? This teaches us to be smart about where we get our info.

There are many resources to help you determine if information sources are factual or not.

7. Socratic Questioning

This way of thinking is called the Socrates Method, named after an old-time thinker from Greece. It's about asking lots of questions to understand a topic. You can do this by yourself or chat with a friend.

Start with a Big Question:

"What does 'success' mean?"

Dive Deeper with More Questions:

"Why do you think of success that way?" "Do TV shows, friends, or family make you think that?" "Does everyone think about success the same way?"

"Can someone be a winner even if they aren't rich or famous?" "Can someone feel like they didn't succeed, even if everyone else thinks they did?"

Look for Real-life Examples:

"Who is someone you think is successful? Why?" "Was there a time you felt like a winner? What happened?"

Think About Other People's Views:

"How might a person from another country think about success?" "Does the idea of success change as we grow up or as our life changes?"

Think About What It Means:

"How does your idea of success shape what you want in life?" "Are there problems with only wanting to be rich or famous?"

Look Back and Think:

"After talking about this, did your idea of success change? How?" "Did you learn something new about what success means?"

8. Six Thinking Hats 

Edward de Bono came up with a cool way to solve problems by thinking in six different ways, like wearing different colored hats. You can do this independently, but it might be more effective in a group so everyone can have a different hat color. Each color has its way of thinking:

White Hat (Facts): Just the facts! Ask, "What do we know? What do we need to find out?"

Red Hat (Feelings): Talk about feelings. Ask, "How do I feel about this?"

Black Hat (Careful Thinking): Be cautious. Ask, "What could go wrong?"

Yellow Hat (Positive Thinking): Look on the bright side. Ask, "What's good about this?"

Green Hat (Creative Thinking): Think of new ideas. Ask, "What's another way to look at this?"

Blue Hat (Planning): Organize the talk. Ask, "What should we do next?"

When using this method with a group:

• Explain all the hats.
• Decide which hat to wear first.
• Make sure everyone switches hats at the same time.
• Finish with the Blue Hat to plan the next steps.

9. SWOT Analysis

SWOT Analysis is like a game plan for businesses to know where they stand and where they should go. "SWOT" stands for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.

There are a lot of SWOT templates out there for how to do this visually, but you can also think it through. It doesn't just apply to businesses but can be a good way to decide if a project you're working on is working.

Strengths: What's working well? Ask, "What are we good at?"

Weaknesses: Where can we do better? Ask, "Where can we improve?"

Opportunities: What good things might come our way? Ask, "What chances can we grab?"

Threats: What challenges might we face? Ask, "What might make things tough for us?"

Steps to do a SWOT Analysis:

• Goal: Decide what you want to find out.
• Research: Learn about your business and the world around it.
• Brainstorm: Get a group and think together. Talk about strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
• Pick the Most Important Points: Some things might be more urgent or important than others.
• Make a Plan: Decide what to do based on your SWOT list.
• Check Again Later: Things change, so look at your SWOT again after a while to update it.

Now that you have a few tools for thinking critically, let’s get into some specific examples.

Everyday Examples

Life is a series of decisions. From the moment we wake up, we're faced with choices – some trivial, like choosing a breakfast cereal, and some more significant, like buying a home or confronting an ethical dilemma at work. While it might seem that these decisions are disparate, they all benefit from the application of critical thinking.

10. Deciding to buy something

Imagine you want a new phone. Don't just buy it because the ad looks cool. Think about what you need in a phone. Look up different phones and see what people say about them. Choose the one that's the best deal for what you want.

11. Deciding what is true

There's a lot of news everywhere. Don't believe everything right away. Think about why someone might be telling you this. Check if what you're reading or watching is true. Make up your mind after you've looked into it.

12. Deciding when you’re wrong

Sometimes, friends can have disagreements. Don't just get mad right away. Try to see where they're coming from. Talk about what's going on. Find a way to fix the problem that's fair for everyone.

13. Deciding what to eat

There's always a new diet or exercise that's popular. Don't just follow it because it's trendy. Find out if it's good for you. Ask someone who knows, like a doctor. Make choices that make you feel good and stay healthy.

14. Deciding what to do today

Everyone is busy with school, chores, and hobbies. Make a list of things you need to do. Decide which ones are most important. Plan your day so you can get things done and still have fun.

15. Making Tough Choices

Sometimes, it's hard to know what's right. Think about how each choice will affect you and others. Talk to people you trust about it. Choose what feels right in your heart and is fair to others.

16. Planning for the Future

Big decisions, like where to go to school, can be tricky. Think about what you want in the future. Look at the good and bad of each choice. Talk to people who know about it. Pick what feels best for your dreams and goals.

Job Examples

17. solving problems.

Workers brainstorm ways to fix a machine quickly without making things worse when a machine breaks at a factory.

18. Decision Making

A store manager decides which products to order more of based on what's selling best.

19. Setting Goals

A team leader helps their team decide what tasks are most important to finish this month and which can wait.

20. Evaluating Ideas

At a team meeting, everyone shares ideas for a new project. The group discusses each idea's pros and cons before picking one.

21. Handling Conflict

Two workers disagree on how to do a job. Instead of arguing, they talk calmly, listen to each other, and find a solution they both like.

22. Improving Processes

A cashier thinks of a faster way to ring up items so customers don't have to wait as long.

23. Asking Questions

Before starting a big task, an employee asks for clear instructions and checks if they have the necessary tools.

24. Checking Facts

Before presenting a report, someone double-checks all their information to make sure there are no mistakes.

25. Planning for the Future

A business owner thinks about what might happen in the next few years, like new competitors or changes in what customers want, and makes plans based on those thoughts.

26. Understanding Perspectives

A team is designing a new toy. They think about what kids and parents would both like instead of just what they think is fun.

School Examples

27. researching a topic.

For a history project, a student looks up different sources to understand an event from multiple viewpoints.

28. Debating an Issue

In a class discussion, students pick sides on a topic, like school uniforms, and share reasons to support their views.

29. Evaluating Sources

While writing an essay, a student checks if the information from a website is trustworthy or might be biased.

30. Problem Solving in Math

When stuck on a tricky math problem, a student tries different methods to find the answer instead of giving up.

31. Analyzing Literature

In English class, students discuss why a character in a book made certain choices and what those decisions reveal about them.

32. Testing a Hypothesis

For a science experiment, students guess what will happen and then conduct tests to see if they're right or wrong.

33. Giving Peer Feedback

After reading a classmate's essay, a student offers suggestions for improving it.

34. Questioning Assumptions

In a geography lesson, students consider why certain countries are called "developed" and what that label means.

35. Designing a Study

For a psychology project, students plan an experiment to understand how people's memories work and think of ways to ensure accurate results.

36. Interpreting Data

In a science class, students look at charts and graphs from a study, then discuss what the information tells them and if there are any patterns.

Critical Thinking Puzzles

Not all scenarios will have a single correct answer that can be figured out by thinking critically. Sometimes we have to think critically about ethical choices or moral behaviors. 

Here are some mind games and scenarios you can solve using critical thinking. You can see the solution(s) at the end of the post.

37. The Farmer, Fox, Chicken, and Grain Problem

A farmer is at a riverbank with a fox, a chicken, and a grain bag. He needs to get all three items across the river. However, his boat can only carry himself and one of the three items at a time. 

Here's the challenge:

• If the fox is left alone with the chicken, the fox will eat the chicken.
• If the chicken is left alone with the grain, the chicken will eat the grain.

How can the farmer get all three items across the river without any item being eaten? 

38. The Rope, Jar, and Pebbles Problem

You are in a room with two long ropes hanging from the ceiling. Each rope is just out of arm's reach from the other, so you can't hold onto one rope and reach the other simultaneously. 

Your task is to tie the two rope ends together, but you can't move the position where they hang from the ceiling.

You are given a jar full of pebbles. How do you complete the task?

39. The Two Guards Problem

Imagine there are two doors. One door leads to certain doom, and the other leads to freedom. You don't know which is which.

In front of each door stands a guard. One guard always tells the truth. The other guard always lies. You don't know which guard is which.

You can ask only one question to one of the guards. What question should you ask to find the door that leads to freedom?

40. The Hourglass Problem

You have two hourglasses. One measures 7 minutes when turned over, and the other measures 4 minutes. Using just these hourglasses, how can you time exactly 9 minutes?

41. The Lifeboat Dilemma

Imagine you're on a ship that's sinking. You get on a lifeboat, but it's already too full and might flip over. 

Nearby in the water, five people are struggling: a scientist close to finding a cure for a sickness, an old couple who've been together for a long time, a mom with three kids waiting at home, and a tired teenager who helped save others but is now in danger. 

You can only save one person without making the boat flip. Who would you choose?

42. The Tech Dilemma

You work at a tech company and help make a computer program to help small businesses. You're almost ready to share it with everyone, but you find out there might be a small chance it has a problem that could show users' private info. 

If you decide to fix it, you must wait two more months before sharing it. But your bosses want you to share it now. What would you do?

43. The History Mystery

Dr. Amelia is a history expert. She's studying where a group of people traveled long ago. She reads old letters and documents to learn about it. But she finds some letters that tell a different story than what most people believe. 

If she says this new story is true, it could change what people learn in school and what they think about history. What should she do?

The Role of Bias in Critical Thinking

Have you ever decided you don’t like someone before you even know them? Or maybe someone shared an idea with you that you immediately loved without even knowing all the details. 

This experience is called bias, which occurs when you like or dislike something or someone without a good reason or knowing why. It can also take shape in certain reactions to situations, like a habit or instinct. 

Bias comes from our own experiences, what friends or family tell us, or even things we are born believing. Sometimes, bias can help us stay safe, but other times it stops us from seeing the truth.

Not all bias is bad. Bias can be a mechanism for assessing our potential safety in a new situation. If we are biased to think that anything long, thin, and curled up is a snake, we might assume the rope is something to be afraid of before we know it is just a rope.

While bias might serve us in some situations (like jumping out of the way of an actual snake before we have time to process that we need to be jumping out of the way), it often harms our ability to think critically.

How Bias Gets in the Way of Good Thinking

Selective Perception: We only notice things that match our ideas and ignore the rest. 

It's like only picking red candies from a mixed bowl because you think they taste the best, but they taste the same as every other candy in the bowl. It could also be when we see all the signs that our partner is cheating on us but choose to ignore them because we are happy the way we are (or at least, we think we are).

Agreeing with Yourself: This is called “ confirmation bias ” when we only listen to ideas that match our own and seek, interpret, and remember information in a way that confirms what we already think we know or believe. 

An example is when someone wants to know if it is safe to vaccinate their children but already believes that vaccines are not safe, so they only look for information supporting the idea that vaccines are bad.

Thinking We Know It All: Similar to confirmation bias, this is called “overconfidence bias.” Sometimes we think our ideas are the best and don't listen to others. This can stop us from learning.

Have you ever met someone who you consider a “know it”? Probably, they have a lot of overconfidence bias because while they may know many things accurately, they can’t know everything. Still, if they act like they do, they show overconfidence bias.

There's a weird kind of bias similar to this called the Dunning Kruger Effect, and that is when someone is bad at what they do, but they believe and act like they are the best .

Following the Crowd: This is formally called “groupthink”. It's hard to speak up with a different idea if everyone agrees. But this can lead to mistakes.

An example of this we’ve all likely seen is the cool clique in primary school. There is usually one person that is the head of the group, the “coolest kid in school”, and everyone listens to them and does what they want, even if they don’t think it’s a good idea.

How to Overcome Biases

Here are a few ways to learn to think better, free from our biases (or at least aware of them!).

Know Your Biases: Realize that everyone has biases. If we know about them, we can think better.

Listen to Different People: Talking to different kinds of people can give us new ideas.

Ask Why: Always ask yourself why you believe something. Is it true, or is it just a bias?

Understand Others: Try to think about how others feel. It helps you see things in new ways.

Keep Learning: Always be curious and open to new information.

In today's world, everything changes fast, and there's so much information everywhere. This makes critical thinking super important. It helps us distinguish between what's real and what's made up. It also helps us make good choices. But thinking this way can be tough sometimes because of biases. These are like sneaky thoughts that can trick us. The good news is we can learn to see them and think better.

There are cool tools and ways we've talked about, like the "Socratic Questioning" method and the "Six Thinking Hats." These tools help us get better at thinking. These thinking skills can also help us in school, work, and everyday life.

We’ve also looked at specific scenarios where critical thinking would be helpful, such as deciding what diet to follow and checking facts.

Thinking isn't just a skill—it's a special talent we improve over time. Working on it lets us see things more clearly and understand the world better. So, keep practicing and asking questions! It'll make you a smarter thinker and help you see the world differently.

Critical Thinking Puzzles (Solutions)

The farmer, fox, chicken, and grain problem.

• The farmer first takes the chicken across the river and leaves it on the other side.
• He returns to the original side and takes the fox across the river.
• After leaving the fox on the other side, he returns the chicken to the starting side.
• He leaves the chicken on the starting side and takes the grain bag across the river.
• He leaves the grain with the fox on the other side and returns to get the chicken.
• The farmer takes the chicken across, and now all three items -- the fox, the chicken, and the grain -- are safely on the other side of the river.

The Rope, Jar, and Pebbles Problem

• Take one rope and tie the jar of pebbles to its end.
• Swing the rope with the jar in a pendulum motion.
• While the rope is swinging, grab the other rope and wait.
• As the swinging rope comes back within reach due to its pendulum motion, grab it.
• With both ropes within reach, untie the jar and tie the rope ends together.

The Two Guards Problem

The question is, "What would the other guard say is the door to doom?" Then choose the opposite door.

The Hourglass Problem

• Start both hourglasses. 
• When the 4-minute hourglass runs out, turn it over.
• When the 7-minute hourglass runs out, the 4-minute hourglass will have been running for 3 minutes. Turn the 7-minute hourglass over. 
• When the 4-minute hourglass runs out for the second time (a total of 8 minutes have passed), the 7-minute hourglass will run for 1 minute. Turn the 7-minute hourglass again for 1 minute to empty the hourglass (a total of 9 minutes passed).

The Boat and Weights Problem

Take the cat over first and leave it on the other side. Then, return and take the fish across next. When you get there, take the cat back with you. Leave the cat on the starting side and take the cat food across. Lastly, return to get the cat and bring it to the other side.

The Lifeboat Dilemma

There isn’t one correct answer to this problem. Here are some elements to consider:

• Moral Principles: What values guide your decision? Is it the potential greater good for humanity (the scientist)? What is the value of long-standing love and commitment (the elderly couple)? What is the future of young children who depend on their mothers? Or the selfless bravery of the teenager?
• Future Implications: Consider the future consequences of each choice. Saving the scientist might benefit millions in the future, but what moral message does it send about the value of individual lives?
• Emotional vs. Logical Thinking: While it's essential to engage empathy, it's also crucial not to let emotions cloud judgment entirely. For instance, while the teenager's bravery is commendable, does it make him more deserving of a spot on the boat than the others?
• Acknowledging Uncertainty: The scientist claims to be close to a significant breakthrough, but there's no certainty. How does this uncertainty factor into your decision?
• Personal Bias: Recognize and challenge any personal biases, such as biases towards age, profession, or familial status.

The Tech Dilemma

Again, there isn’t one correct answer to this problem. Here are some elements to consider:

• Evaluate the Risk: How severe is the potential vulnerability? Can it be easily exploited, or would it require significant expertise? Even if the circumstances are rare, what would be the consequences if the vulnerability were exploited?
• Stakeholder Considerations: Different stakeholders will have different priorities. Upper management might prioritize financial projections, the marketing team might be concerned about the product's reputation, and customers might prioritize the security of their data. How do you balance these competing interests?
• Short-Term vs. Long-Term Implications: While launching on time could meet immediate financial goals, consider the potential long-term damage to the company's reputation if the vulnerability is exploited. Would the short-term gains be worth the potential long-term costs?
• Ethical Implications : Beyond the financial and reputational aspects, there's an ethical dimension to consider. Is it right to release a product with a known vulnerability, even if the chances of it being exploited are low?
• Seek External Input: Consulting with cybersecurity experts outside your company might be beneficial. They could provide a more objective risk assessment and potential mitigation strategies.
• Communication: How will you communicate the decision, whatever it may be, both internally to your team and upper management and externally to your customers and potential users?

The History Mystery

Dr. Amelia should take the following steps:

• Verify the Letters: Before making any claims, she should check if the letters are actual and not fake. She can do this by seeing when and where they were written and if they match with other things from that time.
• Get a Second Opinion: It's always good to have someone else look at what you've found. Dr. Amelia could show the letters to other history experts and see their thoughts.
• Research More: Maybe there are more documents or letters out there that support this new story. Dr. Amelia should keep looking to see if she can find more evidence.
• Share the Findings: If Dr. Amelia believes the letters are true after all her checks, she should tell others. This can be through books, talks, or articles.
• Stay Open to Feedback: Some people might agree with Dr. Amelia, and others might not. She should listen to everyone and be ready to learn more or change her mind if new information arises.

Ultimately, Dr. Amelia's job is to find out the truth about history and share it. It's okay if this new truth differs from what people used to believe. History is about learning from the past, no matter the story.

Related posts:

• Experimenter Bias (Definition + Examples)
• Hasty Generalization Fallacy (31 Examples + Similar Names)
• Ad Hoc Fallacy (29 Examples + Other Names)
• Confirmation Bias (Examples + Definition)
• Equivocation Fallacy (26 Examples + Description)

Reference this article:

About The Author

Free Personality Test

Free Memory Test

Free IQ Test

PracticalPie.com is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow Us On:

Youtube Facebook Instagram X/Twitter

Psychology Resources

Developmental

Personality

Relationships

Psychologists

Serial Killers

Psychology Tests

Personality Quiz

Memory Test

Depression test

Type A/B Personality Test

© PracticalPsychology. All rights reserved

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

• Hard skills
• Soft skills
• Life skills
• People skills
• Social skills
• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions

7 barriers to critical thinking and how to overcome?

Critical thinking is a skill that lets one understand and evaluate an issue or situation logically. All available facts and information related or likely to be related to the issue are analyzed. It involves sorting, organizing, and analyzing facts and information to define a problem and then find an effective solution. It is a mindset that is crucial for the desired development of our personal and professional life. In this article, we will discuss critical thinking and process, barriers of critical thinking, and how to overcome it.

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is the quality of Thinking clearly and thoroughly. It’s a Careful application of reason to explain an issue. It is the ability to define and analyze facts to understand a problem deeply. It often involves a few steps that start from identifying and characterizing a problem and continues through analysis, interpretation, and ends up with developing a solution.�

A critical thinker questions any idea or assumption rather than accepting it blindly. They approach the problem consistently and systematically rather than by intuition. Identify, make, and evaluate arguments and use the facts, arguments, and findings to build the real picture.

Examples of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking can be applied in every sphere of our life. Doctors, Lawyers, Scientists, Politicians, and business Professionals always using the Critical thinking approach. Few examples of Critical thinking are given bellow.

Evaluating news

Today we are confronting with plenty of news and events every day. We are getting information from various media e.g., newspapers, radio, television, and online media like the internet and social media. With the blessing of these media, it has become effortless to get information from anywhere anytime today.

At the same time, it is tough to say whether any news we came across is authentic or not. Doubt regarding online news is increasing nowadays, as fake news is widespread there today. While we think to find a solution to this problem, critical thinking is the only one that can apply.

Whenever we come across any news or information, we should not take it as a divine word. We should try to find or guess the answer to few questions like “From whom it came, what is the place it came from, why did he make it, is there any interest of him or anyone else and so on.”

By analyzing the answers to these questions, we can justify the news’s reliability and authenticity.

Deciding to Purchase a product

Deciding to purchase a product also requires to think critically today. A few years back, we didn’t need to overthink to buy something. It was easy to go to the mall or market, look for the item we need, choose one from the available item, and buy it.

As we are living in a digital age, there is also scope to apply a critical thinking approach to decide to buy something. If you would like to purchase something, you first justify the need for the thing, i.e., do you need the item, or can another way meet it.

If you feel the need, then search the product on the internet to find the model and brand available in the market and know each one’s merits and demerits. Ask your friends and others within your network to see the product’s experience if you find anyone having a good experience to collect further details of the product from him and the internet.

If you do this, there is a low chance of having a bad experience with this product.

Taking care of Health

Health is one of the prime concern to every conscious people today. Most of us try to keeping well, try to get rid of obesity, etc. And there Is no scarcity of suggestions and information around us regarding this. Some of these are not scientific, exaggerated, and rumor.

Moreover, any time information is continually changing. So we need to apply critical thinking to decide how to lead our lives, choose a healthy diet, eat, and what not to eat.�

Presently we are facing the COVID-19 situation throughout the world. And this Pandemic disease is somewhat different from other diseases. Even the scientists are getting baffled to suggest what to do.

Suggestions and information regarding the disorders are frequently changing. A recognized treatment yet to be discovered. If we apply critical thinking, we can be benefitted at least a bit.�

Risk assessment

Business organizations today are undergoing various risks. Economic uncertainty, Political agitation, Climate change, Cyberattack, etc. are continuously pushing the business organization into a threat. To survive within such an environment, business organizations need to assess the risk and threat it abounds with. And it is the employee’s critical thinking ability, which can evaluate the risk with the right approximate.

It involves the activity like listing the risk, defining the nature and extent of each, finding out the factor that influences the risk, whether it is a temporary or permanent risk, and finally to take measures to mitigate the risks.

Some industries are more risk involved e.g., a construction company where the working environment is risky for workers’ lives. So here, addressing and assessing the risk factor is essential.

Otherwise, there could be injuries or even deaths that cause workforce shortage and negatively impact its reputation. Similarly, a financial organization is much more prone to be affected by some financial index.

For example, the introduction of a new law affects overall business activities and customers. It requires critical thinking skills, such as analysis, creativity, and problem-solving. If the financial institution doesn’t apply these critical thinking skills, it could result in losing profit or will suffer legal consequences from regulatory non-compliance. �

Elements of Critical thinking process

Critical thinking is a process that compromises some elements and requires a few steps to follow.

1. Problem Identification

critical thinking process begins with the identification of a problem. Note abnormalities and indications that are likely to cause a problem. Consider it is a problem, why is it a problem. Determine why this problem is there and the possible consequences if no attempt is taken to solve it.

2. Information Gathering

Once something is considered as a problem, gather information about it. Engage yourself to learn as much as possible about the problem. Look for possible reasons, facts, and evidence; Ask other people’s opinions and perspectives regarding the issue. Gather information from multiple sources.

3. Evaluation

In this step, evaluate the information collected in the previous stage. Assess the validity and reliability of the information and ensure that they are accurate. Evaluate the source of information and check whether it is from a single source or more than one source.

4. Find solutions

After evaluating the information and evidence collected, try to deduce solutions to the problem. Plan several solutions based on the conclusions made in the evaluation. List the advantages and disadvantages of each solution.

5. Choose the best solution and Implement

This is the final stage where each solution already suggested is evaluated by considering all the advantages and disadvantages. Consider the risk a solution pose and think whether a solution is easy or difficult to implement. Finally, a practical solution is chosen and implemented.

What are the barriers to critical thinking and how to overcome?

Critical thinking is an important mindset that can help improve our personal life and our professional life. But in reality, very few among us can think critically. Most people don’t have Critical thinking skills because of some reason.

The following are the barriers to critical thinking that prevent us from thinking critically. Also, how to get around this barrier is discussed here.

1. Egocentric behavior

It is the tendency of a person to relate everything to himself and leads to the inability to evaluate others’ perspectives and feelings. He can not tolerate anything beyond his philosophy. He wants others to think of an issue in the same way he thinks.

As a result, he can not broaden his thinking, and the Peoples surrounding him dishearten to think critically. It is one of the most significant Barriers to Critical Thinking and many a time challenging to overcome.�

It is complicated to correct this behavior for a person as he can not find this character flaw. One thing that can help eliminate this tendency is to bring them to an environment where everyone can exchange their views, respect others’ opinions, and question any ideas. Arrange debates, open question-answer session, and group discussion to make them accustomed to open thinking.

2. Group thinking

It is another harmful thing or one of the barriers to Critical thinking. In this case, most of the group people don’t give their views or ask any questions. They remain idle and support whatever other says without any argument.�

To overcome this obstacle, each group member should stand apart and question and argue ideas and opinions presented before him and give his thoughts, beliefs, and ideas.

Only suggesting to do such is not sufficient; also inspire them to think and ask questions, help them grow thinking capability, bring context, and create a situation before him to believe and ask questions easily.

3. Drone mentality

It can be described as a person’s inability to pay attention to what’s going on around him. These kinds of people cannot be attentive in a class meeting or discussion. It becomes a habit for them, and as a result, they cannot think so much.

This habit grows when a person gets exhausted from working a long time and find work tedious. To overcome this barrier, Teachers, supervisors, or hosts Should aware of their audience or officials, make things interesting to them, change topics and tasks.

4. Social condition

The society we live in has some values, thoughts, and assumptions prevailing. Therefore many of us think in a particular way. Their thinking is related to society’s values, beliefs, and assumptions. Usually, it is challenging for them to think beyond this spectrum.�

Again, this is one of the significant barriers to critical thinking as it confined our thinking to a limit. This barrier is also tough to overcome as most people do not realize they are being conditioned to think in a certain way.

Only social and cultural awareness can help to overcome this barrier.

5. Personal Biases

Personal Biases hinder Critical thinking because they influence a person’s justice, and It also prevents one from using experience, reasoning, and common sense to make correct decisions.

To overcome this decision, everyone should practice honesty and integrity.

6. Work pressure

We often are swamped in the workplace. We don’t have much time to accomplish the work assigned. It does affect our skill of critical thinking awfully. When the time is short, and the deadline is knocking the door, most of us walk in a way that does not involve any strategic thinking to complete the job. And here is when the barrier arises to think critically.

To overcome this barrier, we should have a plan and schedule for each job, whether small or big. Also, we should not keep work piled for the future.

It hinders the overall growth and development of a person. As an effect, it is also a barrier to critical thinking. Fear makes a person unconfident and demotivated, and he is not willing to think beyond his circle.

To remove fear from people’s minds, managers, supervisors, or heads of the workplace can play an essential role by ensuring the right working environment.

How can I apply critical thinking to my life ?

In our everyday life, we frequently face various situations, problems, or difficulties. And many a time we conventionally get around this. But if we apply critical thinking, we can quickly meet that moreover, the solution we find here would be more effective than anyone we get otherwise.

Whatever types of situations or problems we encounter and whatever professional we are, student, teacher, doctor, engineer, lawyer, and so on, we first treat everything that we face or everything that we do a problem. And we have the determination or passion for having a solution to it.

Then we try to collect information on this. To do so, we should fond of acquiring knowledge. We always keep our sense alert to receive information from our surroundings.

Next, we must have a certain level of analytical ability to deduce facts from data. However, this requires practice. If we start thinking in this way and continue, hopefully, we could apply critical thinking in our life.

The human being is the best of creations because of the incredible power of its brain. Critical thinking is nothing but to utilize the brain more effectively. We could realize how powerful our brain is if we start thinking critically.

Critical thinking has tremendous value to the employer. Already it is in the list of top seeking soft skills in the world. So it is time for all of us to start thinking critically and make the future generations habituated with this.

But there are some barriers to critical thinking process and If we try, we will be able to overcome them.

Refferences

• balance careers

• Search Search Search …
• Search Search …

How to Overcome Critical Thinking Barriers

Critical thinking is typically needed when graded performances and livelihoods are involved. However, its true value shines outside of academic and professional settings. When we have the power to think critically , we’re not only going to get recognized at school or at work. We also become better at solving personal problems , making crucial decisions, and maintaining good relationships with others.

No Openminded Person is Completely Infallible

In a perfect world, a person who always makes the effort to develop his or her thinking will make the right choices every single time. Unfortunately, we already know that that’s not how things operate. No matter how much we keep our minds open to new experiences and alternate viewpoints, we are not exempt from missing the point sometimes.

Yes, practicing critical thinking is bound to improve our thought processes and our whole understanding of the world. However, that is not enough to keep us from failing to exercise our best judgment in certain situations.

When we’re trying to develop a skill, we shouldn’t only focus on improving what we’re already good at. If we wish to become undeniably better, we should also look at what we’re bad at. Once we acknowledge our weaknesses, the room for growth becomes all the more limitless.

Barriers to Critical Thinking: What is Clouding Your Judgments?

There will be moments when we’ll lose sight of our problems’ best solution because something prevents us from moving towards the right path. Something is clouding our vision and holding us back from realizing that we are doing things wrong. These are the barriers to critical thinking.

• Egocentric Thinking

This kind of thinking focuses too much on oneself. People who are egocentric thinkers are so consumed by their self-narratives and self-interests. They fail to consider other people’s ideas and thoughts. Sometimes they may not even be aware that they’re doing it.

Egocentric thinking usually stems from extreme closemindedness. If we wish to overcome this barrier, we should start being mindful of other’s needs. Our minds will gradually open up once we realize that their perspectives are as valid as ours.

• Biased Experiences

The biased view of our experiences stems from egocentric thinking. While the saying “experience is the best teacher” rings true, our views of our experiences are usually distorted because of how it made us feel. When we’re too stuck inside our heads, this can lead to a cycle of self-delusion.

To get out of our biased experiences, it is important to question ourselves multiple times if we are thinking of our situation rationally. A good way of confirming this is to ask our trusted friends what they think. We must choose someone who can tell us things as it is –– someone who isn’t afraid to speak the truth even if that’s not what we want to hear.

• Arrogance and Intolerance

Another offshoot of egocentric thinking are arrogance and intolerance. These two characteristics can set anyone back because it is often a result of a bloated sense of self. When someone believes in themselves too much, they refuse to see that others may have better ideas.

Arrogance and intolerance mainly stem from the fear of failing –– resulting in wanting to be right all the time. To combat this, we must learn to let go of the stubborn need to be right. Life is not simply about getting ahead of everyone else.

• Schedule Pressures

Working against time can often cause people to think poorly and make the wrong decisions. While it is true that time is of the essence, unrealistic expectations will just result in a vicious cycle of shortcuts, procrastination, and unnecessary stress.

Oftentimes we underestimate the time and effort it takes to get things done, leading to the pressures of having to work within tight and unreasonable schedules. To break out of such a vicious cycle, we must learn how to properly plan things out before we even start. This will save us from wasting time and resources that we will never get back.

• Drone Mentality

This mentality typically happens when we become too comfortable with the status quo. We begin to act without thinking, without paying attention to the world around us, like we are on autopilot. We forget how to act in the face of new challenges and would rather stay within our comfort zones.

To wake ourselves up from autopilot mode, it is important to constantly expose ourselves to things that excite us. This can be hard to do on our own, so it definitely helps to surround ourselves with people who will inspire us to go after personal growth.

• Social Conditioning

One of humanity’s biggest problems is its inability to accept each other. More often than not, our refusal to accept others is a result of social conditioning from the moment we are born. We are taught to believe that certain stereotypes are the absolute truth.

This is why it’s important to recognize that our way of life is not the only right way to live. Once we choose to see beyond the stereotypes, we will learn to get rid of beliefs that only cause more harm than good.

When every form of media you come across expresses the same train of thought, people are bound to think that what they’re saying is the norm. This is another facet of social conditioning, and it becomes very dangerous when no one bothers to question the information that they’re being fed.

Depending on what is being established as the norm, it can be uncomfortable to go against the group’s tide. But to be a critical thinker means you have to continually ask if something makes logical sense. It’s about upholding your principles when you know that something clearly isn’t right.

To successfully avoid running into these harmful barriers, we must first become aware of what they are, and that we are not immune to them. When we know what we should consciously avoid, we allow ourselves to make informed decisions and become better at practicing the best critical thinking techniques.

You may also like

Decision Making Levels: Understanding the Hierarchy in Organizations

Decision making is a multifaceted process that varies significantly depending on the level at which it occurs. At different tiers of an […]

The Basics of Using Critical Thinking in Business

In the world of business, being precise and careful is highly recommended. However, how often do you respond too rashly to a […]

What is Scenario Thinking?

In a world that is becoming increasingly more unpredictable, planning for the future has become even more of a challenge than it […]

The Connection between Associative Thinking and Entrepreneurship: Exploring the Link

Associative thinking is a cognitive process that involves connecting seemingly unrelated concepts to generate new ideas. This type of thinking is essential […]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

How Resistance Shapes Health and Well-Being

The Institute for Lifecourse Development, University of Greenwich, London, England

Resistance involves a range of actions such as disobedience, insubordination, misbehaviour, agitation, advocacy, subversion, and opposition. Action that occurs both publicly, privately, and day-to-day in the delivery of care, in discourse and knowledge. In this article I will demonstrate how resistance plays an important (but often overlooked) role in shaping health and well-being, for better and worse. To show how it can be largely productive and protective, I will argue that resistance intersects with health in at least two ways. First, it acts as an important counterbalance to power; undermining harmful policies, disobeying unfair instructions, challenging rights abuses, confronting those who would otherwise turn a blind eye and even holding ourselves to account when simply accepting the status quo. Second, and beyond being oppositional, resistance is a constructive, productive force, that is fundamental to imagining alternatives; new and better futures and perhaps most fundamentally resistance is cause for hope that we are not resigned to the status quo. While there are numerous examples of how resistance has been employed in service of health and well-being, resistance is not always rational or productive, it can also harm health. I will briefly explore this point. Finally, I will offer some reflections on the intersections of power and health and why this makes resistance both distinct and important when it comes to how it shapes health and well-being.

What is Resistance?

This paper is about resistance; more specifically to highlight its importance as it relates to health and well-being; as a positive force that has been and will continue to serve and protect health and well-being but also as a force that can be harmful to health. When I say “resistance” I mean it in its broadest sense. Resistance entails a range of actions; disobedience, insubordination, misbehaviour, agitation, advocacy, subversion, and opposition (Essex 2021 ). As it relates to health, resistance could be carried out by healthcare workers but also by virtually any individual or collective with some type of interest in health and well-being. Resistance includes action that occurs publicly but that also occurs day-to-day in the delivery of care. Perhaps more fundamentally I also refer to resistance that exists in discourse and knowledge; resistance that challenges assumptions, beliefs, and practices and what we think we know about certain things. The argument I present here is not to say we disobey for the sake of it, nor is it a case against obedience, why we should comply with authority or obey the law for example; resistance can be counter-productive, it can seek to maintain the status quo and entrench power; resistance can also be met with resistance. It is to say that too often we accept things as they are, too often we accept inequalities, unfair structures, broken systems, and the “truths” that perpetuate injustice, too often we accept those small indignities day-to-day that chip away at health and well-being, too often we fail to question authority, too often we fail to question ourselves. Equally, the role of resistance in securing and protecting health and well-being has largely been overlooked. In this article I will argue that resistance can serve as an important means to oppose threats to health, that is, structures, policy, laws, or the multitude of others factors that could negatively impact on health and well-being. Not only this, but resistance has a role to play in imagining alternatives to the status quo, that is, imagining how society could be better structured to support health and well-being or imagining alternatives to harmful systems and policy. In this article I want to fill this gap by drawing on two different conceptualizations of resistance, the first sees resistance as oppositional to but shaped by power, while the second sees resistance as more entangled with and inseparable to power. As a caveat I will also show how resistance can harm health. On the topic of what I am hoping to do, it is also worth briefly addressing what I am not going to do below. I do not want to dwell on the lack of definitional consensus or be caught up in discussions on resistance and its precise relationship to power for example. I also am not going to discuss distinct forms of resistance and their justification, such as civil disobedience; these conversations are of course important but are for another time. Before outlining my reasons in more detail let’s turn to a number of examples of resistance, to not only show how common such action has been as it relates to health and healthcare but to begin to sketch some further contours of what can be a relatively broad and contested concept (Vinthagen and Johansson 2013 ).

While we can trace “agitation” 1 in public health back to the 1800s (and while I will say more about how many public health advances were fought for below; Paterson 1948 ) and while we can chart a history of similar action and agitation, we only need to look to recent history to illustrate the frequency and diversity of resistance. Throughout 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic the “heroics” of healthcare workers were widely celebrated (Cox 2020 ), far less reported were the actions of those who opposed government responses to the pandemic, who demanded greater protections for themselves and their patients, who asserted that their “heroics” were only necessary because of decades of underfunding and neglect (Berger 2021 ). On the morning of September 15, 2020, a group of Ecuadorian medical students marched to the city centre in the capital, Quito, just outside the presidential palace demanding the government commit to a recently passed law that would guarantee them a contract and salary for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite police using tear gas to disperse the students, this was only the first day of a four day national protest which included marches, sit-ins, and picketing. It was only after this strike that the government agreed to negotiate. By September 18, the government had agreed to meet the protesters demands and comply with the law that was introduced almost two months earlier (Ricci 2020 ). In neighbouring Peru at about the same time, protests by healthcare workers persisted throughout late 2020, demanding better working conditions and highlighting decades of under-investment in health (Associated Press 2021a ). By early 2021, a memorial was set up for the 120 nurses and 260 doctors who had died because of COVID-19 (Associated Press 2021b ). At the same time and again, not far away, on February 19, 2021, Bolivian healthcare workers began a strike, demanding the repeal of an emergency law which outlawed strikes and permitted the hiring of foreign health workers. In the days after the strike was called footage emerged of Bolivian riot police using tear gas on protesters (Reuters 2021 ).

Such action can be seen against the backdrop of broader unrest across the globe, with these events not only isolated to South America. In Myanmar, after the military coup in February 2021, healthcare workers had a central role in the broader protests across the country, initially going on strike, concerned about the state of democracy in the country, noting that they “simply [did] not want to work for the regime that staged the military coup” (Nachemson 2021 , ¶4). As the situation deteriorated reports emerged that many healthcare workers had faced intimidation and harassment at the hands of security forces (World Medical Association 2021 ) and that by mid-February hundreds had gone into hiding as the government had sought their arrest (Htwe 2021 ).

As well as COVID-19, 2020 will also be remembered for protests against police brutality, particularly in relation to black and ethnic minority communities. Many of these protests began in the United States, where black Americans are far more likely than those of other ethnic backgrounds to be killed by police (Edwards, Lee, and Esposito 2019 ) and after a series of high-profile cases of brutality and police killings throughout 2020. These issues came to a head after the death of George Floyd. Floyd was an African American man killed during an arrest after a police officer knelt on his neck for almost nine minutes. Footage of Floyd’s death circulated globally, causing global protest; highlighting a public health issue, racism, equally as pressing (if not more so) than the COVID-19 pandemic. Health workers were again involved and joined part of a much larger outcry to address racial inequalities and police treatment of those from minority backgrounds. Dr Rhea Boyd, a paediatrician who joined the protests, noted that “protest is a profound public health intervention, because it allows us to finally address and end forms of inequality” (Ducharme 2020 , ¶ 2). While almost all of the above examples focus on healthcare workers, they do not have a monopoly on such action as it relates to health, far from it. Over the last several years we can see hundreds of examples of the general public taking to street in making demands about their health, from vaccine mandates (Willsher 2021 ) to making demands about healthcare services (Ferguson 2021 ). More recently in the United States (BBC 2021 ) and Poland (Associated Press 2021c ), thousands have taken to the street to protest strict abortion laws.

Even with these many examples, these largely public, mostly collective acts of resistance from healthcare workers, patients, and the general public only represent what is a small spectrum of action that could be considered resistance. Resistance also occurs day to day, it needn’t be public, collective, or even have demands attached. For example, we could resist by undermining structures of systems that harm health, care could be provided outside of traditional institutions for those who might not otherwise have access to healthcare. While this type of resistance rarely makes headlines, its impact can be just as significant as public and collective forms of protest. I will expand upon this point and offer some more examples below. My point should be made however, that resistance as it relates to health and well-being is remarkably common. Despite this however, the role of resistance in securing and protecting health and well-being has largely been overlooked. In this article I want to fill this gap by drawing on two different conceptualizations of resistance, the first sees resistance as oppositional to but shaped by power, framed by the work of Scott ( 1986 ). The second conceptualization sees resistance as more entangled and inseparable to power, framed by Foucault’s ( 2012 ) work on power and on more recent thought on resistance from authors such as Vinthagen and Johansson ( 2013 ) and Lilja ( 2021 ). Drawing on these conceptualizations I will show how resistance shapes health and well-being, acting as both a positive and negative force. I will first explore resistance as a means to respond to power; power that threatens, compromises, or impacts health and well-being; power that oppresses or coerces. Resistance can act as an important counterbalance to power; undermining harmful policies, disobeying unfair instructions, challenging rights abuses, confronting those who would otherwise turn a blind eye and even holding ourselves to account when simply accepting the status quo. My second point relates to resistance as being a constructive, productive force, as fundamental to critical thinking and in imagining alternatives. While resistance could be seen simply as a means to act in opposition and while in many cases this is somewhat true, this limits our inquiry; resistance is also fundamentally about imagining and pursuing something better. I will go on to offer somewhat of a caveat, showing how resistance could also be irrational, counter-productive, and even re-enforce existing power relations; ultimately resistance could also be harmful to health. Perhaps more generally and even with this caveat in mind, I hope to challenge common assumptions that obedience should be our default; we should be wary of the status quo, we should be sceptical of authority, and in some cases, we should take the streets in the name of health. The impact that resistance has on health and well-being is somewhat difficult to measure empirically, so I will illustrate my argument with a number of examples, both historical and more recent.

Resistance as Opposition to Power

When we think about resistance, perhaps the first thing that comes to mind are the many examples of public protest discussed above. Such protests more often than not have relatively clear grievances or demands attached and often have a relatively clear opposition; the government, police, employers, or some type of policy or structure that may be seen as harmful. Resistance however also takes more subtle forms, occurring in day-to-day actions, where grievances might be less overt and opposition less well defined. On this, let’s turn to the concept of “everyday resistance.”

Everyday resistance is a concept that was introduced by Scott ( 1986 ) who contrasted it to open, organized resistance, such as marches or civil disobedience. Everyday resistance is less visible and often employed by groups who have relatively little power and thus luxury to openly confront their oppressors. In Scott’s ( 1989 ) words, everyday resistance is “virtually always a stratagem deployed by a weaker party in thwarting the claims of an institutional or class opponent who dominates the public exercise of power” (52). A number of further contrasts can be drawn with more open forms of resistance. Scott for example, argues that while objectives might be the same, compared to more open acts, everyday resistance “is ‘heavy’ on the instrumental side and ‘light’ on the symbolic confrontation side” (Scott 1989 , 56). In practical terms everyday resistance includes action such as, “foot-dragging, dissimulation, false-compliance, pilfering, feigned ignorance, slander, arson, sabotage, and so forth” (Scott 1986 ). Such action is often also quiet, disguised and undeclared. Essentially, many everyday acts could be considered resistance. For those sceptical of this concept and that such action could be considered resistance, Scott argues that the form of resistance is largely shaped by the form of power in question, that is, those who claim that “‘real resistance’ is organized, principled, and has revolutionary implications … overlook entirely the vital role of power relations in constraining forms of resistance” (Scott 1989 , 51). He goes on to note that if we only care for “real resistance” then “all that is being measured may be the level of repression that structures the available options” (Scott 1989 , 51). With this understanding, resistance then not only opposes power via public, collective acts but day-to-day acts, sabotage, subversion, and even more subtle, individual acts. Below I will discuss some examples of how this could apply to health.

In 1942, Nazi Germany occupied Poland. Millions died during the occupation and many groups, such as the Jews, were singled out, persecuted, and sent to their deaths (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum 2020 ). After World War I the Nazis were particularly weary of communicable diseases, having been exposed to a number of outbreaks during the war. German authorities required authorities in Poland to report all suspected communicable diseases, including Typhus. Polish nationals diagnosed with the disease were spared being sent to labour camps and were quarantined. Jews with the disease were executed (Chapoutot 2014 ). Eugene Lazowski, a doctor who already had a long history of subversion and defiance recognized this and instead created what could best be labelled a fake Typhus epidemic. Lazowski and his colleagues, after learning how to administer the test for typhus, recognized they could create a false positive result, by injecting patients with dead antibodies. This “epidemic” was soon large enough to declare a number of villages an “epidemic area,” which meant the withdrawal of German troops allowing the population to live with relative freedom (Bennett and Tyszczuk 1990 ). When the German authorities questioned the low mortality rate due to the epidemic, a committee was assembled to investigate. When meeting German officials, Lazowski and is colleagues threw a lavish party, while also assembling the most unwell-looking people in the village and having them huddle in filthy huts. After a cursory inspection, with more senior members occupied by the reception, the German committee left and did not return. All of this occurred in secret and was only disclosed in the 1970s, with the doctors not even revealing what they were doing to their patients. It was estimated that the doctors saved an estimated eight thousand people from being killed or imprisoned during their three-year campaign (Goor 2013 ).

Two more recent examples, shed more light onto how resistance could serve health. In 2011 many residents in Ghouta, a small suburban area on the outskirts of Damascus joined protests against the Syrian government. Amid a government siege, Dr Amani Ballour abandoned her paediatric training to begin to treat those impacted by the violence, volunteering at a hospital held by rebel forces (Ballour, in Bseiso, Hofman, and Whittall 2021 ). At the same time, a few hours north in Aleppo, Dr Hamza al-Kateab formed a hospital to begin to treat those again impacted by the violence in Aleppo (Prasad 2019 ). Both continued to work despite the risks they faced; violence, frequent attacks by the government and the death of hospital staff. In late 2016, as the government re-took Aleppo, al-Kateab evacuated the hospital while in Ghouta, Ballour was elected and promoted as the hospital director; the first and only female in Syria to hold this position. She ran the hospital until the government quelled the last resistance in 2018, after which she was forced to flee to a refugee camp in Turkey (Willsher 2020 ). Both Ballour’s and al-Kateab’s stories are captured in the films “The Cave” (Fayyad 2019 ) and “For Sama” (Al-Kateab and Watts 2019 ) respectively. These films, that document the atrocities committed in Syria, were acts of resistance in themselves, as was the act of staying and providing care. Most fundamentally, the Syrian government’s intent was to make life as unbearable as possible for its own citizens, to starve people out, to re-take territory by attrition. Staying was an act of resistance, providing healthcare was an act of resistance. This was not lost on Waad al-Kateab, the director of For Sama, who characterized the uprising in Syria as a “revolution against oppression” and noted that if put in the same situation again, many would “still resist until their last breath” (Kanawati 2020 , ¶8).

Beyond the dramatic examples above, resistance occurs in far less exceptional circumstances. In a study that examined everyday resistance in how medical students responded to the professional lapses of more senior staff, Shaw et al. ( 2018 ) found that everyday resistance amongst medical students was a frequent occurrence and took a multitude of forms, including verbal, bodily, and psychological forms of resistance. Furthermore this research highlighted the often subtle and nuanced ways in which resistance was acted out, in this case in acts that challenged or undermined professionalism lapses of more senior clinicians. Simple acts such as closing curtains for privacy when others had left them open or verbally challenging unprofessional behaviour were common, challenging discourse that was unprofessional or modelling generally accepted professional behaviour. In this case, the authors noted that resistance served several important purposes in immediate practice, from alleviating distress, to addressing lapses in care, and in raising awareness about inappropriate actions, resulting in behaviour change. Beyond these more immediate impacts, resistance served to more subtly challenge dominant and taken for granted structures; undermining hierarchy for example.

From occupied Poland to otherwise unremarkable hospital wards, resistance has been and will continue to be utilized by healthcare workers and the healthcare community as a means to protect health and resist oppression. Resistance could involve open, collective acts, such as protest marches or civil disobedience. It could also occur in various everyday acts, such as those documented above in occupied Poland and Syria. Such forms of resistance could involve disobeying an order, it could mean subverting or undermining harmful policy that in some way harms health or well-being. The action of Dr Amani Ballour and Dr Hamza al-Kateab in simply staying and providing care throughout the Syrian civil war were acts of resistance. In the above examples we can see how resistance is shaped by the form of power to which it is opposed. Under most circumstances, staying and doing your job would not be an act of resistance. Under most circumstances, injecting patients without their consent would be unconscionable, in Nazi occupied Poland such action became an act of resistance and saved thousands of lives. The above examples show how resistance has been used to challenge, undermine, and ultimately counter power that threatens health. Even though the above conceptualization of resistance could involve any range of activities, such an understanding of resistance is still somewhat of an oversimplification. While resistance is fundamentally oppositional, this conceptualization risks reducing it to something that is reactionary; it is more than this, resistance is entangled with power. This leads to my second point that resistance can also be a constructive, productive force.

Resistance as Constructive

Few would argue that resistance is most fundamentally oppositional, it is a concept that can only exist in opposition to something else. To understand how resistance serves as a constructive force, we need to reconceptualize how we understand resistance and to do this we first need to understand how power is conceptualized. On this point, we first turn to Foucault. While Foucault spent comparatively little time speaking about resistance, his ideas about power are particularly important here. For Foucault ( 2012 ), power was not wielded, it was ubiquitous, diffuse, and without individual authors. Power was essentially everywhere and was embodied in knowledge and “regimes of truth” (Foucault 2012 ). Foucault described regimes of truth as discourse that society

… accepts and makes function as true; the mechanisms and instances which enable one to distinguish true and false statements, the means by which each is sanctioned; the techniques and procedures accorded value in the acquisition of truth; the status of those who are charged with saying what counts as true. (Foucault 1980 , 131).

In other words, power dictates the way any topic can be meaningfully discussed. Building on this conceptualization of power, many have reconceptualized resistance as something that is not just oppositional but something that is far more complex and entangled with power.

Vinthagen and Johansson ( 2013 ) for example, argue that as resistance exists in relation to power, this also means that resistance can also be ubiquitous, diffuse, and without individual authors. They go on to argue that this essentially means that power and resistance are interdependent which makes it almost impossible to separate them, instead leaving us with what they describe as an entanglement. This also means that we cannot understand resistance without first understanding the power to which it is entangled. While this adds further complexity to this picture it also opens up a range of possibilities for resistance, what it is and how it works, beyond simply existing as an oppositional force. Returning again to the ideas above, if power is diffuse and without authors, if power exists in knowledge and truths we otherwise take for granted, one of the most fundamental functions of resistance is to imagine alternatives, overcoming these assumptions and creating new possibilities. For Hayward and Schuilenburg ( 2014 ) resistance serves as a “solvent of doxa, to continuously question obviousness and common sense, in order to create a new image of thought, and thus to remind us that things do not have to stay the way they are” (34). For Flohr ( 2016 ) resistance “occupies a threshold between contemporary configurations of power and the possibility that things might be otherwise” (50). In developing this perspective Lilja ( 2021 ) has made a substantial contribution essentially arguing that through repetition and over time, resistance can (and has) “produce[d] new and emerging realities,” new ways of thinking, new ways of viewing old problems while promoting a different and better vision for the future. This may have already been evident in some of the examples above, but let’s again consider some further examples below.

In England in the 1840s most would not be expected to live beyond forty years old (Office for National Statistics 2015 ). For the working class the outlook was even more bleak with the squalid conditions in which they lived and worked described as “scandalous” (Engels 1993 ). The Health of Towns Association was formed in 1844, with the aim of educating the public and pushing for public health legislation. The association pushed for this change utilizing a number of means. A major aim of the association was educational, that is, it sought to educate people on sanitation, producing a number of reports. Much of its action however was also agitational and inspirational, making “urban sanitation the crusade of the day” (Hamlin 2008 , ¶6). The association also organized petition drives and meetings, highlighting the failures of the government and presenting new visions for the “sanitary kingdom to come” (Hamlin 2008 , ¶6). The Public Health Act was passed in 1848 and having achieved this major objective, soon after the association dissolved. While it now seems somewhat obvious that public action could improve population health, this was a controversial idea in the 1840s. At this time in Europe for the working classes in particular, sanitation was near non-existent and more often than not government responded to epidemics with decrees, “set their military forces to protecting borders and ports, whitewashed towns, fumigated dwellings, and burnt bedding” (Hamlin and Sidley 1998 , 587). The Health of Towns Association was not only remarkably successful in “creating a will to act” (Hamlin and Sidley 1998 ) but in also articulating a new and better approach to public health. While the Health of Towns Association employed a range of action that sought change, some of it oppositional and agitational, a substantial part of this work involved simply promoting the idea that an alternative, a better approach to sanitation was possible. Substantial effort was put into “inspirational” efforts promoting this idea amongst the working class, not only drawing them in to existing advocacy efforts but in having them imagine better for themselves and their communities.

Let’s consider one final example that perhaps gets to the heart of Foucault’s ideas about power and “truth.” In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA), included a symposium at its annual meeting that debated whether homosexuality should exist in the APA’s nomenclature. At the time, homosexuality was pathologized and considered a psychiatric disorder (Stoller, et al. 1973 ). In the years leading up to this decision activists engaged in a number of actions to raise awareness about the stigmatization of this “diagnosis” but to also ultimately call for its abolition as a diagnosis. While several factors led the APA to remove homosexuality from the DSM, this resistance played a large part in securing this change. While there was still much to be done beyond this point, this change signalled the beginning of the end of American psychiatry’s stigmatization of homosexuality, with similar shifts occurring internationally over the next few decades (Drescher 2015 ). While significant, these changes came about within a larger shift in society, that challenged discourse in relation to homosexuality. As Foucault notes, what emerged was a form of “reverse discourse” where “homosexuality began to speak in its own behalf, to demand that its legitimacy or ‘naturality’ be acknowledged, often in the same vocabulary, using the same categories by which it was medically disqualified” (Foucault 1990 , 101). Drescher ( 2015 ) argues the APAs decision meant that “religious, governmental, military, media, and educational institutions were deprived of medical or scientific rationalization for discrimination” (572) and furthermore, this shift changed health discourse in relation to homosexuality from questions such as “how can it be treated” to questions of how to support the needs of LGBTI patients (Drescher 2015 ). Perhaps most fundamentally this example shows how accepted “truths” dictated how homosexuality was viewed. Without challenges to the legitimacy of these “truths” it is likely that homosexuality would have remained pathologized beyond the 1970s and persisted as a legitimate means to discriminate.

Again, while I have focused on two examples above, all of which made substantive contributions to health and well-being, there are many more. Outside of these more specific examples we also only need to look at approaches toward disability, gender, and race in medicine to see such shifts. Stramondo for example argues that acts such as civil disobedience can be effective in counter-narrative to common disability narratives of pity and suffering. He points out that it is

… very difficult to pity someone who is deliberately using their 300lb power wheelchair to block your commute to the office. You might be angered by them or you might even admire them, but you almost surely will not pity them … (Stramondo 2021 ,12)

In all of these cases, resistance opened up a range of new possibilities; challenging how sexuality was pathologized and pushing for new approaches to public health. Change would not have occurred without actions that articulated alternatives, pointed out where we were wrong or complacent, challenged the status quo, and inspired others to think beyond the truths we too often take for granted. Most fundamentally, resistance is fundamental to critical thinking, without it there would be acceptance, obedience, little reason to move beyond the status quo. Looking at these historical examples there is a further point here: that medical history is littered with failures and complacency in the face of atrocities. We should be cautious not to repeat these mistakes but also not to sit idly by, we should resist.

Resistance that Harms Health and Well-being

I am sympathetic to resistance and its potential to positively impact health. I do hope that anyone who reads this can see its value in promoting and protecting health and at least to some extent agrees that in many cases we should consider it as an important means to protect health. This however is not the entire story. Resistance cuts both ways, as it is entangled with power. And as power is not only oppressive but productive, it follows that resistance could also be irrational, counter-productive, and even re-enforce existing power relations.

Even from the examples above, we can see that healthcare workers for example can be both resistors and oppressors, whether in the study by Shaw et. al. or when looking at the pathologization of homosexuality in the 1970s. Beyond this however, resistance can also be met with resistance. While the American Psychiatric Association eventually shifted its position, resistance against pathologizing homosexuality was also met by resistance from the medical establishment and those within the American Psychiatric Association. This shows how resistance may be entangled with power but also how it may be used not only for positive change but also as a means to maintain the status quo and oppression. While far less reported in the literature, we can see other examples. In 1934 Montreal interns went on strike because Montreal’s Hôpital Notre-Dame sought to hire a Jewish doctor (Halperin 2021 ). More recently Indian doctors have protested a quota system to promote those from “lower castes” being admitted to medical colleges (Chatterjee 2006 ). Perhaps one final, more clear-cut example, comes from recent history.

A recent event that will be long remembered was the 2021 capital riot in the United States. On January 6, the United States Capitol was stormed by a mob of supporters of President Donald Trump. Amongst those was Dr Simone Gold. About six months earlier, Gold gained public attention when she and other physicians appeared in front of the Supreme Court for a sparsely attended news conference to decry pandemic lockdowns and criticize government efforts to stop the spread of the disease. Video of the event, organized by conservative activists, was retweeted by the president and viewed by millions before social media platforms took it down (Satija 2021 ). Gold was also founder of “America’s Frontline Doctors,” an organization that attacked policies advocated by mainstream scientists and healthcare workers, while promoting misinformation at rallies and on right wing news outlets. It remains to be seen the impact of this action, however throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been multiple and ongoing protests against lockdowns and measures such as mandated mask wearing and, more recently, mandated vaccination.

The Intersection of Resistance, Power, and Health

I have argued that resistance has and will continue to make a positive contribution to health and well-being, both by offering an opposition to power that would otherwise harm health and well-being but also by challenging “truths” and promoting different ways of thinking and articulating new and better futures. While some caution is warranted, we should not make obedience our default. While the reasons we should obey may seem self-evident, there is also an equally important case for resistance; it too can serve to protect and promote health and well-being.

For those familiar with the literature on resistance these points may not be new; resistance can be conceptualized as both a response to power and entangled with power. Beyond what I have said above I want to offer some further reflections on the intersections of power and health and why this makes resistance both distinct and important. These points are not exhaustive but should be seen as a starting point for future discussions in this area. First, health provides a powerful platform on which resistance can be framed. This arguably comes back to many seeing health as a particularly special good. That is, health can be seen as a precursor to being able to function as an agent and enjoy other freedoms and opportunities (Anand 2002 ). From the examples above and elsewhere we see many protests for many different reasons framed in terms of health; climate change, the detention of migrants, nuclear disarmament, and even anti-vaccine protests in response to COVID-19 have all been framed in terms of health. We can see this elsewhere, patient health and well-being is almost always cited as a grievance when healthcare workers pursue strike action. On this point, there is evidence to suggest that framing these issues in terms of health can have positive effects. For example, several studies have suggested that framing climate change as a public health issue is effective and could engage those previously not engaged and raise support for climate change mitigation and adaptation (Myers et al. 2012 ; Maibach et al. 2010 ). In many circumstances health has been used to give issues legitimacy and in garnering support; it can serve as a powerful way to frame resistance under the right circumstances. A second related point, is how resistance is shaped by the asymmetry of knowledge related to health and well-being and how this may lend further legitimacy to resistance. In visible forms of resistance healthcare workers often openly identify as such. Signs, scrubs, white coats, and stethoscopes are all examples. Throughout the 2019 Doctors for Extinction Rebellion actions in the United Kingdom a number chose to wear their scrubs “thinking that the media would find it harder to dismiss medical professional protestors as cranks” (Fulchand 2019 , 1). Similarly, in response to nuclear disarmament Young ( 2019 ) argued that

… [t]aking a medical standpoint against nuclear weapons became a problem for the government, who could easily write off movements like the CND [Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament] as unwashed hippies … but when you have a doctor saying the same thing and backing it up with a medical argument, it’s much more difficult for the government to discredit. (e222)

Beyond these examples here, we can see above how the authority of healthcare workers has also been used to oppress, like the above argument, how health-related knowledge and authority cuts both ways. Beyond simply being entangled with power, resistance intersects with health in numerous ways, shifting the sites and nature of power and resistance. Like many other questions related to resistance and health, there is scope for further discussion on this point, along with discussion on the many unanswered questions about the normative aspects of resistance. Even from the examples above, we can see how forms of action, their objectives (or lack thereof), the context in which they occurred, the power to which they were entangled, and the risks that came with resisting all varied substantially. While there has been some work exploring the normative aspects of specific episodes or acts of resistance (Essex and Weldon, In press ) or opposition that occurs in relation to specific issues, such as climate change (Bennett et al. 2020 ) or immigration detention (Essex 2020 ), less has been said about resistance more generally.

This is of course not the final word nor is it the whole story. The above discussion should not be seen as exhaustive or as the only intersections of health and resistance; nor should it be seen to diminish other important struggles. One example, which I have not discussed, relates to resistance by Indigenous populations. The ongoing impact of colonization and imperialism has had a devastating impact on the health and well-being of Indigenous populations with dramatic iniquity that continues to this day (Kauanui 2016 ). In Australia, for example, Indigenous life expectancy remains at least ten years less than the national average (Zhao et al. 2013 ). Resistance in this context is not only entangled with health and power but could be seen to serve an existential function, as a means of survival, a means of self-determination. The ongoing resistance of Indigenous populations is not only “testimony to ongoing dispossession” (Picq 2017 , 2), but more profoundly indigenous survival “means that the project of the nation-state did not triumph … that there is not one single territory, not one single language, not one single citizenship” (Gladys Tzul in Capiberibe and Bonilla 2015 , 293). For Palmater ( 2019 , 131) “the most radical thing that a person can do … is be born Indigenous.” It is unfortunately beyond the scope of this paper, but it should go without saying that the intersections of health and indigenous resistance deserve far greater attention that what I have offered here.

Putting these things aside, and despite the need for future discussion, I hope my overarching point remains—resistance has been a common but overlooked force in health and healthcare that has been central to securing a number of health-related gains. I have argued that resistance can serve as an important means to oppose threats to health and that resistance has a role to play in imagining alternatives to the status quo, that is, imagining how society could be better structured to support health and well-being or imagining alternatives to harmful systems and policy. In short, I hope to have shown how resistance has been and will continue to serve as a positive force to hold power to account but to also inspire new and better futures. While not an explicit aim of this paper, I also hope I have shown how common and diverse such action can be and why it deserves greater attention. Even with the above caveats about the potential misuses of resistance in mind, looking to history, without resistance we simply would not have made many advances that we today take for granted. Resistance will continue to be a frequent occurrence as it relates to health and healthcare, from day-to-day action to marches, protest, and civil disobedience, there is substantial scope to discuss its conceptual and normative potential.

1 Although this isn’t elaborated on specifically, this appears to be meant in a very general way. Action undertaken by the Health of Towns Association included marches, petitions, meetings, and publications that functioned as “inspirational” or calls to action (Hamlin 2008 ).

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Al-Kateab, W., and E. Watts, directors. 2019. For Sama. Waad Al-Kateab. 1 hr., 40 min. https://www.forsamafilm.com/ .
• Anand S. The concern for equity in health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 2002; 56 (7):485. doi: 10.1136/jech.56.7.485. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Associated Press. 2021a. Peru doctors on hunger strike over pandemic work conditions. The Sydney Morning Herald , January 21. https://www.smh.com.au/world/south-america/peru-doctors-on-hunger-strike-over-pandemic-work-conditions-20210121-p56vz0.html . Accessed February 3, 2022.
• ————. 2021b. Peru mourns its “pandemic soldiers,” doctors who died treating COVID. NBC News , January 29. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/peru-mourns-its-pandemic-soldiers-doctors-who-died-treating-covid-n1255989 . Accessed February 3, 2022.
• ————. 2021c. Polish activists protest after woman’s death in wake of strict abortion law. The Guardian , November 3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/02/polish-activists-protest-after-first-death-in-wake-of-stricter-abortion-law . Accessed February 3, 2022.
• BBC. 2021. Abortion rights march: Thousands attend rallies across US. BBC News , October 3. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58774262 . Accessed February 3, 2022.
• Bennett H, Macmillan A, Jones R, Blaiklock A, McMillan J. Should health professionals participate in civil disobedience in response to the climate change health emergency? Lancet. 2020; 395 (10220):304–308. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32985-X. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bennett JD, Tyszczuk L. Deception by immunisation, revisited. British Medical Journal. 1990; 301 (6766):1471. doi: 10.1136/bmj.301.6766.1471. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berger, D. 2021. Up the line to death: COVID-19 has revealed a mortal betrayal of the world’s healthcare workers. BMJ Opinion , January 29. https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/29/up-the-line-to-death-covid-19-has-revealed-a-mortal-betrayal-of-the-worlds-healthcare-workers/ . Accessed February 3, 2022.
• Bseiso, J., M. Hofman, and J. Whittall (eds). 2021. Everybody’s war: The politics of aid in the Syria crisis. Oxford University Press.
• Capiberibe A, Bonilla O. A ocupação do Congresso: contra o quê lutam os índios? [The occupation of the Congress: What are the Indians fighting against?] Estudos Avanzados. 2015; 29 (83):293–313. doi: 10.1590/S0103-40142015000100014. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chapoutot J. Eradicating typhus: Medical representations and Nazi sanitary discourse in the General Government of Poland (1939-1944) Revue Historique. 2014; 669 (1):87–108. doi: 10.3917/rhis.141.0087. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chatterjee P. India’s doctors protest over caste quota plans. Lancet. 2006; 367 (9526):1892–1892. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68826-0. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cox CL. “Healthcare heroes”: Problems with media focus on heroism from healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2020; 46 (8):510–513. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106398. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drescher J. Out of DSM: Depathologizing homosexuality. Behavioral Sciences. 2015; 5 (4):565–575. doi: 10.3390/bs5040565. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ducharme, J. 2020. “Protest is a profound public health intervention.” Why so many doctors are supporting protests in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. Time , June 10. https://time.com/5848212/doctors-supporting-protests/ . Accessed February 3, 2022.
• Edwards F, Lee H, Esposito M. Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2019; 116 (34):16793–16798. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1821204116. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Engels F. The condition of the working class in England . Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
• Essex R. The healthcare community and Australian immigration detention: The case for non-violent resistance . Cham: Palgrave MacMillan; 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Essex R. Resistance in health and healthcare. Bioethics. 2021; 35 (5):480–486. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12862. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Essex, R., and S. Weldon. (In press). The justification for strike action in healthcare: A systematic critical interpretive synthesis. Nursing Ethics , accepted May 8, 2021. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Fayyad, F., director. (2019). The cave . National Geographic Documentary Films. 1 hr., 47 min. https://films.nationalgeographic.com/the-cave/ .
• Ferguson, A. 2021. Wrexham residents to stage protest against planned GP surgery closure. The Leader , August 3. https://www.leaderlive.co.uk/news/19487646.wrexham-residents-stage-protest-planned-gp-surgery-closure/ . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Flohr M. Regicide and resistance: Foucault’s reconceptualization of power. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory. 2016; 17 (1):38–56. doi: 10.1080/1600910X.2016.1145590. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Foucault M. Power/knowledge . New York: Pantheon; 1980. [ Google Scholar ]
• ————. 1990. The history of sexuality: An introduction, volume I. Translated by R. Hurley. New York: Vintage 95.
• Foucault M. Discipline & punish: The birth of the prison . New York: Vintage; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fulchand S. Could protesting for climate action damage doctors’ careers? British Medical Journal. 2019; 367 :l6875. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6875. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goor Y. When the test tube was mightier than the gun: a Polish doctor out-frightens the Nazis. The Israel Medical Association Journal. 2013; 15 (4):198. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halperin EC. “We do not want him because he is a Jew”: The Montreal interns’ strike of 1934. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2021; 174 (6):852–857. doi: 10.7326/M20-7121. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamlin C. Health of Towns Association (act. 1844–1849) Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamlin C, Sidley P. Revolutions in public health: 1848, and 1998? British Medical Journal. 1998; 317 (7158):587–591. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7158.587. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayward K, Schuilenburg M. To resist=to create? Some thoughts on the concept of resistance in cultural criminology. Tijdschrift Over Cultuur & Criminaliteit. 2014; 4 (1):22–36. doi: 10.5553/TCC/221195072013003003003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Htwe, Z.Z. 2021. Myanmar medics in hiding as regime targets hospital-led disobedience movement. The Irrawaddy , February 19. https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/burma/myanmar-medics-hiding-regime-targets-hospital-led-disobedience-movement.html . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Kanawati, O. 2020. Syrian woman’s Aleppo documentary takes top British award, up for Oscar. Al-Monitor , February 3. https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/02/for-sama-forces-international-awards.html . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Kauanui JK. “A structure, not an event”: Settler colonialism and enduring Indigeneity. Lateral. 2016; 5 (1):5–1. doi: 10.25158/L5.1.7. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lilja M. Constructive resistance: Repetitions, emotions, and time . Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers; 2021. [ Google Scholar ]
• Maibach EW, Nisbet M, Baldwin P, Akerlof K, Diao G. Reframing climate change as a public health issue: An exploratory study of public reactions. BMC Public Health. 2010; 10 (1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-299. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Myers TA, Nisbet MC, Maibach EW, Leiserowitz AA. A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change. Climatic Change. 2012; 113 (3):1105–1112. doi: 10.1007/s10584-012-0513-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nachemson, A. 2021. Medics in Myanmar on strike against military amid COVID-19 crisis. Al Jazeera , February 3. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/2/3/medics-in-myanmar-on-strike-against-military-amid-covid-crisis . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Office for National Statistics. 2015. How has life expectancy changed over time? September 9. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/articles/howhaslifeexpectancychangedovertime/2015-09-09 . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Palmater P. The radical politics of Indigenous resistance and survival 1. In: Kinna R, Gordon U, editors. In Routledge handbook of radical politics . London, New York: Routledge; 2019. pp. 131–162. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paterson RG. The Health of Towns Association in Great Britain 1844-1849: An exposition of the primary voluntary health society in the Anglo-Saxon public health movement. Bulletin of the History of Medicine. 1948; 22 (4):373–402. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Picq ML. Indigenous politics of resistance: An introduction. New Diversities. 2017; 19 (2):1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Prasad A. A mother bears witness to the conflict in Syria. The Lancet. 2019; 394 (10212):1895. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32761-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reuters. 2021. Clashes in Bolivia as striking health workers face off against riot police. Reuters , February 22. https://reuters.screenocean.com/record/1602607 . Accessed February 4, 2022
• Ricci, V. 2020. After going on strike, Ecuador’s medical students win historic victory. Waging Non-Violence: Resistance Studies , December 29. https://wagingnonviolence.org/rs/2020/12/after-strike-medical-students-ecuador-forced-government-negotiate/ . Accessed February 4, 2022
• Satija, N. 2021. “I do regret being there”: Simone Gold, noted hydroxychloroquine advocate, was inside the Capitol during the riot. The Washington Post , January 12. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/simone-gold-capitol-riot-coronavirus/2021/01/12/d1d39e84-545f-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Scott JC. Everyday forms of peasant resistance. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 1986; 13 (2):5–35. doi: 10.1080/03066158608438289. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Scott JC. Everyday forms of resistance. The Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies. 1989; 4 :33. doi: 10.22439/cjas.v4i1.1765. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shaw MK, Rees CE, Andersen NB, Black LF, Monrouxe LV. Professionalism lapses and hierarchies: A qualitative analysis of medical students’ narrated acts of resistance. Social Science & Medicine. 2018; 219 :45–53. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.10.009. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stoller RJ, Marmor J, Bieber I, et al. A symposium: Should homosexuality be in the APA nomenclature? American Journal of Psychiatry. 1973; 130 (11):1207–1216. doi: 10.1176/ajp.130.11.1207. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stramondo, J. 2021. How disability activism advances disability bioethics. Unpublished manuscript .
• United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 2020. Documenting numbers of victims of the Holocaust and Nazi persecution. December 8. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/documenting-numbers-of-victims-of-the-holocaust-and-nazi-persecution . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Vinthagen S, Johansson A. Everyday resistance: Exploration of a concept and its theories. Resistance Studies Magazine. 2013; 1 (1):1–46. [ Google Scholar ]
• Willsher, K. 2020. “We Syrians just want to survive”: Doctor who saved lives as bombs rained down. The Guardian , March 8. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/08/amani-ballour-syrian-doctor-saved-lives-as-bombs-fell-le-cave . Accessed February 4, 2022
• ————. 2021. France extends Covid health pass after fourth weekend of protests. The Guardian , August 9. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/09/france-extends-covid-health-pass-weekend-protests-pass-sanitaire . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• World Medical Association. 2021. Harassment and arrest Of doctors in Myanmar condemned by physician leaders. World Medical Association , February 24. https://www.wma.net/news-post/harassment-and-arrest-of-doctors-in-myanmar-condemned-by-physician-leaders/ . Accessed February 4, 2022.
• Young, T. 2019. Nuclear war in the U.K . Four Corners Books.
• Zhao Y, Wright J, Begg S, Guthridge S. Decomposing Indigenous life expectancy gap by risk factors: A life table analysis. Population Health Metrics. 2013; 11 (1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/1478-7954-11-1. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]