CAPITALISM AND ALIENATION: THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

The beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century led to the rise of capitalism in society. According to the linguist, political activist, and social critic, Noam Chomsky, capitalism is an economic system in which there is more emphasis on profit maximization and the concentration of wealth in private organizations, as compared to societal welfare, democracy, and public accountability.

Capitalism prioritizes corporate interests resulting in social inequality that fosters mental health problems, including alienation. Alienation is a state of estrangement from oneself, from others, from society, or from nature. It is an isolation of individuals with respect to their sense of self, their status within their socio-cultural community, and their sense of control within the world of which they are a part of. The sociologist Melvin Seeman described alienation in five dimensions - powerlessness, meaninglessness, normlessness, isolation, and self-estrangement. According to the clinical psychologist George Albee, capitalism emphasizes individualism and consumerism, which give rise to feelings of disconnection, isolation, and alienation.

Over the years, theorists have suggested how capitalism leads to a sense of alienation in society. The earliest and perhaps the most prominent figures among them is the philosopher, sociologist, political theorist, and economist Karl Marx. Marx, in the mid-19th century, specifically in his work Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, extensively wrote about how the capitalistic system results in a sense of disconnectedness and alienation. He suggested that capitalism is exploitative and that it is rationalized and legitimized as freedom, agency, democracy, and fulfillment.

Karl Marx

According to Marx, because the workers do not own the products that they create, they are not able to get the full benefits of it. Due to this, they are unable to realize the true value of their work. Workers also have no or little say in what they are doing. They are more like machines, viewing their work as a means to an end. This leads to a lack of creativity and personal connection to their work, giving them a feeling of monotony and unfulfillment. The repetitive tasks make individuals disconnected from their own true potential and sense of self. For them, work becomes a means to survive and not something that should be enjoyed, leading to dissatisfaction.

Marx also suggested that capitalism creates a sense of competitiveness among individuals, which prevents cooperation, mutual support, and a sense of community, making individuals feel isolated and disconnected. 

On the whole, according to Marx, capitalism makes the majority of people disconnected and alienated. Individuals feel disconnected from their work, their potential and sense of self, and from each other, giving rise to a sense of alienation in society.

In the 1890s, the sociologist Emil Durkheim also theorized about alienation. Durkheim linked alienation to the concept of anomie that he introduced in 1893 in his work The Division of Labor in Society. According to Durlheim, anomie is a state of instability and disorderliness in society that occurs due to unclear norms. Such a state occurs when there is rapid change in society because of industrialization and capitalism.

Emil Durkheim

Durkheim suggested that in modern, capitalistic societies, social life becomes complex leading to the weakening of social bonds, which makes individuals feel disconnected. It becomes difficult for people to find meaning in a fragmented society. Further, the lack of social integration and social isolation develop a sense of alienation among people in society. Durkheim believed that in modern, capitalistic societies, the lack of shared norms and social bonding leads to the feeling of alienation.

In the early 1900s, the sociologist and political economist, Max Weber suggested how capitalism results in alienation, specifically in his work of 1903, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Weber suggested that capitalism promotes a bureaucratic and impersonal society that leads to a sense of disenchantment. According to Weber, the rise of rationality due to capitalism has led to society becoming efficiency-driven, replacing it with emotion-driven actions.

Max Weber

Weber used the term iron cage to describe how individuals in a capitalistic society feel trapped in a bureaucratic system, which makes them lose their personal freedom leading them to become disconnected from their purpose. The bureaucratic system, according to Weber, makes individuals feel like machines, giving rise to a sense of disconnectedness and alienation.

In a similar vein, the Marxist philosopher, literary historian, and literary critic Gyorgy Lukacs, in the early 1900s, suggested that capitalism develops a sense of alienation among people. In 1923, in his work History and Class Consciousness, Lukacs developed the concept of reification. Reification is the process by which social relationships and human activities become like commodities, under capitalism. This, further, makes individuals view their relationships as mere things, instead of dynamic social interactions.

Gyorgy Lukacs

According to Lukacs, reification causes individuals to be disconnected from their social reality and they lead their life in a passive manner, resulting them to experience a sense of alienation. Thus, Lukacs argues that alienation is directly associated with capitalism. Capitalistic societies commodify human relationships, making people feel alienated within society.

The psychoanalyst and social psychologist Erich Fromm, in his book The Sane Society, published in 1955, argues that alienation is a form of mental illness when individuals lose their sense of purpose and identity in a society that starts valuing material possessions. Fromm argued that alienation stems from giving emphasis to material success, which makes individuals feel isolated, resulting in a sense of dissatisfaction.

Erich Fromm

Fromm was highly influenced by Karl Marx and is often referred to as a Marxist psychologist. Like Marx, Fromm suggested that alienation can be viewed in relation to capitalism, and has written about it from the 1950s onwards. According to Fromm, the rise of capitalism has resulted in feelings of anxiety, isolation, and powerlessness. In capitalistic societies, individuals feel disconnected from their work, each other, and even themselves.

Fromm suggested that every individual has inherent existential needs. These needs are - relatedness (the drive for union with others or the need to form meaningful connections with others), transcendence (the urge to rise above a passive existence), rootedness (the need to develop a sense of belongingness), sense of identity (the need to develop oneself as a separate entity), and frame of orientation (the need to have coherence and meaning in life). Capitalism, according to Fromm, inhibits the fulfillment of the inherent existential needs of individuals. 

Due to capitalism, people give emphasis to consumption, material success, and conformity, which leads to a disconnection from the true self, others, and nature - all of which inhibit the fulfillment of the existential needs, and giving rise to alienation.

Erich Fromm’s theory can be seen as the culmination of the perspectives of Marx, Durkheim, Weber, and Lukacs. Fromm took instances from their sociological and philosophical perspectives and integrated them to develop his psychological perspective, resulting in a comprehensive understanding of how capitalism leads to experiencing a sense of alienation.

The theoretical perspectives of Marx, Durkheim, Weber, Lukacs, and Fromm indicate how socio-economic and political structures can lead to disconnectedness among people, resulting in a sense of meaninglessness, self-estrangement, and powerlessness - aspects of alienation as described by Melvin Seeman. These perspectives have implications in contemporary times, where it has been found that loneliness is highly prevalent to the extent of being called an epidemic.

This article can also be found on the blog - Life and Psychology

INITIALLY NOT A PSYCHOLOGIST: SIGMUND FREUD

The eighth part of the series - Initially Not A Psychologist ...

Sigmund Freud

Sigmund Freud was the founder of the school of psychology, known as psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis is the first school of psychology dedicated to the treatment of mental illness. Freud also formulated the first comprehensive theory of personality. Psychoanalysis completely changed the course of the discipline of psychology. The contributions of Freud made him one of the most influential and popular psychologists ever. Sigmund Freud, however, did not begin his career as a psychologist. He, initially, was not a psychologist.
In his early days, Freud was interested in a career in law or politics. He changed his mind after listening to a lecture on Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's essay on nature and reading the work of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. The works of Goethe and Darwin made him interested in science, which made him decide to study medicine. He felt that studying medicine would allow him to be involved in scientific research.
During his medical studies, Freud was highly influenced by the physician and physiologist Ernst Wilhelm von Brucke, who was one of the founders of the materialistic-positivistic movement in physiology. After getting his medical degree, in 1881, Freud continued to work in Brucke's laboratory as a researcher in physiology. During this time, Freud became highly inspired by Henry von Helmholtz and his mechanical physiology. His main interest was research in physiology, but due to financial concerns, and after getting advice from Brucke, Freud decided to change his career plans and begin his practice in medicine.
He then went to the Vienna General Hospital to study under the psychiatrist, neuropathologist, and anatomist Theodor Meynert. Meynert was one of the best-known brain anatomists of that time. After studying under Meynert, Freud became an expert in diagnosing brain damage. Freud made significant discoveries as a neurologist. Later, in 1891, he wrote the monograph called On Aphasia, in which he criticized the localization of function of the brain, the theory that suggests the specific brain areas are associated with specific functions. This is considered to be a significant contribution to neuropsychology.
While working as a neurologist, Freud realized that many of his patients were suffering from hysteria, and did not actually have neurological symptoms. At that time, the French neurologist, Jean-Martin Charcot was very well known for using hypnosis to treat hysteria. Freud received a small postgraduate grant that allowed him to study under Charcot. Till this visit, Freud was a materialist-positivist physiologist. He believed that all disorders, including hysteria, had a neurophysiological explanation. He believed that psychological explanations of disorders are non-scientific.
Charcot had a huge influence on Freud. Charcot believed that hysteria is a real disorder, which involves dissociated ideas. He also felt that hypnosis can be used to treat hysteria. Charcot also believed that hysteria has a sexual basis. These ideas laid the foundation for Freud to develop his psychoanalysis. 
Hysteria, according to Charcot, involving dissociated ideas indicated the role of the unconscious mind. Hypnosis, then, was used by Charcot to access uncovered memories and emotions within the unconscious mind. The role of the unconscious mind and sexuality in hysteria changed Freud’s belief that hysteria has a psychological explanation and not a neurophysiological explanation.
In 1886, after studying with Charcot, Freud returned to Vienna and got involved in private practice as a neurologist. After some time, Freud thought of treating hysterical patients, and not just neurological patients. Initially, he tried the traditional methods of neurology, such as electrotherapy, but he did not find them to be effective for treating hysteria. He then realized the significance of Charcot’s method of hypnosis in treating hysteria. He also realized the relevance of what he had learned from the physician Joseph Breuer.
Freud had known Breuer from the time when he was a medical student. He was very close to Breuer, and saw him as his mentor. At that time, Breuer was involved in the treatment of the woman known as Anna O, whose real name was later revealed to be Bertha Pappenheim. This was the case that eventually led to the beginning of psychoanalysis. 
Breuer had discovered that the origins of the physical symptoms of Anna O were in traumatic experiences. Further, when these experiences were given conscious expression, the physical symptoms disappeared. Breuer called this the cathartic method, because the emotional release of the traumatic symptoms led to a relief, causing the physical symptoms to disappear.
In 1889, in order to improve his skills in hypnosis, Freud visited the physicians Auguste Ambroise Liebeault and Hippolyte Bernheim, at the Nancy School. From them, he learned about posthypnotic suggestion, which suggests that an idea planted during hypnosis has an influence on a person's behavior, even when they are not aware of it. This confirmed what he had learned from Charcot, and turned out to be important for Freud in suggesting the role of the unconscious mind in behavior. Freud also learned about posthypnotic amnesia, from Liebeault and Bernheim, which is that patients tend to forget what they experience during hypnosis, but such memories return if they are encouraged to remember it. This also turned out to be important for Freud to develop his idea of psychoanalysis.
Even though learning about hypnosis played an important role in Freud establishing psychoanalysis, he did not find hypnosis to be an effective method of treatment for hysteria. He soon abandoned hypnosis and adopted the cathartic method used by Breuer. Later, Freud modified Breuer’s method to develop his own, which he called free association.
In 1895, Breuer and Freud published the book Studies on Hysteria, in which they discussed the case of Anna O, and outlined the basic tenets of psychoanalysis. They suggested that hysteria is caused by a traumatic experience that has not been expressed adequately and is, thus, manifested by physical symptoms. According to them, symptoms are a symbolic representation of traumatic experiences that have been repressed, that is, the experiences are not consciously aware, but held back in the unconscious to prevent anxiety.
Freud suggested that even though the traumatic experiences are repressed, they still have a strong influence on the person’s behavior and personality. In this sense, Freud had emphasized the significance of the unconscious mind in behavior. Freud, however, was not the first person to suggest this. Before him, philosophers like Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Johann Friedrich Herbart, Gustav Theodor Fechner, Eduard von Hartmann, Arthur Schopenhauer, and Friedrich Nietzsche had written about the role of the unconscious on behavior. Freud in some way was influenced by these philosophers.
Before the publication of the book, Breuer had expressed his dissatisfaction with it, because he felt that Freud had overemphasized the role of sexuality in hysteria. He had asked Freud not to get it published, but he still went ahead with it. Due to this Breuer parted ways from Freud. The year 1895, the date of the publication of Studies on Hysteria, is considered to be the beginning of the school of psychoanalysis.
In the next few years, Freud published a number of significant works, in which he refined his concepts and even introduced new ideas and concepts. In 1900, Freud published one of his most important works called The Interpretation of Dreams. In the book, he suggested that dreams are a way to reveal the unconscious. He outlined a new method called dream analysis, in this book. He also introduced the concept of the Oedipus Complex in this book. In 1991, Freud published his next significant work called The Psychopathology of Everyday Life. In this book, Freud emphasized that psychoanalysis can be used to explain normal behavior as well, and not just abnormal behavior. 
In 1905, in his book Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, Freud outlined the stages of childhood development, which he called psychosexual stages. In his book The Unconscious, published in 1915, he systematically elaborated on the unconscious mind. Specifically, he distinguished between the different layers of the mind, which are the conscious, preconscious, and unconscious mind. In 1920, in his book Beyond the Pleasure Principle, Freud wrote about instinctual drives that govern behavior. In his book, The Ego and the Id, published in 1923, Freud introduced his tripartite model suggesting that the mind is divided into three components - id (pleasure principle), ego (reality principle), and superego (morality principle). He also suggested that these three components are always in conflict and that their dynamic interaction determines personality.
A significant event, not just for psychoanalysis, but the history of psychology, in general, took place in 1909. Granville Stanley Hall, the founder and first president of APA (American Psychological Association), invited Sigmund Freud to deliver lectures on psychoanalysis, at Clark University, USA. Stanley Hall was the president of Clark University at that time. Freud’s lectures were very well received, giving him a lot of recognition and popularity. This was the first time that psychoanalysis was exposed to a non-European audience.
Freud’s visit to America made psychoanalysis extremely popular. It gave psychoanalysis a wide acceptance, and even played a role in making psychology to be way beyond just an academic discipline. It also led to the expansion of the subfield of clinical psychology. The concepts of psychoanalysis such as the unconscious mind, free association, dream analysis, psychosexual stages, etc. made psychology hugely popular and even had a strong influence on art, literature, and pop culture. Freud’s psychoanalysis, in this way, had completely widened the scope of psychology and changed the course of the history of psychology.
From an initial inclination towards law and politics, then being interested in scientific research after being exposed to the works of Goethe and Darwin, making him study medicine, and then making a shift from research in physiology to practicing as a neurologist due to financial constraints, and then getting involved in treating hysteria after being influenced by Breuer, Charcot, Liebeault, and Bernheim, as well as being influenced by Liebniz, Herbart, Fechner, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche eventually developing psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud became known as one of the most popular and influential psychologists.

THE ORIGINS OF THE POLITICAL IDEOLOGY OF COMMUNALISM

Communalism is the belief in the primacy of one's own religion over others, often leading to conflict and even violence among religious groups. The political identity of communalism emphasizes the superiority of one religious group over the other.

The renowned historian Romila Thapar, in her book The Past as Present: Forging Contemporary Identities Through History, published in 2014, suggests that the ideology of communalism defines groups in terms of religion and that the identity that is formed becomes more significant than any other identity. Thapar further states that communalism is the political exploitation of religion - religion is used as a mechanism to control society. It takes the form of deliberately opposing secularism and rationality, wherein political parties draw on religious identities, using religion as a basis to spread hate and violence.

In their book, India’s Struggle for Independence, published in 2016, historians Bipin Chandra, Mridula Mukherjee, Aditya Mukherjee, Sucheta Mahajan, and K. N. Panikkar describe three basic elements of the ideology of communalism. First, people who follow the same religion have common political, economic, social, and cultural interests. 

Second, in a multi-religious society, the political, economic, social, and cultural interests of people from one religion are different from that of another religion. Third, the interests of people from different religions are  mutually incompatible, antagonistic, and hostile. This is where communalism takes the form of fascism, as it is based on fear and hatred, and has the possibility of leading to violence.

Romila Thapar suggests that the ideology of communalism is a relatively recent phenomenon, specifically arising in 19th century India. Bipin Chandra also emphasizes that communalism is a political trend of modern times. Its roots lie within the social, economic, and political objectives that existed in modern Indian history. In the book India’s Struggle for Independence, Bipin Chandra and his co-authors suggest that communalism emerged as a result of colonialism, and it was a major shift in politics after the revolt of 1857, famously known as the first war of Indian independence.

Historians argue that the Britishers' divide-and-rule policy is responsible for the emergence of the political ideology of communalism. Communalism, propagated by the Britishers, was accepted by many Indian leaders as well as commoners, leading it to develop into a political ideology.

The Britishers propagated communalism strategically by associating it with the history of India, indicating that it has always been a part of the past. The beginning of this can be traced back to the book History of British India, published in 1817. The book was written by the philosopher, historian, economist, and political theorist, James Mill. He made significant contributions to empiricism and utilitarianism. Mill’s book laid the foundation for what Romila Thapar calls the communal interpretation of Indian history and provided a justification for the two-nation theory.

James Mill

Romila Thapar describes the impact that James Mill’s book had on Indian politics and society, in her paper Communalism and the Writing of Ancient Indian History, which was published in 1969 as a chapter in the book, Communalism and the Writing of Indian History, which has two other chapters - one by the historian Harbans Mukhia and the other by the historian Bipan Chandra.

In her paper, Thapar writes that James Mill gave a factually incorrect and very arbitrary periodization of Indian history. He was the first person to divide the history of India into three periods - Hindu civilization, Muslim civilization, and British civilization. This was the first recognized work on the History of India, and it had such a huge impact that later historians used similar divisions of Indian history. The periodization, which is now commonly used as ancient history, medieval history, and modern history - indicating that ancient history is about the Hindu civilization, medieval history is about the Muslim civilization, and modern history is about the coming of Britishers to India.

The periodization of Indian history by Mill has been found to be factually incorrect. The Hindu civilization is usually suggested to be from 1000 BCE to 1200 CE, because the ruling dynasties were from the Hindu religion. This ignores the fact that during this period there were other kingdoms like the Indo-Greeks, Shakas, Kushanas, and Mauryans, which did not follow the Hindu religion. 

More importantly, Thapar suggests that the pre-Islamic sources related to India have no mention of the term Hindu. It was first used by the Arabs and used more in a geographical sense rather than religion. In the period referred to as the Hindu civilization, the concept of Hindu did not even exist. There was no unified idea of the Hindu religion in those times. The unified idea of Hinduism, which is known today, came up much later in the post-Gupta period, post fifth century CE.

Further, the Muslim civilization as described by Mill, because it was dominated by Muslim rulers, is also found to be factually incorrect. The rulers from this period were never bracketed as Muslims. They were referred to as Arabs, Turks, or Persians, depending on the place of their origin. The single term Muslim was never used for them. In addition to that, these rulers arrived in India at different times and ruled in different periods and regions. Their kingdoms were largely in the northern parts of India. They ruled in the southern parts much later.

It is also incorrect to mention that this period was dominated by Muslim rulers. During this time, there were also strong Hindu kingdoms like the Vijayanagar Empire and many Rajput kingdoms. The date of the arrival of Muslim rulers has also been considered to be very arbitrary, with some referring it to be as 1000 CE and some referring it to be as 1200 CE.

The periodization of James Mill, therefore, has communal intentions. It is factually incorrect and was only meant to create a divide in terms of religion among Indians. Unfortunately, Mill’s periodization was carried forward by communal historians and was used by communal politicians for their agenda to spread hatred. It was challenged by historians much later.

Along with the inaccurate periodization, James Mill also heavily criticized the Hindu civilization, which is now referred to as a part of ancient history. He referred to the Hindu civilization as backward and irrational, among many other unjustifiable derogatory remarks. This led many politicians to an over-glorification of the Hindu civilization, a glorious civilization that somehow had declined over the years.

The decline was very conveniently blamed on the arrival of the Muslim rulers. The Muslim rulers being responsible for the decline of the glorious ancient culture became a justification for the two-nation theory. This idea has been continuously spread by communal politicians and historians and has become a common narrative among propagandists wanting to create division and hate.

The political ideology of communalism emerged as a result of the divide-and-rule policy of the Britishers. The origins of this ideology can be traced back to the publication of James Mill's book History of British India, which is a communal interpretation of Indian history, and became a justification for the two-nation theory. The after-effects of this communal interpretation of Indian history, leading to the emergence of the political ideology of communalism can be found even in the current scenario. The political ideology of communalism is being used rampantly in today's time.

CRITICAL THINKING AND EDUCATION: IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES

Critical thinking has been described in many ways. The philosophers Michael Scriven and Richard Paul, in 1987, in describing critical thinking emphasized on the evaluation, synthesis, and analysis of information. The philosopher Peter Facione, in 2005, suggested that critical thinking is purposeful and self-regulatory judgment. It involves interpretation, analysis, evaluation, explanation, and self-regulation. More recently, in 2018, the Foundation of Critical Thinking described critical thinking as self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking, which involves effective communication and problem-solving abilities, as well as overcoming egocentrism and sociocentrism.

Over the years, scholars have argued about being able to blend the idea of critical thinking within formal education. The significance of this idea was reflected when in 1983 the California State University system introduced the requirement of undergraduate students to complete a course on critical thinking.  This came to be known as critical thinking pedagogy which involves “an understanding of the relationship of language to logic, leading to the ability to analyze, criticize and advocate ideas, reason inductively and deductively, and reach factual or judgmental conclusions based on sound inferences drawn from unambiguous statements of knowledge or belief.” 

The introduction of critical thinking pedagogy is referred to as the Big Bang moment of teaching critical thinking in higher education. It allegedly led to what is often called the critical thinking movement. However, before and after this historical moment, philosophers, educationists, psychologists, and scientists have proposed significant perspectives on critical thinking and education.

One of the earliest figures proposing critical thinking in education is the psychologist, philosopher, and educationist John Dewey. Dewey developed what came to be known as the progressive education model, which involves learning through discovery-based activities. He opposed rote memorization and suggested the idea of learning by doing.

John Dewey

Dewey believed that education should facilitate creative intelligence and prepare students to live effectively in society. In his book How We Think, published in 1910, Dewey argued that thinking should be a means to clear doubt. He suggested that students should be given effective learning activities meant for problem-solving.

For this, Dewey suggested a science-inspired method of reasoning, which involved proposing a tentative solution, till more evidence is gathered to either confirm or disprove it. Dewey termed this type of reasoning as reflective thinking, which he defined as “active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends.” Scholars have suggested that reflective thinking is the same as critical thinking, making Dewey one of the first individuals to incorporate critical thinking within education.

Like Dewey, the educationist, philosopher, and often considered to be the father of critical pedagogy, Paulo Freire opposed the traditional methods of education. In his book Pedagogy of the Oppressed, published in 1970, Freire criticized the educational system, calling it banking education, in which students are passive beings and teachers simply deposit information in their minds. Freire suggested that banking education does not encourage dialogue with students and completely inhibits critical thinking.

Paulo Freire

In contrast, Freire proposed the problem-posing method, in which the teacher and student become co-investigators of knowledge. The problem-posing method encourages a dialog and invites the oppressed to explore their reality as a problem that can be transformed, and not something that is fixed. 

According to Freire, the aim of education is to make students develop a critical consciousness that will help them understand the roots of social, political, and economic oppression - a form of critical thinking that will create awareness of society. Freire’s ideas came to be known as critical pedagogy, which encourages learners to confront their knowledge, ideas, and biases to question the power dynamics in society and develop new ways of thinking. 

In similar ways to Dewey and Freire, the philosopher Robert Ennis believed that critical thinking in individuals should be developed in aspects of everyday life, something that is not covered in their formal education. Ennis, in this way, views critical thinking as a lifelong perspective. For this, Ennis suggested the idea of transfer - being able to apply learnings in everyday aspects of life, beyond academics.

Robert Ennis

In this regard, Ennis proposed a framework of four approaches - general, infusion, immersion, and mixed. In the general approach, critical thinking is taught independently of the regular course. In the infusion approach, critical thinking is blended within the regular course, in which critical thinking skills are made explicit. In the immersion approach, critical thinking is blended into the regular course, and critical thinking skills are not made explicit. Finally, in the mixed approach, there is a combination of the general approach combined with either the infusion or the immersion approach. According to research, the mixed approach has been found to be the most effective in learning critical thinking as well as transfer.

Apart from Dewey, Freire, and Ennis, the teaching style of the theoretical physicist Richard Feynman is considered to promote critical thinking. Along with his contributions to physics, Feynman has been widely known for his teaching style, which came to be known as the Feynman technique, after he passed away in 1988. The Feynman technique involves understanding, simplifying, and explaining difficult concepts. It is about simplifying substantive and complex concepts and explaining them in their simplest forms.

Richard Feynman

The Feynman technique involves four steps - (1) identifying a concept to learn, (2) understanding and explaining the concept in simple terms, (3) reviewing the concept and identifying gaps, and (4) simplifying the concept further and creating analogies for a better understanding. The Feynman technique enables active learning and not just passive re-reading and memorization. It also enables a deep understanding of an idea or concept. Both of these aspects promote critical thinking.

Further, the Feynman technique is associated with autodidactism and heutagogy. Autodidactism is self-directed learning, which involves taking initiative in acquiring knowledge. Heutagogy is self-determined learning, which involves reflecting upon learning experiences. Both autodidactism and heutagogy are features of critical thinking. This indicates that the Feynman technique is not just an effective learning method, but it is also useful in developing critical thinking.

Philosophers, educationists, psychologists, and scientists, from the early 20th century, have suggested ways in which critical thinking can be blended into formal education. According to them, traditional methods of learning should be shunned, and instead, education should incorporate critical thinking to make learners indulge in active learning and deep understanding, develop problem-solving skills, confront biases, be aware of various societal issues, and develop new ways of thinking.

To know more about critical thinking, refer to my podcast - Psychology, Critical Thinking, and Society