Category: Critical Thinking

Day 7 of our Critical Thinking Life class began with a quick recap of previous concepts, discussions, and case studies. This helped refresh our understanding before moving into new topics.

We explored moral reasoning and key ethical theories, including moral relativism, self-interest theory, deontology, utilitarianism, and rule utilitarianism. Through real-life examples, we learned how different frameworks can lead to very different conclusions about the same situation.

We also discussed the placebo effect, particularly in relation to touch therapy and healing, and how belief can influence outcomes.

The highlight of the day was debating the trolley dilemma. The discussion pushed us to think critically about right and wrong, consequences, and moral responsibility. It was a powerful reminder that ethical decisions are rarely simple and always thought-provoking.

Today’s class focused entirely on our group task — researching and presenting different ethical theories. What seemed like a simple 30-minute activity turned into a deep and engaging discussion about how humans decide what is right and wrong.

Each group was assigned a theory: Moral Reasoning, Moral Relativism, Self-Interest Theory, Deontology, Utilitarianism, and Rule Utilitarianism. Our task was to understand the definition, give examples, and identify the issues or limitations of each theory.

As we began discussing, it became clear that morality is not as black and white as we often assume.

The group working on Moral Reasoning explained how people make ethical decisions at different stages — some based on fear of punishment, others based on social approval, and some based on universal principles like justice and equality. It made us reflect on our own level of thinking.

The Moral Relativism group highlighted how morality can differ across cultures. What is considered acceptable in one society may be questioned in another. While this promotes cultural understanding, it also raised an important concern: if everything is relative, how do we stand against injustice?

The Self-Interest Theory group argued that people naturally act to benefit themselves. This theory felt realistic, but also uncomfortable. If everyone acted purely out of self-interest, would society still function fairly?

The Deontology group introduced Kant’s idea that actions should follow moral rules regardless of consequences. This approach values duty and principles. However, we also discussed how rigid rules can sometimes ignore real-life complexities.

The Utilitarianism group explained the idea of “the greatest happiness for the greatest number.” This seemed practical and outcome-focused, but we questioned whether it could justify harming a minority for the majority’s benefit.

Finally, the Rule Utilitarianism group presented a balanced approach — following rules that generally produce the greatest good. It appeared more stable than judging actions one by one, yet it still depends on predicting outcomes.

What stood out most during the presentations was that no theory is perfect. Each offers a different lens to view moral situations. Some focus on rules, some on consequences, some on culture, and some on personal benefit.

This group task made me realize that ethics is not about memorizing definitions. It is about understanding perspectives and questioning assumptions. Listening to different groups helped me see how the same situation can be analyzed in completely different ways depending on the theory applied.

Today’s activity was not just academic. It encouraged us to think deeper about our own values and decision-making processes. In just 30 minutes of collaboration and discussion, we explored ideas that philosophers have debated for centuries.

And perhaps that was the real takeaway — morality is complex, and learning to examine it thoughtfully is an important step toward becoming more aware and responsible individuals.

In today’s session, one interesting activity we did was categorising statements based on general moral principles and personal beliefs. We ranked statements like “stop cruelty to animals,” “don’t drive on the wrong side,” and “don’t steal from parents’ wallet,” along with similar examples, to see how society and individual values differ or overlap. Moving forward, we explored some really thought-provoking topics around moral philosophy and critical thinking. We dived into different ethical theories like deontology (duty-based ethics), utilitarianism, rule utilitarianism, and moral relativism, trying to understand not just their definitions but how they actually apply in real life with examples. Overall, today’s learning was about understanding different types of moral reasoning, comparing viewpoints, and strengthening analytical thinking skills by connecting theory with real-world examples.

In our recent life classes, we explored religion, faith and God in a very meaningful and inspiring way. These sessions helped us think deeply, reflect peacefully and celebrate the diversity of beliefs around us. Instead of giving fixed answers, our facilitators created a safe and respectful space where we could express our thoughts freely, understand new perspectives and strengthen our inner clarity. When I think about my earlier beliefs, I realise that most of them were shaped by what I saw and learned while growing up. But now, I understand that faith actually becomes more powerful when we question it with an open mind. Asking questions is not to break belief, but to make it stronger, deeper and more conscious. Today, I believe that religion should create peace and love. God, for me, is a beautiful feeling of goodness, positivity and universal energy. Every person may have a different belief, and that is the beauty of the world. Our differences do not divide us -they help us learn from each other. I still have questions, and I feel happy about that because questions keep our thinking alive and growing. When we ask “why”, we move closer towards truth, meaning and clarity. Questions are like bridges that help us understand traditions and rituals in a more mindful way. During these sessions, we also understood that people react differently when it comes to religious beliefs. Some feel emotional, some curious, some protective. This showed us how deeply religion touches the human heart. This is why conversations about religion should always be handled with sensitivity, love and respect. These two days taught me that critical thinking does not challenge faith negatively – it enriches it. It makes our belief system more aware, more positive and more meaningful. Religion can be personal, but humanity must always remain universal.

Today’s live class on critical thinking opened up a deeply thought-provoking conversation about religion, belief systems, and the existence of man. The session encouraged us to look beyond what we have been told and examine our beliefs through the lens of evidence, reasoning, and open-mindedness. We began by exploring how religion and critical thinking can both coexist and, at times, clash. Religion is often rooted in faith, tradition, and collective belief, while critical thinking relies on logic, inquiry, and evidence. The question we discussed, Can religion and critical thinking go hand in hand? , made me reflect on how our perspectives evolve with time and experience.

During the discussion, we also delved into the existence of man, a question that continues to intrigue philosophers, scientists, and theologians alike. In today’s world, where almost everything is backed by scientific evidence, faith still remains an essential part of many people’s identities. The session emphasized the importance of being curious yet respectful, questioning without dismissing, and reasoning without arrogance. When I think about what I believed about God and religion earlier, I realize that much of it came from my upbringing and community. I accepted certain beliefs without questioning them. Over time, I began to have doubts and questions ,not necessarily about the existence of God, but about the nature of belief itself. Why do people follow different religions? How do we know which one holds the “truth”? And is faith less valid if it cannot be proven scientifically?

Today, my beliefs have matured into a blend of faith and logic. I see religion as a way of finding meaning and moral grounding, while also recognizing that critical thinking allows me to understand these beliefs in a broader, more inclusive context. I’ve learned that questioning does not mean disbelief, it simply means seeking understanding. I still have questions about the nature of divinity and why humanity needs structured religion to connect with something greater. I often notice that people struggle with reconciling faith and reason—trying to balance spiritual beliefs with modern scientific understanding. This struggle, however, also reflects our shared desire to find purpose and truth. To truly find common ground, I believe we must approach discussions on religion with empathy and openness. Instead of debating who is right or wrong, we should focus on understanding why people believe what they do. Critical thinking doesn’t reject faith,it refines it, helping us to separate inherited assumptions from genuine conviction. In conclusion, today’s session was not just an academic discussion; it was a journey inward, a reminder that belief, doubt, evidence, and reason all coexist within us. As we continue to think critically, we also continue to grow spiritually, intellectually, and emotionally.