CRITICAL THINKING, CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE ARE NOT THE SAME THING

Center for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis (CCTAA)

“If we are uncritical, we shall always find what we want: we shall look for, and find confirmations” Karl Popper, cited in: Critical Thinking (Tom Chatfield).

It is important that thinkers and knowledge workers know and understand what critical thinking, critical analysis and critique mean and how they differ from each other. They are not the same thing although many think there is no significant difference between them. It is true that many people who produce critiques and carry out critical anlysis think that they are critical thinkers. Far from it.

There are so many academics who will dismiss you when you tell them that despite their education to the highest level, they missed the opportunity to become critical thinkers although they can produce wonderful critiques and carry out very good critical analyses on the theses of their students. As Karl Popper said, “If we are uncritical, we shall always find what we want: we shall look for and find confirmations”. This is so common in the academia, for which we get rewarded.

Writing as a former academic now intellectually situated between academia and the wider society, both subject to the influences of the Internet and Artificial Intelligence (AI), thinking is that we should all be in a position to understand the differences between critical thinking, critique and critical analysis.

Virtually all our problems do not require just political interventions, which dominate public discourse in Uganda, or chains of critical analysis of and critiques on them, which we are preoccupied with. They require critical thinking. Some people who don’t know the difference will say, “What is this former academic saying? He must be confused and a victim of almost 16 years of retirement from academic life!”

I am neither confused nor a victim of exclusion from active academic life. I understand what I am writing about: the differences between critical thinking, critique and critical analysis.

In fact, I have given the differences between critical thinking, critical analysis and critique in my unpublished, wide-ranging article titled “The Centrality of Criticality in Academic, Intellectual, Educational, Ideological AI and Public Discourses”.

All education should culminate in the capacity to engage meaningfully and effectively in critical thinking, reasoning and problem-solving; not just in the capacity to carry out critical analysis and generate critiques.

If you are ready to listen to my reasoning, then let us proceed together below.

CRITICAL THINKING

Critical thinking is a way of thinking that is purposeful, focussed, and is formulated to ultimately solve problems; not just to advance theory or knowledge work. There are identifiable aspects, underlying abilities, and clear competencies that define critical thinking (Jesse Martin, 2017).

• The ability and willingness to plan
• Cognitive flexibility – rejection of rigidity or dogmatic thinking, which are so common in academia and in the world of practice today.
• Persistence – because it is effortful, it is easy to take shortcuts to find a solution
• Willingness to self-correct – this is, by far, the most difficult because it means that you can be wrong
• Directive attention – making your thinking purposeful and directive
• Consensus seeking – sometimes in the process of solving a difficult problem, we find that we must display some give and take in order to get through it

Critical thinking is a powerful tool for solving problems in the world. Unfortunately, it is a very limited commodity or is not common. There are shortages in virtually every corner of our society. Being in short supply, the laws of economics suggest that it would have a high value. It does not. The reason is that, often, those who need it the most already think they are endowed with more than enough. Most of those who teach it teach something not even closely related (often in ignorance) and then flood their counterfeit goods on the market, depressing prices. And those who understand the need, and their own lack, feel threatened by anyone who possesses it, and so avoid buying it. There are also those who know they need it; and think they are buying it but don’t really understand what it is that they are buying and are forced to rely on experts (who often don’t really know what they are supposed to be selling) who market counterfeit critical thinking to them (Jesse Martin, 2017).

Critical thinking is the basis of contemporary society, as it does not admit the existence of absolute truths or absolute values. One always should prove one’s thesis in a rational manner, no matter who one is or what one has done before. Critical thinking involves thinking, analysing, reasoning, and evaluating ideas and beliefs diligently and effectively. Critical thinking goes against the basic premise, also known as Dogma. A Dogma is an unquestionable knowledge – information that is accepted without the intervention of practical thought or criticism. Critical thinking should ideally be done objectively, without being influenced by personal feelings, beliefs, or biases, and only focus on facts. Critical thinking ability helps to make logical and informed decisions. The task is not to question the facts of the argument but to question the gap between the facts and the conclusion (Oweyegha-Afunaduula, 2025).

The key to thinking critically is not automatically accepting things you read in books or on the internet, or hear on radio, television or in society. For example, politicians will tell lies to convince you that they mean business when they promise you A, B, C. Yet all they want is to hypnotize your vulnerable mind and use you to achieve their narrow interests of power, glory, wealth, conquest and domination.

Therefore, instead, you should try to independently assess how reliable what you read and hear is, considering evidence, logic, and alternative perspectives. Only then will you be able to make informed decisions about what to do with it.

Developing the skills and the confidence to think more critically is not easy – it takes time and sustained effort.  However, developing your ability to think critically and independently equips you much better – not just for your studies, but for your future employment, and indeed for your wider life (Newcastle University Website) outside the walls of your discipline or the ivory tower, where you interact with people, including those who have never seen a classroom, the greedy and the selfish -those who just want to primitively accumulate wealth and only look for what will facilitate that. Critical thinking, reasoning and problem-solving are inconsequential to them.

It is important to use critical thinking to ask questions such as: ‘Is there a better way of collecting a different type of data?’, ‘Have I analysed this correctly?’, ‘Is it biased or influenced by a broader social, political and scientific message it is designed to support?’, ‘Were there shortcomings in the method used to collect the data?’, ‘Have I interpreted it correctly?’, ‘Or has some form of misinterpretation taken place?’(e.g., Oweyegha-Afunaduula, 2025).

One major constraint to critical thinking, I must emphasise, is that too many university graduates at whatever level think they possess critical thinking skills when in fact they don’t. They need to go back to a suitable institution, such as the Center for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis (CCTAA) located at Seeta, Mukono in Uganda to be taught critical thinking skills.

Otherwise, it must be pointed out that critical thing does not apply to writing or intellectual discourses alone. It applies to systems that have been in place for any length of time in order to evaluate their fitness or suitability for the purposes they were erected. Jesse Martin (2017) has advised that if you have had a system in place for more than ten years, no matter how well it works, you should run a critical analysis. This doesn’t mean that you have to change the system, it might be just fine, but a good critical analysis will show you that and may even suggest changes that might improve the efficiency of the system. However, in Uganda and perhaps the whole of Africa, system reviews can take as long as 20 years. When it comes to politics a political regime system can take even 40 years unchanged and the people will be conditioned or coerced to believe that it will deliver in a fast-changing world dominated by the internet and artificial intelligence.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Critical analysis is the production of a critique (see, these two are related) that evaluates something else so that it can be better understood by others. This is often an academic exercise used to teach students to write an evaluation of a piece of written work or understand a body of work (e.g., Jesse Martin, 2017; Oweyegha-Afunaduula, 2025).

I must re-emphasize that critical analyses are not limited to written works.  We can critically analyse political speeches, including presidential speeches, to find out whether they can help create a culture of good leadership or good governance. For example, I am not aware of any serious critical analysis of the speeches of President Tibuhaburwa Museveni since he captured the instruments of power in 1986.

Perhaps I have not been following the research outputs of the Institute of Languages at Makerere University.  I strongly believe that all the speeches of President Tibuhaburwa Museveni should be critically analysed for current and future generations of Ugandans to understand how the language of a leader can greatly influence the change or no change of a country and advantage or disadvantage current and future generations.

CRITIQUE

Critique is a method of disciplined, systematic study of a written or oral discourse. Although critique is frequently understood as fault finding and negative judgment, it can also involve merit recognition, and in the philosophical tradition, it also means a methodical practice of doubt.[1] The contemporary sense of critique has been largely influenced by the Enlightenment critique of prejudice and authority, which championed the emancipation and autonomy from religious and political authorities.

Jesse Martin (2017) says a critique becomes extremely shallow when a naïve teacher reduces the word “critically” to critical. In this case, critical means to find flaws in the work. Hence look at a body of work or a paper written and find something wrong with it; not the merit or usefulness of it. A critique is much, much more. For example, philosophy is the application of critical thought. Kant used the term to mean a reflective examination of the validity and limits of a human capacity or of a set of philosophical claims. Hegel used the term in a broad sense to mean the systematic inquiry into the limits of a doctrine or set of concepts.

In German, French and Italian, there is no difference between critique and criticism. However, in English, a difference between the two exists. Sometimes we are told “Critique, don’t criticize (Bowman, 2020); implying the two words are different. Criticism seeks to tear a person down, while critique seeks to help him or her to improve. Criticism focuses on the critic’s goals, while critique is motivated by the intention to serve the creator’s goals. Criticism is judgmental and focused on placing blame, while critique is descriptive and focused on finding solutions (Bowman, 2020). When leaders are intentional about approaching continuous evaluation through the lens of offering critique and not criticism, they build dynamic training programmes and teams where risk is welcomed. They create a corporate culture where people feel free to try new things and extend themselves beyond their comfort zone. They create organizations where today’s dreams are tomorrow’s realities (Bowman, 2020).

We should always remember also that a critique may express a positive as well as a negative assessment. Don’t confuse critique with criticize in the popular sense of the word, meaning “to point out faults. In Uganda public discourses are characterised far more with criticisms and far less with critiques. This explains why we are trapped in a vicious circle of underdevelopment, poverty and environmental decay and collapse in all dimensions of the environment (ecological-biological, sociopolitical, sociocultural and temporal).

To critique a piece of writing is to do the following:

• describe: give the reader a sense of the writer’s overall purpose and intent
• analyze: examine how the structure and language of the text convey its meaning
• interpret: state the significance or importance of each part of the text
• assess: make a judgment of the work’s worth or value

You may not be asked in every critique to assess a work, only to analyze and interpret it. If you are asked for a personal response, remember that your assessment should not be the expression of an unsupported personal opinion. Your interpretations and your conclusions must be based on evidence from the text and follow the ideas you have dealt with in the paper (Hunter RWC).

Although Critical analysis and critique are related, critical analysis is really the product of critique. Jesse Martin (2017) has written that it does not take critical thinking to produce a critique. It takes an understanding of a body of knowledge and the ability to present that knowledge (paper, work, book etc.) in an understandable format with the writer’s evaluation of what the work means.

One way that critical thinking, critical analysis, and critique are closely related is that critiques produced through the use of critical thinking are the ones that are, by far the best. They highlight strengths and weaknesses in an area and then go on to present a well-thought-out evaluation and solution to address the weaknesses or solve the problem. Mixing the three up is common (very common), but if you buy the shallow (or even pretty good) ability to critically analyze something, thinking you are buying critical thinking, you are paying for a counterfeit – even if you never find out (Jesse Martin, 2017).

CAN CRITICAL THINKING BE TAUGHT? 

Some believe that critical thinking skills can be generalised and applied to different contexts and subjects, and can be taught in a generic way. For example, understanding the links between ideas can be applied to any area of knowledge. Others believe that critical thinking skills can only be taught in the context of a specific subject. For example, the skills used with an opinion article (analysing the arguments, evaluating the evidence, identifying facts etc.) are different from those used with a scientific article, where the skills mentioned may not be as relevant as the application of the scientific method – establishing facts after making an observation, forming a hypothesis, making a prediction, conducting an experiment and analysing the results etc. There are also those who believe some skills are general while others are specific (Mauricio Shiroma, 2022).

Otherwise, critical thinking must be learned. We can’t assume people know how to get information, understand it, question it, and use it effectively. It’s something that can be learned with life experiences and examples from the world around us. And we need to have discipline to incorporate it in our lives. We need to have knowledge about something before we can think critically about it. Lastly, we can’t really think critically unless we are aware of our biases. They can alter our perception of reality, our judgment, and our capacity to make impartial observations.  (Mauricio Shiroma, 2022).

CAN CRITIQUING BE TAUGHT?

Critiquing can definitely be taught. It is considered a skill that can be developed through instruction, practice, and guidance, particularly by learning how to provide constructive feedback that analyses strengths and weaknesses while maintaining a respectful and objective approach. Indeed, students can be taught to creatively critique one’s work. Besides, Critiques help students hone their persuasive oral and writing, information-gathering, and justification skills (Payne, 2019). Payne (2019) lists 4 major areas of criticism (i.e., Description, analysis, interpretation and judgement or evaluation).

Description

Describe the work without using value words such as “beautiful” or “ugly”:

1. What is the written description on the label or in the program about the work?
2. What is the title and who is (are) the writer(s)?
3. When and where was the work created?
4. Describe the elements of the work (i.e., line movement, light, space).
5. Describe the technical qualities of the work (i.e., tools, materials, instruments).
6. Describe the subject matter. What is it all about? Are there recognizable images?

Analysis

Describe how the work is organized as a complete composition:

• How is the work constructed or planned (i.e., acts, movements, lines)?
• Identify some of the similarities throughout the work (i.e., repetition of lines, two songs in each act).
• Identify some of the points of emphasis in the work (i.e., specific scene, figure, movement).
• If the work has subjects or characters, what are the relationships between or among them?

Interpretation

Describe how the work makes you think or feel:

• Describe the expressive qualities you find in the work. What expressive language would you use to describe the qualities (i.e., tragic, ugly, funny)?
• Does the work remind you of other things you have experienced (i.e., analogy or metaphor)?
• How does the work relate to other ideas or events in the world and/or in your other studies?

Judgement or Evaluation

Present your opinion of the work’s success or failure:

• What qualities of the work make you feel it is a success or failure?
• Compare it with similar works that you think are good or bad.
• What criteria can you list to help others judge this work?
• How original is the work? Why do you feel this work is original or not original?

CAN CRITICAL ANALYSIS BE TAUGHT? 

Critical analysis can be taught; while it may involve complex cognitive skills, educators can effectively teach the principles and techniques of critical analysis through various methods, including modelling critical thinking, providing practice with analyzing texts and data, and encouraging students to identify assumptions and biases within information.

Teaching critical analysis involves helping students evaluate ideas, arguments, and evidence. It can be taught using a variety of strategies, including real-world scenarios, group discussions, and problem-solving activities. Powell and Hood submit that we can indeed help students to critically evaluate a source but caution that we need to evaluate how effective the tools we use are.

Further reading

Bowman, Randy (2020). Critique but don’t criticize. IACET, Blog Article October 30, 2020. https://www.iacet.org/news/iacet-blog/blog-articles/critique-but-dont-criticize/#:~:text=Criticism%20focuses%20on%20the%20critic’s,and%20focused%20on%20finding%20solutions. Visited on 3 February 2020 at 10:57 am EAT

Kant, Immanuel (1781). Critique of Pure Reason.

Kant, Immanuel (1788). Critique of Practical Reason.

Kant, Immanuel (1790). Critique of Judgement.

Mauricio Shiroma (2022). A Deep Dive into Critical Thinking Part 1: What is it and How is it Taught? Cambridge, https://www.cambridge.org/elt/blog/2022/09/07/what-critical-thinking-is/ Visited on 2 February 2025 at 12:27 pm EAT

Oweyegha-Afunaduula (2023. Centrality of Criticality in Academic, Intellectual, Educational, Ideological, AI and public discourses. Draft Article, 15 January 2025. Nawaka, Luuka, Uganda.

Payne, Joice (2019). Teaching Students to Critique. The Kennedy Center, November 26 2019 https://www.kennedy-center.org/education/resources-for-educators/classroom-resources/articles-and-how-tos/articles/educators/critique–feedback/teaching-students-to-critique/#:~:text=Critiques%20help%20students%20hone%20their,and%20objectives%20of%20the%20lesson. Visited on 2 February 2025 at 12:55 pm EAT.

Powell, Edward and Hood, Sonia (2023). Helping Students to learn how to critically evaluate a source: How effective are the tools we use? Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. Archives No.26 (2023)., DOI: https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi29.990, https://journal.aldinhe.ac.uk/index.php/jldhe/article/view/990 Visited on 2 February 2025 at 13:13 pm EAT

Thonney, T. and Montgomery, J. C. (2019) ‘Defining critical thinking across disciplines: an analysis of community college faculty perspectives’, College Teaching, 67(3), pp. 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2019.1579700

University of Reading (2023) Critical analysis: thinking, reading and writing. Available at: https://libguides.reading.ac.uk/critical-analysis/reading (Accessed: 1 September 2023)

Webster, H. (2019) The Three Domains of Critical Reading, LearnHigher. Available at: https://aldinhe.ac.uk/product/learnhigher-resources/the-three-domains-of-critical-reading/ (Accessed: 1 September 2023)

Img Src: www.mindtools.com