Critical Mind vs. Critical Spirit article

[GandalfTheWise]

Nice article I saw a link to in another group contrasting the difference between critically looking at ideas and thoughts versus critically attacking people.

Here is the opening paragraph quoted:  "There is a massive difference between a critical mind and a critical spirit. The former builds up; the latter tears down. Having a critical mind is a terrific thing. It results in healthy self-reflection, learning, and evaluating the why beneath everything one does. Having a critical spirit is a terrible thing. It results in pushing people away, mistrusting everything and everyone, and constantly looking for things to be broken instead of rejoicing in the good things the Lord has done and is doing. Here are five differences between a critical mind and a critical spirit:"

https://churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-articles/366281-5-differences-between-a-critical-mind-and-a-critical-spirit.html?fbclid=IwAR1A_wtBRU851msQqLDO_22jKk4xu52XCmKFOe4XTNZjzGFX-rDpiLfiDR0

[AnOrangeCat]

Thanks for sharing. I like the distinction made there.

[Marathoner]

I read the article, so the following is an example of critical analysis.

1. More proofreading is required (I spotted a number of errors). It helps to have at least two different pairs of editorial eyes scrutinize an article prior to publishing. Is this negative, delivered with spite? Of course not. Before I submitted a paper to my professor, I had it scrutinized by two different pairs of eyes. This is merely the editorial process carried out in a satisfactory manner. 

2. The dichotomy employed by the author strains credulity. Truth to be told, most of us have evidenced traits which the author ascribes to both the "critical mind" and the "critical spirit" at one time or another, often in concert. Why? Because man is neither perfect nor flawlessly consistent, pointing at our pressing need to be disciplined, corrected, taught, and loved by the Lord our God. It is man's place to repent of both his words and deeds. In my critical estimation, the contrasting effigies employed by the author are one-dimensional caricatures lacking depth and meaning. There's more to this story. 

3. The author's reliance upon absolutes undermines the message I believe he's striving to communicate. For example, "Those with critical spirits are always angry... ". At the very worst, this is a gross misrepresentation which is indicative of critical point #2 above; the author's dichotomy is shaky and demonstrably false. This by no means invalidates the message the author sought to convey so if I were called upon (or requested by the author) to offer editorial critique, I would suggest changing the tone from one of "this is good and this is bad, okay?" to "we work well with our fellow man when we walk in a spirit of self-control delivered in love." 

Brief, but I think that is a sufficient demonstration of critical analysis. Critical analysis is all about improvement and a cooperative effort. I agree with @Josheb's clarifications; not a single one of us ought to consider ourselves above reproach. My old professor taught me how to tame my writing talent and direct it properly as well as effectively, but he sure had a field day dressing my papers with red ink! 

The man could dissect a paragraph in seconds!    

[Michael37]

3 minutes ago, Marathoner said:

I read the article, so the following is an example of critical analysis.

1. More proofreading is required (I spotted a number of errors). It helps to have at least two different pairs of editorial eyes scrutinize an article prior to publishing. Is this negative, delivered with spite? Of course not. Before I submitted a paper to my professor, I had it scrutinized by two different pairs of eyes. This is merely the editorial process carried out in a satisfactory manner. 

2. The dichotomy employed by the author strains credulity. Truth to be told, most of us have evidenced traits which the author ascribes to both the "critical mind" and the "critical spirit" at one time or another, often in concert. Why? Because man is neither perfect nor flawlessly consistent, pointing at our pressing need to be disciplined, corrected, taught, and loved by the Lord our God. It is man's place to repent of both his words and deeds. In my critical estimation, the contrasting effigies employed by the author are one-dimensional caricatures lacking depth and meaning. There's more to this story. 

3. The author's reliance upon absolutes undermines the message I believe he's striving to communicate. For example, "Those with critical spirits are always angry... ". At the very worst, this is a gross misrepresentation which is indicative of critical point #2 above; the author's dichotomy is shaky and demonstrably false. This by no means invalidates the message the author sought to convey so if I were called upon (or requested by the author) to offer editorial critique, I would suggest changing the tone from one of "this is good and this is bad, okay?" to "we work well with our fellow man when we walk in a spirit of self-control delivered in love." 

Brief, but I think that is a sufficient demonstration of critical analysis. Critical analysis is all about improvement and a cooperative effort. I agree with @Josheb's clarifications; not a single one of us ought to consider ourselves above reproach. My old professor taught me how to tame my writing talent and direct it properly as well as effectively, but he sure had a field day dressing my papers with red ink! 

The man could dissect a paragraph in seconds!    

I enjoyed your analysis, Marathoner. It is well written so you must have learned a thing or two from your educators. 

[Marathoner]

At the risk of inviting criticism (), I'm convinced that each has their place. This reflects the many-membered Body of Jesus Christ, wherein each member has their proper purpose and function. Some of us notice little things... others look for things out of place... and then there's always a few who stare at the elephant in the room. This is suggestive of something mind boggling:

The Lord intended each and every one of us to be different from the other! 

The apostle likens this truth to the difference between disparate parts of the same body. The hand does not do what a foot does, yet both hand and foot work together for the good of all. So it is with the Body of Christ, my friends. 

In spite of the critique I offered above (dear grammar checker, there is nothing amiss with what I just typed), I would never presume to broadcast such an effort uninvited nor unsolicited. There was a time when I would have done just that, but I'm so grateful to the Lord that He dismantled me over the years. I was soundly defeated before His instruction finally sprouted roots.

Christ knows how to deal with us.  

We also have our quirks. As for me, I'm fond of being critiqued which is why I got along so famously with my English Comp professor. I'll never forget his entrance the first day of the semester, when he stormed into the lecture hall burdened with an enormous stack of folders and books. When he arrived at the table facing us all he paused for effect, grimaced, and dropped that stack with a resounding "THOOM!" 

He carefully placed five boxes of red pens in front of the pile. Grinning, the fellow said, "I'll run out of those in a few weeks."

My favorite lecture of them all. I remember him fondly. 

  

 

Edited January 13, 2022 by Marathoner

[Michael37]

14 hours ago, Marathoner said:

At the risk of inviting criticism (), I'm convinced that each has their place. This reflects the many-membered Body of Jesus Christ, wherein each member has their proper purpose and function. Some of us notice little things... others look for things out of place... and then there's always a few who stare at the elephant in the room. This is suggestive of something mind boggling:

The Lord intended each and every one of us to be different from the other! 

The apostle likens this truth to the difference between disparate parts of the same body. The hand does not do what a foot does, yet both hand and foot work together for the good of all. So it is with the Body of Christ, my friends. 

In spite of the critique I offered above (dear grammar checker, there is nothing amiss with what I just typed), I would never presume to broadcast such an effort uninvited nor unsolicited. There was a time when I would have done just that, but I'm so grateful to the Lord that He dismantled me over the years. I was soundly defeated before His instruction finally sprouted roots.

Christ knows how to deal with us.  

We also have our quirks. As for me, I'm fond of being critiqued which is why I got along so famously with my English Comp professor. I'll never forget his entrance the first day of the semester, when he stormed into the lecture hall burdened with an enormous stack of folders and books. When he arrived at the table facing us all he paused for effect, grimaced, and dropped that stack with a resounding "THOOM!" 

He carefully placed five boxes of red pens in front of the pile. Grinning, the fellow said, "I'll run out of those in a few weeks."

My favorite lecture of them all. I remember him fondly. 

A Critique of Ephesians 4:

• Plan
• Purpose
• Provision
• Polarity
• Perfecting
• Participation
• Placement