Clarity through Critical Thinking, 290-301

Radu Panait


For the better part of the pandemic, through exercises in prudence and usefulness, I have stumbled upon the realisation that, more often than not, a well-raised question weighs more than an unhinged or lackluster answer. Thusly, my utmost intention is that of delivering a recourse to clarity, logical reasoning and socratic wisdom. Although a bare dilettante of wiseness and critical thinking in general, I find myself in an equally opportunistic and imperative environment. As a sophomore, my knowledge and impact are equally insufficient. However, human consciousness is such that, even in dire straits, it is capable of digging through the most strenuous of circumstances.  My efforts have made the thread of the article take you through, and over, what I consider to be, the two most important barriers that stand in the way of a cohesive and efficient fightback, guided all the while, by the erudition of some of the brightest minds of humanity. From Antiquity to 20th century Modernity. I designated my efforts to specifically outline the threats I consider to be of infamous impact. Incompetence, delusions of grandeur, immorality and logical fallacies, to name a few. I inquired into the specificity of philosophical language and its shared similarities to journalism, as well as their crippling asymmetry. Moreover, I emphasize the necessity of realizing one’s intellectual limits and urge my peers to anticipate and become aware of our sporadic shortcomings. Lastly, I target the paradoxical idiosyncrasies of philosophical vocabulary and how, in its exigent intentions, it unwillingly envelopes its audience in sheer fluster.       


phrónēsis, sophistry, clarity, incompetence, corruption, immorality, student, critic, opinion, pandemic

Full Text:



  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 2668-0009; ISSN-L 2668-0009