Critical Thinking In Homeland Security

Introduction

-need for critical thinking in Homeland security

-why it is important

The date of September 11, 2001 marked a turning point in the history of security. Because of these devastating attacks, not only have homeland defense, security, safety, and military strategies changed, but also our way of thinking has changed. We cannot afford to have failures in our planning and imagination of what criminals can do. To improve security, we must seek new tools to assist us in our thinking processes. Critical thinking skills can counter business as usual. Critical thinking helps us to become an active learner to not only absorb information, but to probe and shape knowledge. The critical thinker cuts through “hype” and emotion and goes beyond collecting

“facts” and memorizing information in an effort to understand causes, motives, and changes.

Critical thinking skills provide a foundation for creative planning while helping us to anticipate future events. The critical thinker asks many questions and the questions are often easier to formulate than the answers. Critical thinking requires us to “jump out of our own skin” to see the world from the perspective of others. Although this is not an easy process, we are much better informed prior to our conclusions and decisions. Critical thinking is not to be used as a tool to open up the floodgates of criticism in the workplace. It is to be applied discreetly to understand the world and to meet challenges. A professional’s success depends on his or her thinking process applied to everyday duties and long-range planning. Critical thinking adds an extra edge to the repertoire of tools available to security and loss prevention practitioners. Security challenges have become increasingly complex...

... middle of paper ...

... reveal what the analyst believes the event or record should reveal.

Assessing reliability involves determining whether different means of collection produce the same results.

If, on the other hand, the evidence is testimonial, different criteria apply. The first thing to be established is whether the source is being truthful. Truthfulness is not absolute. Rather, it is time- and contextdependent.

A source may believe he is being truthful about an issue or may have legitimate reasons to be untruthful about that issue. In another time and about another issue, these impediments to veracity may not exist for that source. Therefore, establishing the truthfulness of a source can pose a significant challenge to the analyst.

--Convey sound, well-reasoned arguments

--Execute solutions

--Focus on the process of reasoning with the intention of improving the process