Critical thinking in action
To further your understanding of critical thinking, let’s examine three
responses to the sugar tax on the soft drinks industry. The UK
Government introduced this tax in April 2018 to combat obesity.
The See Also section contains the UK Government’s news story Soft Drinks
Industry Levy comes into effect. (Soft Drinks Industry Levy comes into effect GOV.UK)
Below are three consumers’ responses to this tax. Read each response and
consider the level of critical thinking each demonstrates. Feedback is provided
after each example highlighting where elements of critical thinking are shown in
these responses and why.
Response 1
“Not another tax! I’m already paying so much on shopping. Sugar tax is just
another way to make me spend more. I can’t believe they’re taxing sugar as
shopping will be even more expensive now. Besides, what’s wrong with a can of
coke or a chocolate bar? Why does the government intervene in our personal
choices?”
Feedback
This response shows limited critical thinking. It is driven by personal
experience and emotion and lacks consideration of any evidence to support
their points. The response also makes an assumption that the tax will be paid
for by the consumer whereas the tax may actually be on the manufacturers.
There is no consideration of the wider implications of the sugar tax beyond their
personal circumstance.
Response 2
“It’s already a success - many big brands have cut down how much sugar they
put in soft drinks. The money raised from the tax will support education so that’s
a plus. Even though we don’t know for sure, hopefully the sugar tax will stop
people from buying sugary drinks eventually. I think it’ll work and solve this
country’s childhood obesity problem.”
Feedback
This response shows some critical thinking as it provides some evidence of
the positive impact of the sugar tax. However, it overstates the impact without
evidence. For example, childhood obesity is a complex problem and it is
unlikely to be solved by the sugar tax alone. It does not consider any other
contributory factors.
Response 3
“It’s still too early to judge. An analysis published in the British Medical Journal
showed there may have been some success in reducing consumer purchasing
of sugary beverages in the USA, Mexico, Brazil and France where a similar tax
had been introduced. The success appears fairly limited in reducing obesity so
more research is needed. Also, the tax is on the manufacturer rather than the
consumer. The consumer may not see the price rise at all so will have limited
impact on purchasing decisions. Also, if manufacturers choose to change their
recipe rather than pay a tax, the government won’t be able to use the revenue
raised to put in place other initiatives such as directly funding new sports
facilities in schools and healthy breakfast clubs. Therefore the benefits of this
tax may be limited. An alternative would be to encourage healthy beverage
consumption such as requiring supermarkets to make healthier drinks
prominent in displays.“
Feedback
This response shows the highest level of critical thinking of the three. It not
only shows an awareness of what is happening in the UK but also globally.
Rather than making a rash judgement, it draws on evidence and recognises the
need for further research before more definite conclusions can be made. It is
not just responding to the scenario from one perspective. The different
implications of the tax are considered and a different approach to this issue is
suggested.
Have your say:
Reflecting on the responses and their feedback, did you identify the
elements of critical thinking shown?
How would you add criticality to your personal experiences or
observations in daily life?
How would you go about adding criticality to your personal experiences
and observations?
0
