“Tradecraft Without Thought: The Critical Thinking Deficit in Intelligence”

Intelligence analysts: let’s stop pretending “critical thinking” means “I read a lot” or “I have opinions with citations.”

Most analysts don’t actually think critically in the conceptual sense. They summarize. They pattern-match. They default to institutional narratives. They confuse confidence with rigor. And they call it “analysis.”

If you want to prove you can actually think—not just produce words—answer these four questions (without Googling, without hiding behind jargon, and without turning it into a memo):

When you make an analytic judgment, what would have to be true for your conclusion to be wrong—and what evidence, specifically, would force you to update or abandon it?

What is the strongest alternative explanation to your current assessment, and what observable indicators would discriminate between your preferred hypothesis and that alternative?

Identify one assumption you are treating as “background fact.” Now justify it: what’s its evidentiary basis, what’s its failure mode, and what happens to your judgment if it collapses?

Separate “evidence” from “interpretation”: name two facts you’re relying on, then show how two different reasonable analysts could interpret those same facts into opposing judgments—and explain why yours is more valid.

If you can answer those cleanly, under time pressure, with intellectual honesty, you’re doing critical thinking.

If you can’t… you’re doing narrative maintenance.

Want to learn more about Critical Thinking:

https://drcharlesmrusso.substack.com/

https://www.skool.com/the-analytical-edge-3643

0 comments