Critical Reading: A Tool for Free Decision-Making

Imagine reading an article that strongly contradicts your beliefs. How do you react initially? I get unsettled and search for what truth there might be in it.
At first, I can't believe it, but I keep reading.
I immediately think of counterarguments in my mind.
I feel disgust and stop reading.
I'm intrigued – I want to understand how the author thinks.

In the text, a "study" is mentioned, but its source is not provided. What will you do? I'll try to verify the information elsewhere.
I will lightly question the credibility, but I will keep reading.
I ignore it – I am only interested in the main idea.
I tend to believe if the claim sounds logical.
I will start to be cautious – manipulations often hide right here.

Imagine that the author of the text uses strong emotional expressions. How does that affect you? I will start to be more cautious.
I will unconsciously let myself be influenced by it.
I feel that it is manipulation and it discourages me.
It creates sympathy or aversion in me – depending on the topic.
I will focus more on the facts than on the tone.

When reading a text that appears objective but you can sense a subtle manipulation, what will you do? I am analyzing what that feeling is rooted in.
I will say that everyone has some opinion.
In my mind, I create a "counter-text" as if I were discussing with the author.
I'll go through the text quickly and move on.
I get excited about discovering hidden intentions.

What does the sentence "The opinion of an expert is more important than personal experience" mean to you? It depends on the context – sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I disagree – personal experience is fundamental to me.
I agree more – experts see things more deeply.
The sentence provokes me – I am considering who is an expert and why.
I will think about how these two sources can complement each other.

If you are unsure about a certain topic and come across an article with a clear stance, how will you react? I will take it as one option and I am looking for others.
I will let myself be influenced by that, at least for a while.
I notice who wrote the article and for whom.
I feel more relieved that "someone knows what you're thinking."
I'm saving the article, but I don't know the opinion yet.

If someone tells you: "You are a very influential person, so you should only share verified things." What does that evoke in you? Responsibility and the desire to verify facts more thoroughly.
Doubts about what is already "verified"
Feeling of manipulation – who decides what is right?
The motivation to be a source of certainty for others.
I perceive the division of the world into "manipulators" and "responsible" as a problem.

When you come across a text that has a lot of likes and positive comments, but something feels off about it, how do you react? I wonder if the majority can have a blind spot.
I'm looking for critical comments – someone must have seen it differently.
I question my perception – maybe it’s just me who is "weird."
I don't worry – the emotion of the majority is often right.
I admit my contradiction and I will leave it open.

The author of the text admits at the beginning to a mistake in their previous stance. How do you respond to that? You are gaining my trust with that.
I'm curious about what led him to that.
I feel sympathy and a willingness to continue reading.
I take it as a rhetorical move.
I'm starting to be cautious - maybe he/she wants to push something through.

Imagine that someone recommends a text that "completely changed" them. What is your reaction? I am curious what affected him so strongly.
I will skeptically prepare for exaggerated claims.
I want to find out what changes in the reader, not just in the content.
I will start to focus more on the language than on the content.
I will reflect on whether I am also looking for such "transformative" texts.