Predisposed Mental Illness And Religious Trauma Summary

Meeting the Standards of Critical Thinking

The student paper entitled “The Effects of Predisposed Mental Illness and Religious Trauma” by Woolridge Grant describes the life and experiences of the writer, who is predisposed to mental illness and has suffered religious trauma. The paper represents all standards of critical thinking excellently but especially clarity, relevance, and depth. The student directly addressed his personal situation and was able to use critical thinking skills to determine the reasons for the outcomes of his perilous situation.

The essay describes the personal experiences of Woolridge Grant clearly and effortlessly and allowed me to feel the broken hearted moments within the paper. The clarity of description of the family lineage, which predisposed the

author to mental illness, was particularly clear. According to the Critical Thinking Community, “clarity is the gateway to the other standards of critical thinking” (Elder). Thus the standard that Grant was able to most effectively complete in his paper is the most crucial standard of critical thinking to address because it affects the trajectory of his claim. Without clarity in describing his family’s circumstance, Grant would not have been able to convince me adequately that he was predisposed to mental illness and religious trauma. Grant’s clarity in the description of his grandfather and his family’s religious practices made his claims believable, convincing, and relevant.
The essay continued to meet the standards of critical thinking by addressing a problem with a relevant personal anecdote.

The problem “at hand” in Grant’s essay was his genetic inclination towards mental illness and the trauma he faced when exiting his religion from revealing his sexual preference. The relevance of his story, struggles, and pain bring forth added clarity to his problem of mental illness and religious trauma. His detail in the amount of pain and ridicule he received after communicating his sexual orientation to his family members are the most relevant to his problem. Through these relevant descriptions he is able to communicate the horrific extent of the religious trauma placed on his mental state during this time. According to Michael W. Austin, a professor at Eastern Kentucky University, “relevance means that the information and ideas discussed must be logically relevant to the issue being discussed.” (Austin). When analyzing Woolridge Grant’s writing through the lens of Michael Austin’s definition of relevance, it is easy to asset that Grant has effectively demonstrated the standard of relevance in his writing by including a detailed and provocative personal

anecdote.
In Grant’s relevant personal anecdote, there is no lack of depth. Grant explains three different perspectives of individuals in his life that contributed to his mental illness and religious trauma. He first analyzes his maternal grandfather’s experiences with infants and anxiety. He then included the perspective of his mother’s personal bout of anxiety that he used to explain the genetic trend for his own mental illness. By including his maternal grandfather’s perspective, he is able to add another level of depth to his claim that his mental illness was genetically inherited. The third perspective he includes in his anecdote is his father’s. He describes his father’s struggle with Major Depressive Disorder and the way the illness affected his father’s employment. With the inclusion of three familial perspectives, Grant is able to bring added depth and persuasion to his claim that his mental illness is derived from a genetic predisposition.
Grant’s claims that his mental illness and religious trauma were well supported by his demonstration of clarity, relevance and depth. Grant displayed clarity in his approach of a personal anecdote where he clearly described his life events and the causes for his mental illness and religious trauma. He also proved to the reader that his religious trauma was relevant to his problem because of the detail of the horrific events that led to his lowest moments. Grant’s depth also added further fidelity to his claims and illustrated the strenuous experiences he went through to find healing and inner piece. Overall, Grant’s essay epitomized each standard of critical thinking. His paper especially embodied the standards of clarity, relevance and depth due to his excellent personal anecdote and inward personal analysis.