Categories Are Meaningful: Pro-Choice or Pro-Life

[CraigD]

I have manage to make people conscious of the concept and the rest is in their hands. But at least they now are conscious of the fact that what they call critical thnking is not what CT is.

Though I was familiar with the concept of critical thinking from an early age (my father was fond of the term), and have encountered and articulated it many times in academic and professional contexts, I don’t consider myself to have a fundamental, formal understanding of it.

 

My standard of what constitutes a formal understanding of a thing is strict, deriving from the definitions and approaches outlined in books like Gödel, Escher, Bach. In short, until I’ve either written a computer program that generates theorems in a formalized thing – implemented what Hofstadter would call its “nomenclatural rules”, or feel confident that I could – possibly requiring much practical cleverness, discipline, or remaining lifetime than I have, but at least could in principle – I won’t claim a formal understanding of a thing.

 

I think this motivates me – as I think it motivates many people who like this sort of formalism – to focus my attention on small systems that I’m reasonably confident I can successfully approach this way. CT is not such a small system.

 

Thus, my approach to CT is a bit like my approach to plumbing – acknowledge that I lack the best training in it, take heart that I’ve yet to fail at it catastrophically, learn as I go along, and make sure I know the location of and have tested the main shutoff valve before I start. :doh: As a result, most of what I consciously know – that is, that I could write in an organized manner – of critical thinking is a fusion of various professional problem analysis methods (eg: Kepner Tregoe) and loose guides like Carl Sagan’s “baloney detection kit”.

 

I’m fond, when approaching an unplumbed magisterium, of an approach I term “the 3 by 5 card approach”. In this approach, I write everything I know about the thing on a collection of 3 by 5 cards (or their electronic equivalent), with the requirement that the overall scheme’s outline must fit, with reasonably legible writing, on a single 3 by 5 inch index card. The deck of cards can begin with specific, detailed theorems, then be rewritten as often as necessary as more theorems are added and organized into their outline. This approach is convenient for testing and reviewing my knowledge of a wide or narrow domain of knowledge. Before I need to use it in some critical way – to continue my plumbing metaphor, before I begin cutting pipes – I attempt to write its top card. If I fail, I know review and relearning is called for – that, or lots of rags, buckets, and epoxy putty. ;)

 

Would any in this thread who consider themself accomplished in CT care to try 3 by 5 carding it? That is, write its practical essentials, of the first of a series of theorems, practices, rules, or principles that should be assimilated before assimilating more, in a compact textual form?

[Turtle]

.. Would any in this thread who consider themself accomplished in CT care to try 3 by 5 carding it? That is, write its practical essentials, of the first of a series of theorems, practices, rules, or principles that should be assimilated before assimilating more, in a compact textual form?

 

Your phrasing prompted me to recall a high-school student of my acquaintance from a decade ago telling me about learning & using Bloom's Taxonomy in school. My quick review of the Wiki article suggests it was in the cogtnitive domain the school was teaching this form of CT. ;) :doh:

 

Taxonomy of Educational Objectives - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...Skills in the cognitive domain revolve around knowledge, comprehension, and "thinking through" a particular topic. Traditional education tends to emphasize the skills in this domain, particularly the lower-order objectives.

 

There are six levels in the taxonomy, moving through the lowest order processes to the highest: ...

[coberst]

 

 

 

I don't have children, so I can't speak to that. I can ask my friend who is a middle school teacher, but my guess is that he will say, "What is CT?".

 

 

In other words, the best way to enable CT in others is to practice it oneself. "Be the change you wish to see in the world" -Gandhi :hihi:

 

Therein lay the rub; the teacher asking "What is CT?". Raising the consciousness of an individual beyond this level of comprehension is the first step. The teacher, no doubt, would not respond "What is critical thinking?" because everyone is a critical thinker.

 

I agree that practicing CT is a useful means for promoting CT to someone who is conscious of the existence of CT. However, if everyone is conscious of critical thinking but not conscious of CT then that will not work.

 

Critical thinking can be acquired through social osmosis just as proper social etiquette can thus be acquired. However, social osmosis will not work for CT just as it will not work for Algebra.

[coberst]

Craig

 

I will not try the 3X5 card idea myself but have copied from the Internet something that might look like such a system as presented by a very well qualified teacher of CT.

 

 

Making good judgments is an important and complex matter. There are bad judgments, good judgments, and better judgments. To make better judgments requires many kinds of knowledge, skills, and character traits all working together.

 

Our schools and colleges are beginning to teach these things but it is an effort that is just beginning and it is a difficult one to accomplish.

 

This info was taken from workbooks for classes K-12. This list is found in the following handbooks: Critical Thinking Handbook: k-3, Critical Thinking Handbook: 4-6, Critical Thinking Handbook: 6-9, Critical Thinking Handbook: High School.

 

 

A. Affective Strategies

S-1 thinking independently

Thru

S-9 developing confidence in reason

 

B. Cognitive Strategies - Macro-Abilities

S-10 refining generalizations and avoiding oversimplifications

Thru

S-26 reasoning dialectically: evaluating perspectives, interpretations, or theories

 

C. Cognitive Strategies - Micro-Skills

S-27 comparing and contrasting ideals with actual practice

Thru

S-35 exploring implications and consequences

 

S-1 Thinking Independently

 

Principle: Critical thinking is independent thinking, thinking for oneself. Many of our beliefs are acquired at an early age, when we have a strong tendency to form beliefs for irrational reasons (because we want to believe, because we are praised or rewarded for believing). Critical thinkers use critical skills and insights to reveal and reject beliefs that are irrational.

 

S-2 Developing Insight Into Egocentricity or Sociocentricity

 

Principle: Egocentricity means confusing what we see and think with reality. When under the influence of egocentricity, we think that the way we see things is exactly the way things are. Egocentricity manifests itself as an inability or unwillingness to consider others' points of view, a refusal to accept ideas or facts which would prevent us from getting what we want (or think we want).

 

S-3 Exercising Fairmindedness

 

Principle: To think critically, we must be able to consider the strengths and weaknesses of opposing points of view; to imaginatively put ourselves in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them; to overcome our egocentric tendency to identify truth with our immediate perceptions or long-standing thought or belief.

 

S-4 Exploring Thoughts Underlying Feelings and Feelings Underlying Thoughts

 

Principle: Although it is common to separate thought and feeling as though they were independent, opposing forces in the human mind, the truth is that virtually all human feelings are based on some level of thought and virtually all thought generative of some level of feeling. To think with self-understanding and insight, we must come to terms with the intimate connections between thought and feeling, reason and emotion.

 

S-5 Developing Intellectual Humility and Suspending Judgment

 

Principle: Critical thinkers recognize the limits of their knowledge. They are sensitive to circumstances in which their native egocentricity is likely to function self-deceptively; they are sensitive to bias, prejudice, and limitations of their views. Intellectual humility is based on the recognition that one should not claim more than one actually knows. It does not imply spinelessness or submissiveness.

 

S-6 Developing Intellectual Courage

 

Principle: To think independently and fairly, one must feel the need to face and fairly deal with unpopular ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints. The courage to do so arises when we see that ideas considered dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part) and that conclusions or beliefs inculcated in us are sometimes false or misleading.

 

S-7 Developing Intellectual Good Faith or Integrity

 

Principle: Critical thinkers recognize the need to be true to their own thought, to be consistent in the intellectual standards they apply, to hold themselves to the same rigorous standards of evidence and proof to which they hold others, to practice what they advocate for others, and to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in their own thought and action. They believe most strongly what has been justified by their own thought and analyzed experience.

 

S-8 Developing Intellectual Perseverance

 

Principle: Becoming a more critical thinker is not easy. It takes time and effort. Critical thinking is reflective and recursive; that is, we often think back to previous problems to re-consider or re-analyze them. Critical thinkers are willing to pursue intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations.

 

S-9 Developing Confidence in Reason

 

Principle: The rational person recognizes the power of reason and the value of disciplining thinking in accordance with rational standards. Virtually all of the progress that has been made in science and human knowledge testifies to this power, and so to the reasonability of having confidence in reason.

 

S-10 Refining Generalizations and Avoiding Oversimplifications

 

Principle: It is natural to seek to simplify problems and experiences to make them easier to deal with. Everyone does this. However, the uncritical thinker often oversimplifies and as a result misrepresents problems and experiences.

 

S-11 Comparing Analogous Situations: Transferring Insights to New Contexts

 

Principle: An idea's power is limited by our ability to use it. Critical thinkers' ability to use ideas mindfully enhances their ability to transfer ideas critically. They practice using ideas and insights by appropriately applying them to new situations. This allows them to organize materials and experiences in different ways, to compare and contrast alternative labels, to integrate their understanding of different situations, and to find useful ways to think about new situations.

 

S-12 Developing One's Perspective: Creating or Exploring Beliefs, Arguments, or Theories

 

Principle: The world is not given to us sliced up into categories with pre-assigned labels on them. There are always many ways to "divide up" and so experience the world. How we do so is essential to our thinking and behavior. Uncritical thinkers assume that their perspective on things is the only correct one. Selfish critical thinkers manipulate the perspectives of others to gain advantage for themselves.

 

S-13 Clarifying Issues, Conclusions, or Beliefs

 

Principle: The more completely, clearly, and accurately an issue or statement is formulated, the easier and more helpful the discussion of its settlement or verification. Given a clear statement of an issue, and prior to evaluating conclusions or solutions, it is important to recognize what is required to settle it. And before we can agree or disagree with a claim, we must understand it clearly.

 

S-14 Clarifying and Analyzing the Meanings of Words or Phrases

 

Principle: Critical, independent thinking requires clarity of thought. A clear thinker understands concepts and knows what kind of evidence is required to justify applying a word or phrase to a situation. The ability to supply a definition is not proof of understanding. One must be able to supply clear, obvious examples and use the concept appropriately. In contrast, for an unclear thinker, words float through the mind unattached to clear, specific, concrete cases. Distinct concepts are confused.

 

And so on

 

============================================================

 

S-33 Giving Reasons and Evaluating Evidence and Alleged Facts

 

Principle: Critical thinkers can take their reasoning apart in order to examine and evaluate its components. They know on what evidence they base their conclusions. They realize that un-stated, unknown reasons can be neither communicated nor critiqued. They are comfortable being asked to give reasons; they don't find requests for reasons intimidating, confusing, or insulting.

 

S-34 Recognizing Contradictions

 

Principle: Consistency is a fundamental-some would say the defining-ideal of critical thinkers. They strive to remove contradictions from their beliefs, and are wary of contradictions in others. As would-be fairminded thinkers they strive to judge like cases in a like manner.

 

S-35 Exploring Implications and Consequences

 

Principle: Critical thinkers can take statements, recognize their implications-what follows from them-and develop a fuller, more complete understanding of their meaning. They realize that to accept a statement one must also accept its implications. They can explore both implications and consequences at length. When considering beliefs that relate to actions or policies, critical thinkers assess the consequences of acting on those beliefs.

 

{This list is found in the following handbooks: Critical Thinking Handbook: k-3, Critical Thinking Handbook: 4-6, Critical Thinking Handbook: 6-9, Critical Thinking Handbook: High School.}

 

Critical Thinking Skills

[jedaisoul]

message deleted - unnecessary.

[Turtle]

The upshot of all this, after I gave it some thought, is that you can lead a student to critical thinking, but you can't make them use it. Nothing is a panacea. :cup: