History[ edit ] The earliest documentation of critical thinking are the teachings of Socrates recorded by Plato. Socrates established the fact that one cannot depend upon those in "authority" to have sound knowledge and insight. He demonstrated that persons may have power and high position and yet be deeply confused and irrational.
The essence of critical thinking is logic, and logical evaluation — by using reality checks and quality checks — is the essence of Design-Thinking Process and Scientific Method.
On the other end of the logic spectum, we see a variety of logical fallacies that include circular reasoning and strawman arguments. Thinking is encouraged by a creative use of Thinking Activities, such as Aesop's Activities or Socratic Teaching Six Types of Socratic Questions and other teaching tactics that encourage active learning.
It's difficult to evaluate thinking skills. Accurate evaluation of a thinking skill — or even defining precisely what the "skill" is, and how we can observe and measure it — is much more difficult than evaluating ideas-knowledge.
Some educators have accepted the challenge: Critical Thinking on the Web offers links to many interesting, useful resources about critical thinking in a WIDE variety of areas, for teaching more.
Its value is simple: Rather, it is a seminal goal which, done well, simultaneously facilitates a rainbow of other ends. It is best conceived, therefore, as the hub around which all other educational ends cluster.
For example, as students learn to think more critically, they become more proficient at historical, scientific, and mathematical thinking.
Finally, they develop skills, abilities, and values crucial to success in everyday life. Recent research suggests that critical thinking is not typically an intrinsic part of instruction at any level. Students come without training in it, while faculty tend to take it for granted as an automatic by-product of their teaching.
Yet without critical thinking systematically designed into instruction, learning is transitory and superficial. A person can be good at critical thinking, meaning that the person can have the appropriate dispositions and be adept at the cognitive processes, while still not being a good in the moral sense critical thinker.
For example, a person can be adept at developing arguments and then, unethically, use this skill to mislead and exploit a gullible person, perpetrate a fraud, or deliberately confuse and confound, and frustrate a project.
The experts were faced with an interesting problem. Some, a minority, would prefer to think that critical thinking, by its very nature, is inconsistent with the kinds of unethical and deliberately counterproductive examples given.
They find it hard to imagine a person who was good at critical thinking not also being good in the broader personal and social sense. In other words, if a person were "really" a "good critical thinker" in the procedural sense and if the person had all the appropriate dispositions, then the person simply would not do those kinds of exploitive and aggravating things.
The large majority, however, hold the opposite judgment. They are firm in the view that good critical thinking has nothing to do with The majority of experts maintain that critical thinking conceived of as we have described it above, is, regrettably, not inconsistent with its unethical use.
A tool, an approach to situations, these can go either way, ethically speaking, depending on the character, integrity, and principles of the persons who possess them. So, in the final analysis the majority of experts maintained that "it is an inappropriate use of the term to deny that someone is engaged in critical thinking on the grounds that one disapproves ethically of what the person is doing.
What critical thinking means, why it is of value, and the ethics of its use are best regarded as three distinct concerns. Fairminded thinkers take into account the interests of everyone affected by the problem and proposed solutions.
They are more committed to finding the best solution than to getting their way. Yes, reason is useful, it is noble and desirable, it should be highly valued and carefully developed.
But we should keep things in perspective, regarding what reason can accomplish. Probably most of us will agree with Paul about the value of critical thinking but also with the majority of experts, who conclude that becoming skilled at critical thinking does not guarantee that this powerful tool will always be used for the benefit of others.
The internet offers an abundance of resources, so our main challenge is selectivity, and we have tried to find high-quality pages for you to read. But the pages above don't necessarily represent views of the American Scientific Affiliation. As always, we encourage you to use your critical thinking skills to evaluate everything you read.Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way.
People who think critically consistently attempt to . Further reading. The following is a sample of books for further reading, selected for a combination of content, ease of access via the internet, and to provide an indication of published sources that interested readers may review.
Critical thinking is the objective analysis of facts to form a judgment. The subject is complex, and several different definitions exist, which generally include the rational, skeptical, unbiased analysis, or evaluation of factual metin2sell.comal thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking.
It presupposed assent to rigorous standards of. A crucial part of critical thinking is to identify, construct, and evaluate arguments..
In everyday life, people often use "argument" to mean a quarrel between people. A critical study of the fallacies of universalism in theology. Volume 14, No. 1, Art. 25 – January Theory Building in Qualitative Research: Reconsidering the Problem of Induction. Pedro F. Bendassolli. Abstract: The problem of induction refers to the difficulties involved in the process of justifying experience-based scientific metin2sell.com specifically, inductive reasoning assumes a leap from singular observational statements to general.