Excellent article and will be in Monday's edition of P&D. One of the things I would love to see instituted in public education is the study of logical fallacies, starting in their freshmen year of high school, and I would love to see it made mandatory through out the four years of college, and making a passing grade mandatory for graduation for both high school and college, along with a good civics course.
Kids are so inherently curious, I think the teachers (and parents who are actively engaged with raising their children) are key to children keeping their innate ability to think critically and expanding it exponentially. Questions should be encouraged. Children should also be encouraged to think outside the box, and teachers should make that kind of thinking fun and challenging. Debate class...another great way to get kids looking at subjects from all angles and also a way to get kids to learn respectful ways to make an argument for their case. I was very shy and introverted all through high school. In college I majored in microbiology. There was a lab exam where the students were given a pathogen and three days to run the lab tests to identify what was making their "patient" sick. I came up with my answer in one day by thinking outside the box and cutting to the chase. The professor called me into his office to accuse me of cheating on the lab exam. I was horrified but I explained my rationale of using several shortcuts (mine, not his) to eliminate common possibilities and find the pathogen quickly. I argued that if a patient was sick and needed the correct antibiotic, the faster they got it, the faster the patient would recover. My actions were logical. I properly identified the pathogen, staph aureus. He couldn't argue with me, and granted me the grade I deserved. But he was angry that I bypassed his standard procedures, which take forever, IMO. When teachers get stuck in their own comfortable grooves, students can suffer and be stifled. Not sure this has anything to do with critical thinking, but a mind that can't be free to create is one that is wasted.
I enjoy reading your thoughts on Critical Thinking, a lost art in America today. Your baseball analogy highlights the need to acquire base skills took me back to my life growing up in a different age which are generally missing in the development of today’s young people.
At an early age I was exposed and learned to read literature far beyond my “grade level”, whatever that is supposed to mean. My mother bought the complete series of Alex Dumas’ novels which I read. She also subscribed to the “Book of the Month Club” so current material was there for me to read. For shorter periods of time, I read her copy of the “Reader’s Digest”.
From this background, I learned to concentrate reading long foreign author novels about places I had yet to see and historical times long past.
When I started writing seriously, especially my book ,“Looking Through a Glass Darkly: Divided America and the Gathering Storm”, I found that the two years handling two or three Harvard Case Method analyses daily caused me to approach each subject as both the case writer, to get to the facts so often obscured in today’s misinformation mainstream, and the critical thinking analysis.
Reading at a complex level, concentration, broad unbiased subject exposure, and your list would be the building blocks taking ones Critical Thinking beyond the University level. But at the K-12 level, it begins with learning to read and concentrate and expands slowly to a breadth of knowledge. Is that even possible today?
John: TY for your interesting reply. Yes, my list assumed the 3Rs, so TY for pointing that out. That said, as my prior commentary spelled out, the beginnings of being a Critical Thinker actually precede our ability to read.
To think critically, one must make use of the Principles of Reasoning but few people are aware of the Nature of these Principles. Thwy are "entropy minimax," as desribed by the late theoretiscall physisist Ronald Christensen in the seven volume "Entropy Minimax Sourcebook. Under "Entropy Minimas", the induced model of a physical system expresses all of the avvailable information about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for the induced model no more.
Memorable teachers are those who do not stand at the front of a class and lecture. Teachers must involve the children (and students of ll ages), in the learning process. Do the students understand... or do they have questions? Too many teachers totally ignore children who raise their hands to ask questions or contribute their info. In college, I took a course in student teaching...and went to observe my own mother who was a teacher. I was amazed at how good she was. She involved her students in the learning process. What I observed over the years...Rote learning, which is destructive...and boring.
On the teaching of critical thinking, I also think that it is possible, and that the opposing forces have (perhaps) always been predominant.
Jung certainly did not possess the greatest critical spirit of the time, but it may be useful to remember that he said "the world does not improve, it changes...".
I would add that psychology and psychotherapy, over the last century, have also spread to less wealthy social strata, on paper psychotherapists are those who should be able to distinguish both social lies and those of their patients when they lie to themselves (significantly reducing their critical capacity).
It is known, however, that the vast majority of psychotherapists have also joined the vaccination campaign and on this they have certainly not opened their patients' minds.
Critical thinking is not synonymous with social success, it almost always contrasts the individual with his social counterpart and above all with his ego.
I wonder if there is a universal sense of guilt that clouds the minds of much of the planet and makes us accept rules that critical thinking should identify (soon) as criminal.
the development of the human being probably passes through the individual, but not collective, recognition of injustices, the recognition of injustices can also be the parameter of measurement of development but it can be falsified if injustices are a product of social consumption, that is, they are indoctrinated.
That is, one can be very skilled at lying to oneself and school has this downside, it also teaches one to lie to oneself, one can probably also become a baseball champion by lying to oneself in such a masterly way, that one meets collective approval.
The collective, if it goes well, stops at the contrast between lies and truth both towards oneself and towards others, but if in the midst of this contrast, the individual produces things to admire, then the collective judges it absolutely positive and as the quickest means (the recipe) to be a winner.
Kafka, more than a century ago, especially in his shorter writings, transmits the crushing force of social conventions on the individual, who struggles to find an individual way and instead ends up describing himself, making his prose like a poetic state almost in contact with a "universal", but Kafka gave the order to burn everything he had written and without selection.
Nietzsche had found something that I believe Americans liked very much, even if I think they would have wanted to select only the positive side ..., in my opinion he had found a strength within himself, almost primordial, but he had to put it to the test and it was not enough to criticize social conventions, morals or the predominant culture, he ended up not being able to speak to men anymore.
Excellent article and will be in Monday's edition of P&D. One of the things I would love to see instituted in public education is the study of logical fallacies, starting in their freshmen year of high school, and I would love to see it made mandatory through out the four years of college, and making a passing grade mandatory for graduation for both high school and college, along with a good civics course.
Kids are so inherently curious, I think the teachers (and parents who are actively engaged with raising their children) are key to children keeping their innate ability to think critically and expanding it exponentially. Questions should be encouraged. Children should also be encouraged to think outside the box, and teachers should make that kind of thinking fun and challenging. Debate class...another great way to get kids looking at subjects from all angles and also a way to get kids to learn respectful ways to make an argument for their case. I was very shy and introverted all through high school. In college I majored in microbiology. There was a lab exam where the students were given a pathogen and three days to run the lab tests to identify what was making their "patient" sick. I came up with my answer in one day by thinking outside the box and cutting to the chase. The professor called me into his office to accuse me of cheating on the lab exam. I was horrified but I explained my rationale of using several shortcuts (mine, not his) to eliminate common possibilities and find the pathogen quickly. I argued that if a patient was sick and needed the correct antibiotic, the faster they got it, the faster the patient would recover. My actions were logical. I properly identified the pathogen, staph aureus. He couldn't argue with me, and granted me the grade I deserved. But he was angry that I bypassed his standard procedures, which take forever, IMO. When teachers get stuck in their own comfortable grooves, students can suffer and be stifled. Not sure this has anything to do with critical thinking, but a mind that can't be free to create is one that is wasted.
SM: I'd say that your college story was a fine example of using Critical Thinking! BTW, you were shy and introverted? Who wooda thunk?
John Whitmore Jenkins
jenkins-speaks.com
I enjoy reading your thoughts on Critical Thinking, a lost art in America today. Your baseball analogy highlights the need to acquire base skills took me back to my life growing up in a different age which are generally missing in the development of today’s young people.
At an early age I was exposed and learned to read literature far beyond my “grade level”, whatever that is supposed to mean. My mother bought the complete series of Alex Dumas’ novels which I read. She also subscribed to the “Book of the Month Club” so current material was there for me to read. For shorter periods of time, I read her copy of the “Reader’s Digest”.
From this background, I learned to concentrate reading long foreign author novels about places I had yet to see and historical times long past.
When I started writing seriously, especially my book ,“Looking Through a Glass Darkly: Divided America and the Gathering Storm”, I found that the two years handling two or three Harvard Case Method analyses daily caused me to approach each subject as both the case writer, to get to the facts so often obscured in today’s misinformation mainstream, and the critical thinking analysis.
Reading at a complex level, concentration, broad unbiased subject exposure, and your list would be the building blocks taking ones Critical Thinking beyond the University level. But at the K-12 level, it begins with learning to read and concentrate and expands slowly to a breadth of knowledge. Is that even possible today?
John: TY for your interesting reply. Yes, my list assumed the 3Rs, so TY for pointing that out. That said, as my prior commentary spelled out, the beginnings of being a Critical Thinker actually precede our ability to read.
To think critically, one must make use of the Principles of Reasoning but few people are aware of the Nature of these Principles. Thwy are "entropy minimax," as desribed by the late theoretiscall physisist Ronald Christensen in the seven volume "Entropy Minimax Sourcebook. Under "Entropy Minimas", the induced model of a physical system expresses all of the avvailable information about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for the induced model no more.
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher.
Los Altos Hills, California
This was written:
For example, to be a successful baseball player, an individual needs to be able to run well, throw well, catch well, and hit well.
That is not enough, you left out the thinking and understanding of the dynamics and strategy of the game.
You left out Critical Thinking as important to Baseball.
If you throw perfectly to the wrong place or at the wrong time, you are still not a successful baseball player.
Alex: yes, you are right. My analogy was a bit simplified, but thank you for expanding it further.
Memorable teachers are those who do not stand at the front of a class and lecture. Teachers must involve the children (and students of ll ages), in the learning process. Do the students understand... or do they have questions? Too many teachers totally ignore children who raise their hands to ask questions or contribute their info. In college, I took a course in student teaching...and went to observe my own mother who was a teacher. I was amazed at how good she was. She involved her students in the learning process. What I observed over the years...Rote learning, which is destructive...and boring.
Barbara:Yes, those are good observations.
Just a reflection, almost harmful.
On the teaching of critical thinking, I also think that it is possible, and that the opposing forces have (perhaps) always been predominant.
Jung certainly did not possess the greatest critical spirit of the time, but it may be useful to remember that he said "the world does not improve, it changes...".
I would add that psychology and psychotherapy, over the last century, have also spread to less wealthy social strata, on paper psychotherapists are those who should be able to distinguish both social lies and those of their patients when they lie to themselves (significantly reducing their critical capacity).
It is known, however, that the vast majority of psychotherapists have also joined the vaccination campaign and on this they have certainly not opened their patients' minds.
Critical thinking is not synonymous with social success, it almost always contrasts the individual with his social counterpart and above all with his ego.
I wonder if there is a universal sense of guilt that clouds the minds of much of the planet and makes us accept rules that critical thinking should identify (soon) as criminal.
the development of the human being probably passes through the individual, but not collective, recognition of injustices, the recognition of injustices can also be the parameter of measurement of development but it can be falsified if injustices are a product of social consumption, that is, they are indoctrinated.
That is, one can be very skilled at lying to oneself and school has this downside, it also teaches one to lie to oneself, one can probably also become a baseball champion by lying to oneself in such a masterly way, that one meets collective approval.
The collective, if it goes well, stops at the contrast between lies and truth both towards oneself and towards others, but if in the midst of this contrast, the individual produces things to admire, then the collective judges it absolutely positive and as the quickest means (the recipe) to be a winner.
Kafka, more than a century ago, especially in his shorter writings, transmits the crushing force of social conventions on the individual, who struggles to find an individual way and instead ends up describing himself, making his prose like a poetic state almost in contact with a "universal", but Kafka gave the order to burn everything he had written and without selection.
Nietzsche had found something that I believe Americans liked very much, even if I think they would have wanted to select only the positive side ..., in my opinion he had found a strength within himself, almost primordial, but he had to put it to the test and it was not enough to criticize social conventions, morals or the predominant culture, he ended up not being able to speak to men anymore.
Franco: TY for your reflection. My overview was intended for primarily a layperson audience.
Thinking deeply is taught at hymarkacademy.us
Dave: TY for that. I was not familiar with them...