2024 Critical Thinking Blog

The Foundation for Critical Thinking Blog began in 2019. The chief contributor is Dr. Linda Elder, President and Senior Fellow of the Foundation for Critical Thinking. We also post articles and interviews from the Richard Paul Archives, featuring seminal work and ideas from throughout Dr. Paul's life and career. Additionally, there may be occasional contributions from other Foundation for Critical Thinking Fellows and Scholars.

While some entries will be posted in full on this website, others are previews, and their full copies can only be found in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online .

The copyright of each blog entry belongs to its respective author, except in the case of Richard Paul Archives posts, the copyrights for which belong to Linda Elder.

Entries from Other Years

Entries from 2024

[Part 8] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

Dec 18, 2024

Post-Transcript Analysis and Discussion [1 of 4]

Socratic questioning is flexible. The questions asked at any given point will depend on what the students say, what ideas the teacher wants to pursue, and what questions occur to the teacher. Generally, Socratic questions raise basic issues, probe beneath the surface of things, and pursue problematic areas of thought.

The above discussion could have gone in a number of different directions. For instance, rather than focusing on the mind’s relationship to emotions, the teacher could have pursued the concept ‘mind’ by asking for more examples of its functions, and having students group them. The teacher could have followed up the response of the student who asked, “Does reputation mean that if you have a good reputation you want to keep it just like that?” He might, for instance, have asked the student why he asked that, and asked the other student what they thought of the idea. Such a discussion may have developed into a dialogical exchange about reputation, different degrees of goodness, or reasons for being bad. Or the concept ‘bad people’ could have been pursued and clarified by asking students why the examples they gave were examples of bad people. Students may then have been able to suggest tentative generalizations which could have been tested and probed through further questioning. Instead of exploring the influence of perspective on evaluation, the teacher might have probed the idea, expressed by one student, that no one is “really bad.” The student could have been asked to explain the remark, and other students could have been asked for their responses. In these cases and others, the teacher has a choice between any number of equally thought provoking questions. No one question is . . .

Continue Reading & Comment

{"id":"5699","title":"[Part 8] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Dec 18, 2024\r\nPost-Transcript Analysis and Discussion [1 of 4]\r\nSocratic questioning is flexible. The questions asked at any given point will depend on what the students say, what ideas the teacher wants to pursue, and what questions occur to the teacher. Generally, Socratic questions raise basic issues, probe beneath the surface of things, and pursue problematic areas of thought.\r\nThe above discussion could have gone in a number of different directions. For instance, rather than focusing on the mind’s relationship to emotions, the teacher could have pursued the concept ‘mind’ by asking for more examples of its functions, and having students group them. The teacher could have followed up the response of the student who asked, “Does reputation mean that if you have a good reputation you want to keep it just like that?” He might, for instance, have asked the student why he asked that, and asked the other student what they thought of the idea. Such a discussion may have developed into a dialogical exchange about reputation, different degrees of goodness, or reasons for being bad. Or the concept ‘bad people’ could have been pursued and clarified by asking students why the examples they gave were examples of bad people. Students may then have been able to suggest tentative generalizations which could have been tested and probed through further questioning. Instead of exploring the influence of perspective on evaluation, the teacher might have probed the idea, expressed by one student, that no one is “really bad.” The student could have been asked to explain the remark, and other students could have been asked for their responses. In these cases and others, the teacher has a choice between any number of equally thought provoking questions. No one question is . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=252\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading & Comment</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=252\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Critical Thinkers Avoid Dystopian Thinking - Linda Elder

Dec 10, 2024

In the past hundred years or more, the idea of a dystopian world has increasingly taken root. The term dystopian has somewhat different uses, with its core definition referring to the opposite of the ideal (utopian) society. As a developing concept, dystopian thinking generally refers to imagining a human future marked by great suffering, oppression, and injustice. Many people see global warming and failures to sustain the earth’s resources as dystopian, which may lead to a sense of hopelessness. In addition, dystopian thinkers spotlight how in many societies today, information, as well as independence of thought and freedom of thought, are restricted or censored. People are perceived as being under constant surveillance, with little or no rights to privacy (increasingly in accord with George Orwell’s predictions in his book 1984), and consequently, these people may develop a fear of the outside world. According to dystopian thinking, people are under government control, religious control, bureaucratic control, and/or technological control, with loss of the individual as a consequence. This perspective often leads to a growing view of society as an antagonist against which people must fight or dissent. There is dystopian fiction, dystopian conversation, and private dystopian thinking. You may be influenced by any or all of these.

It is true that humans are in many ways restricted by societal impositions, by authoritarian or sophistic governments, and by the influences and controls of religion, bureaucracy, and technology. It is true that we live in an era of government and corporate surveillance which appears to be growing worse, with its attendant loss of privacy and dignity. It is also true that neither freedom of thought, freedom of speech, nor the other basic human rights are widespread across human societies.

Despite all these dark realities and their implications, in the end, as a thinker, you have options. Ideally, you can accept that humans are imperfect (and, in many ways, absurd), while you yourself attempt to live at the highest level of self-fulfillment possible within societal constraints, and at the same time doing what you can to contribute to a better world. Alternatively, sadly, you can maintain a feeling of hopelessness and recoil into a cloud of depression caused by feelings of impotence. Or, again sadly, you may choose to deal with your dystopian feelings through indifference, apathy, mediocrity, or even violence.

Each of us has the right to find happiness in ways that do not harm others, despite the deficient world in which we live. This cannot be done if we emotionally collapse under dystopian thinking or allow ourselves to become emotionally imbalanced in any other ways, such as through violence.

I do not at all mean to deny or ignore the dystopian features of human cultures and governments. But as aspiring critical thinkers, we can only work to remedy these problems to the extent that we are able, while also working around them to achieve what personal goals we can in our lifetimes in keeping with conscientious values.

Consider: what important implications follow, for you, from harboring a sense of hopelessness? What important implications follow from nurturing a sense of impotence in yourself? What implications come from dwelling on existing dystopian realities and future dystopian possibilities? What can you personally do to change anything at all about human societies? In other words, how can you productively work against dystopian realities? How can you preserve your sense of self and develop your creative talents while living in this very imperfect human world?

If you fall prey to dystopian thinking, realize how this will likely affect your mental well-being. How can you be other than depressed, anxious or irritable if you constantly think about how sick, ridiculous, and bizarre are people, governments, their beliefs, and their actions? Answered frankly, you cannot. Realize that you are not responsible for making the world a sane place, as much as you may want to, and as clearly as you may see a path to more cultivated ways of living. You are only responsible to do what you can to positively affect any part of life or the earth itself. Beyond that, you have every right to pursue activities that bring you pleasure. You are not required to carry the weight of the world on your back; in any case, you cannot.

INTERNALIZE THE IDEA: AVOIDING DYSTOPIAN THINKING

If you fall prey to dystopian thinking, write out your answers to these statements:

1. Dystopian thinking affects me in the following ways . . .

2. I get my dystopian ideas from . . .

3. I realize I need to replace dystopian thinking with the following reasoning . . .

4. Therefore, I intend to make the following changes in my life . . .

This blog has been adapted from pages 313-315 of Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness and Self-Actualization, by Linda Elder (2025), Treely Green Publishing Co. (treelygreenpublishing.com).

---

DISCLAIMER: Dystopian thinking can lead to deep depression and other enduring negative emotions that require professional help. The ideas in this blog cannot substitute for professional therapeutic help where it is needed.

Comment on the Original Post in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online

{"id":"5697","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Critical Thinkers Avoid Dystopian Thinking - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Dec 10, 2024\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nIn the past hundred years or more, the idea of a dystopian world has increasingly taken root. The term dystopian has somewhat different uses, with its core definition referring to the opposite of the ideal (utopian) society. As a developing concept, dystopian thinking generally refers to imagining a human future marked by great suffering, oppression, and injustice. Many people see global warming and failures to sustain the earth’s resources as dystopian, which may lead to a sense of hopelessness. In addition, dystopian thinkers spotlight how in many societies today, information, as well as independence of thought and freedom of thought, are restricted or censored. People are perceived as being under constant surveillance, with little or no rights to privacy (increasingly in accord with George Orwell’s predictions in his book 1984), and consequently, these people may develop a fear of the outside world. According to dystopian thinking, people are under government control, religious control, bureaucratic control, and/or technological control, with loss of the individual as a consequence. This perspective often leads to a growing view of society as an antagonist against which people must fight or dissent. There is dystopian fiction, dystopian conversation, and private dystopian thinking. You may be influenced by any or all of these.\r\nIt is true that humans are in many ways restricted by societal impositions, by authoritarian or sophistic governments, and by the influences and controls of religion, bureaucracy, and technology. It is true that we live in an era of government and corporate surveillance which appears to be growing worse, with its attendant loss of privacy and dignity. It is also true that neither freedom of thought, freedom of speech, nor the other basic human rights are widespread across human societies.\r\nDespite all these dark realities and their implications, in the end, as a thinker, you have options. Ideally, you can accept that humans are imperfect (and, in many ways, absurd), while you yourself attempt to live at the highest level of self-fulfillment possible within societal constraints, and at the same time doing what you can to contribute to a better world. Alternatively, sadly, you can maintain a feeling of hopelessness and recoil into a cloud of depression caused by feelings of impotence. Or, again sadly, you may choose to deal with your dystopian feelings through indifference, apathy, mediocrity, or even violence. \r\nEach of us has the right to find happiness in ways that do not harm others, despite the deficient world in which we live. This cannot be done if we emotionally collapse under dystopian thinking or allow ourselves to become emotionally imbalanced in any other ways, such as through violence.\r\nI do not at all mean to deny or ignore the dystopian features of human cultures and governments. But as aspiring critical thinkers, we can only work to remedy these problems to the extent that we are able, while also working around them to achieve what personal goals we can in our lifetimes in keeping with conscientious values.\r\nConsider: what important implications follow, for you, from harboring a sense of hopelessness? What important implications follow from nurturing a sense of impotence in yourself? What implications come from dwelling on existing dystopian realities and future dystopian possibilities? What can you personally do to change anything at all about human societies? In other words, how can you productively work against dystopian realities? How can you preserve your sense of self and develop your creative talents while living in this very imperfect human world?\r\nIf you fall prey to dystopian thinking, realize how this will likely affect your mental well-being. How can you be other than depressed, anxious or irritable if you constantly think about how sick, ridiculous, and bizarre are people, governments, their beliefs, and their actions? Answered frankly, you cannot. Realize that you are not responsible for making the world a sane place, as much as you may want to, and as clearly as you may see a path to more cultivated ways of living. You are only responsible to do what you can to positively affect any part of life or the earth itself. Beyond that, you have every right to pursue activities that bring you pleasure. You are not required to carry the weight of the world on your back; in any case, you cannot.\r\nINTERNALIZE THE IDEA: AVOIDING DYSTOPIAN THINKING\r\nIf you fall prey to dystopian thinking, write out your answers to these statements:\r\n1. Dystopian thinking affects me in the following ways . . .\r\n2. I get my dystopian ideas from . . .\r\n3. I realize I need to replace dystopian thinking with the following reasoning . . .\r\n4. Therefore, I intend to make the following changes in my life . . .\r\nThis blog has been adapted from pages 313-315 of Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness and Self-Actualization, by Linda Elder (2025), Treely Green Publishing Co. (treelygreenpublishing.com).\r\n---\r\nDISCLAIMER: Dystopian thinking can lead to deep depression and other enduring negative emotions that require professional help. The ideas in this blog cannot substitute for professional therapeutic help where it is needed.      \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=251\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on the Original Post in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=251\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n</div>\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 7] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

Nov 27, 2024

Transcript [2 of 2]

Does your mind come to think at all the way the children around you think? Can you think of any examples where the way you think is like the way children around you think? Do you think you behave like other American kids?

Student: Yes.

What would make you behave more like the kids around you than like Eskimo kids?

Student: Because you’re around them.

Student: Like, Eskimo kids probably don’t even know what the word “jump-rope” is. American kids know what it is.

And are there things that the Eskimo kids know that you don’t know about?

[The transcript then skips to a later point in the dialogue.]

So sometimes people think somebody is real good and they’re not and sometimes people think that somebody is real bad and they’re not. Like if you were a crook, would you let everyone know you’re a crook?

Students: [Chorus of “NO!”]

So some people are really good at hiding what they are really like. Some people might have a good reputation and be bad; some people might have a bad reputation and be good.

Student: Like, everyone might think you were good but you might be going on dope or something.

Student: Does reputation mean that if you have a good reputation you want to keep it just like that? Do you always want to be good for . . .

Continue Reading & Comment

{"id":"5695","title":"[Part 7] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Nov 27, 2024\r\nTranscript [2 of 2]\r\n<ul>\r\n<li>Does your mind come to think at all the way the children around you think? Can you think of any examples where the way you think is like the way children around you think? Do you think you behave like other American kids? </li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudent: Yes. \r\n<ul>\r\n<li>What would make you behave more like the kids around you than like Eskimo kids? </li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudent: Because you’re around them.\r\nStudent: Like, Eskimo kids probably don’t even know what the word “jump-rope” is. American kids know what it is. \r\n<ul>\r\n<li>And are there things that the Eskimo kids know that you don’t know about? </li>\r\n</ul>\r\n[The transcript then skips to a later point in the dialogue.] \r\n<ul>\r\n<li>So sometimes people think somebody is real good and they’re not and sometimes people think that somebody is real bad and they’re not. Like if you were a crook, would you let everyone know you’re a crook? </li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudents: [Chorus of “NO!”] \r\n<ul>\r\n<li>So some people are really good at hiding what they are really like. Some people might have a good reputation and be bad; some people might have a bad reputation and be good. </li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudent: Like, everyone might think you were good but you might be going on dope or something.\r\nStudent: Does reputation mean that if you have a good reputation you want to keep it just like that? Do you always want to be good for . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=250\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading & Comment</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=250\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Critical Thinking Therapy: Intervene in Your Bad Habits of Thought - Linda Elder

Nov 21, 2024

If you want to be happy and yet are in the habit of entertaining and indulging in bad habits of thought, you will need to develop the opposing tendency of routinely monitoring your thoughts throughout every day to override these harmful patterns. You will need to intervene in your thinking so that you stop falling prey to the bad habits of thought you have developed in your lifetime. These negative routines may keep you trapped in various dysfunctional rituals created by your own mind. They may cause feelings of frustration and discontent. They may lead you to harm others while thinking you are the one being harmed. It is only when you monitor and deliberately change these thoughts that you can experience contentment as an overall state of mind. But altering a habit of thought will take much commitment in the form of practice, since you may be facing an unconscious, long-running mental pattern or process that naturally repeats itself.

For the next twenty-four hours, actively observe your thoughts and then evaluate them as follows:

1. Today I had the following powerful thoughts that seem to be habits for me [perhaps disturbing thoughts, perhaps empowering thoughts, perhaps destructive thoughts] . . .

2. I realize that these thoughts are largely determining my level of happiness and contentment.

After evaluating these thoughts, I see that most of them are [realistic or unrealistic, empowering or debilitating, etc.] . . .

3. I uncovered the following irrational thoughts that I need to change, because these thoughts are causing problems for me . . . [For example, I thought mainly about my past mistakes, or I worried a lot of the time about what bad things might happen tomorrow or next week, or I was frustrated with the same person over and again when that person seems incapable of being reasonable, or I thought other people were leaving me out or not appreciating me.]

4. I need to replace these thoughts with the following reasonable thoughts . . .

5. I frequently have trouble changing my unreasonable or illogical thoughts to more reasonable thoughts, because . . .

6. However, when I permanently change these thoughts, I am certain to experience the following positive outcomes . . .

7. Therefore, I intend to . . .

For the next week and beyond, revisit the concerns you detailed in 1-7 above to make sure you are actively replacing the bad habits of thought uncovered in your reasoning. Reread (and, if necessary, rewrite) your answers until you find yourself sufficiently commanding and replacing your bad habits of thought.

Let us know how this activity is helping you better command your mind by sharing your results in the comment section.

----

This blog has been excerpted (and slightly revised) from pages 54-55 of the upcoming book Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness and Self-Actualization by Linda Elder (2025), Treely Green Publishing Co. (treelygreenpublishing.com), due for release Dec. 15.

Comment on the Original Post

{"id":"5693","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Critical Thinking Therapy: Intervene in Your Bad Habits of Thought - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Nov 21, 2024\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nIf you want to be happy and yet are in the habit of entertaining and indulging in bad habits of thought, you will need to develop the opposing tendency of routinely monitoring your thoughts throughout every day to override these harmful patterns. You will need to intervene in your thinking so that you stop falling prey to the bad habits of thought you have developed in your lifetime. These negative routines may keep you trapped in various dysfunctional rituals created by your own mind. They may cause feelings of frustration and discontent. They may lead you to harm others while thinking you are the one being harmed. It is only when you monitor and deliberately change these thoughts that you can experience contentment as an overall state of mind. But altering a habit of thought will take much commitment in the form of practice, since you may be facing an unconscious, long-running mental pattern or process that naturally repeats itself.\r\nFor the next twenty-four hours, actively observe your thoughts and then evaluate them as follows:\r\n1. Today I had the following powerful thoughts that seem to be habits for me [perhaps disturbing thoughts, perhaps empowering thoughts, perhaps destructive thoughts] . . .\r\n2. I realize that these thoughts are largely determining my level of happiness and contentment.\r\nAfter evaluating these thoughts, I see that most of them are [realistic or unrealistic, empowering or debilitating, etc.] . . .\r\n3. I uncovered the following irrational thoughts that I need to change, because these thoughts are causing problems for me . . . [For example, I thought mainly about my past mistakes, or I worried a lot of the time about what bad things might happen tomorrow or next week, or I was frustrated with the same person over and again when that person seems incapable of being reasonable, or I thought other people were leaving me out or not appreciating me.]\r\n4. I need to replace these thoughts with the following reasonable thoughts . . .\r\n5. I frequently have trouble changing my unreasonable or illogical thoughts to more reasonable thoughts, because . . .\r\n6. However, when I permanently change these thoughts, I am certain to experience the following positive outcomes . . .\r\n7. Therefore, I intend to . . .\r\nFor the next week and beyond, revisit the concerns you detailed in 1-7 above to make sure you are actively replacing the bad habits of thought uncovered in your reasoning. Reread (and, if necessary, rewrite) your answers until you find yourself sufficiently commanding and replacing your bad habits of thought.\r\nLet us know how this activity is helping you better command your mind by sharing your results in the comment section.\r\n----\r\nThis blog has been excerpted (and slightly revised) from pages 54-55 of the upcoming book Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness and Self-Actualization by Linda Elder (2025), Treely Green Publishing Co. (treelygreenpublishing.com), due for release Dec. 15.\r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=249\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on the Original Post </a>\r\n</div>\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 5] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

Nov 05, 2024

Transcript [1 of 2]

The following is a transcript of a 4^th grade Socratic discussion. The discussion leader was with these particular students for the first time. The purpose was to determine the status of the children’s thinking on some of the abstract questions whose answers tend to define our broadest thinking. The students were eager to respond and often seemed to articulate responses that reflected potential insights into the character of the human mind, its relation to the body, the forces that shape us, the influence of parents and peer groups, the nature of morality and of ethnocentric bias. The insights are disjointed, of course, but the questions that elicited them and the responses that articulated them could be used as the basis of future discussions or simple assignments with these students.

How does your mind work? Where’s your mind?

Student: In your head. (Numerous students point to their heads.)

Does your mind do anything?

Student: It helps you remember and think.

Student: It helps, like, if you want to move your legs. It sends a message down to them.

Student: This side of your mind controls this side of your body and that side controls this other side.

Student: When you touch a hot oven, it tells you whether to cry or say ouch.

Does it tell you when to be sad and when to be happy? How does your mind know when to be happy and when to be sad?

Student: When you’re hurt it tells you to be sad.

Student: If something is happening around you is sad.

Student: If there is lightning and you are scared.

Student: If you get something you want.

Student: It makes your body operate. It’s like a machine that operates your body.

Does it ever happen that two people are in the same circumstance but one is happy and the other is sad? Even though they are in exactly the same circumstance?

Student: You get. . .

Continue Reading & Comment

{"id":"5682","title":"[Part 5] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Nov 05, 2024\r\nTranscript [1 of 2]\r\nThe following is a transcript of a 4th grade Socratic discussion. The discussion leader was with these particular students for the first time. The purpose was to determine the status of the children’s thinking on some of the abstract questions whose answers tend to define our broadest thinking. The students were eager to respond and often seemed to articulate responses that reflected potential insights into the character of the human mind, its relation to the body, the forces that shape us, the influence of parents and peer groups, the nature of morality and of ethnocentric bias. The insights are disjointed, of course, but the questions that elicited them and the responses that articulated them could be used as the basis of future discussions or simple assignments with these students. \r\n<ul>\r\n<li> How does your mind work? Where’s your mind? \r\n<ul>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudent: In your head. (Numerous students point to their heads.) \r\n<ul>\r\n<li> Does your mind do anything? \r\n<ul>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudent: It helps you remember and think.\r\nStudent: It helps, like, if you want to move your legs. It sends a message down to them.\r\nStudent: This side of your mind controls this side of your body and that side controls this other side.\r\nStudent: When you touch a hot oven, it tells you whether to cry or say ouch. \r\n<ul>\r\n<li> Does it tell you when to be sad and when to be happy? How does your mind know when to be happy and when to be sad? \r\n<ul>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudent: When you’re hurt it tells you to be sad.\r\nStudent: If something is happening around you is sad.\r\nStudent: If there is lightning and you are scared.\r\nStudent: If you get something you want.\r\nStudent: It makes your body operate. It’s like a machine that operates your body. \r\n<ul>\r\n<li> Does it ever happen that two people are in the same circumstance but one is happy and the other is sad? Even though they are in exactly the same circumstance? \r\n<ul>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\nStudent: You get. . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=248\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading & Comment </a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Critical Thinking Therapy: Don't Act Helpless; Exercise Your Power - Linda Elder

Critical thinking is required for high quality reasoning in all parts of our lives. This includes, at the core, consistent application of critical thinking principles to our mental and emotional well-being. Accordingly, this blog focuses on one part of a healthy approach to life – exercising proper power in one’s life while making decisions that lead to a feeling of empowerment, in so far as this may be possible in any given situation.

The following activity, found in my forthcoming book, Critical Thinking Therapy, emphasizes helping you delineate precisely when and where you feel helpless in your life, and then how to take proper power where before you felt helpless.

DON’T ACT HELPLESS; DON’T LET OTHERS CONTROL YOU; EXERCISE YOUR POWER

There are times in your life when you may feel powerless. During these times, it may seem that others have all the power and you have none. But is this true? Are you letting others determine your happiness by allowing them to dictate how you think and act? Do you allow other people too much influence and control over your thinking? Do you spend too much time and energy trying to please others, thereby giving them power over you? Can you think of no fruitful ways to use your power?

Mentally well people do not allow others to control them. They do not see themselves as helpless, vulnerable, or defenseless. They think for themselves, while seeking and considering the views of other reasonable people. They take responsibility for their decisions, their actions, and all aspects of their lives.

If you often feel helpless, complete the following statements (whenever you do):

1. The following event happened today, or recently, in which I felt helpless [e.g., I thought my supervisor criticized me unfairly] . . .

2. Because of this criticism I had the following thoughts and feelings . . . [For example, I was upset because I don’t like being criticized. My supervisor is always picking on me. My supervisor is a bully, and I am not taking this anymore.]

3. Based on these thoughts, I reacted as follows . . .

4. I now see the thinking underlying my emotions was reasonable/unreasonable because . . .

5. I now realize I could have instead thought and behaved as follows . . . [For example, I could have considered that my supervisor is under pressure from her supervisor, that I had mischaracterized her behavior as being offensive when she meant no harm, or that there may be truth in her critique of my behavior. Or—if I cannot continue to live with the situation because I can’t be happy and fulfilled in this job—I could have recognized that acting irritable or angry is not rational, and that I should remain civil until I can get another job.]

6. Based on this analysis, I intend to make the following changes in my thinking or my life circumstances . . .

For the next week, practice reminding yourself of this important truth:

My power comes from within; I therefore have power over my thoughts and my life. I will take control of my thoughts in every situation and will be responsible for my thoughts and actions in every circumstance. I will use my power in the most advantageous ways possible, while still respecting the rights and needs of others. I will not pretend to have power when and where I have none, nor will I dwell negatively on the power I don’t have.

----

This blog has been excerpted from the upcoming book Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness and Self-Actualization, by Linda Elder, Treely Green Publishing Co. (treelygreenpublishing.com), due for release December 15, 2024, pp. 53-54.

Comment on the Original Post

{"id":"5681","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Critical Thinking Therapy: Don't Act Helpless; Exercise Your Power - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nCritical thinking is required for high quality reasoning in all parts of our lives. This includes, at the core, consistent application of critical thinking principles to our mental and emotional well-being. Accordingly, this blog focuses on one part of a healthy approach to life – exercising proper power in one’s life while making decisions that lead to a feeling of empowerment, in so far as this may be possible in any given situation. \r\nThe following activity, found in my forthcoming book, Critical Thinking Therapy, emphasizes helping you delineate precisely when and where you feel helpless in your life, and then how to take proper power where before you felt helpless. \r\nDON’T ACT HELPLESS; DON’T LET OTHERS CONTROL YOU; EXERCISE YOUR POWER\r\nThere are times in your life when you may feel powerless. During these times, it may seem that others have all the power and you have none. But is this true? Are you letting others determine your happiness by allowing them to dictate how you think and act? Do you allow other people too much influence and control over your thinking? Do you spend too much time and energy trying to please others, thereby giving them power over you? Can you think of no fruitful ways to use your power?\r\nMentally well people do not allow others to control them. They do not see themselves as helpless, vulnerable, or defenseless. They think for themselves, while seeking and considering the views of other reasonable people. They take responsibility for their decisions, their actions, and all aspects of their lives.\r\nIf you often feel helpless, complete the following statements (whenever you do):\r\n1. The following event happened today, or recently, in which I felt helpless [e.g., I thought my supervisor criticized me unfairly] . . .\r\n2. Because of this criticism I had the following thoughts and feelings . . . [For example, I was upset because I don’t like being criticized. My supervisor is always picking on me. My supervisor is a bully, and I am not taking this anymore.]\r\n3. Based on these thoughts, I reacted as follows . . .\r\n4. I now see the thinking underlying my emotions was reasonable/unreasonable because . . .\r\n5. I now realize I could have instead thought and behaved as follows . . . [For example, I could have considered that my supervisor is under pressure from her supervisor, that I had mischaracterized her behavior as being offensive when she meant no harm, or that there may be truth in her critique of my behavior. Or—if I cannot continue to live with the situation because I can’t be happy and fulfilled in this job—I could have recognized that acting irritable or angry is not rational, and that I should remain civil until I can get another job.]\r\n6. Based on this analysis, I intend to make the following changes in my thinking or my life circumstances . . .\r\nFor the next week, practice reminding yourself of this important truth:\r\nMy power comes from within; I therefore have power over my thoughts and my life. I will take control of my thoughts in every situation and will be responsible for my thoughts and actions in every circumstance. I will use my power in the most advantageous ways possible, while still respecting the rights and needs of others. I will not pretend to have power when and where I have none, nor will I dwell negatively on the power I don’t have.\r\n----\r\nThis blog has been excerpted from the upcoming book Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness and Self-Actualization, by Linda Elder, Treely Green Publishing Co. (treelygreenpublishing.com), due for release December 15, 2024, pp. 53-54.\r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=247\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on the Original Post</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=247\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 5] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

[Missed Part 4? Read It Here]

Why Children Need to Think Philosophically [3 of 3]

Let me now explore the conceptual side of the question further by suggesting some kinds of philosophical issues embedded, not only in the lives of children, but also in the lives of adults:

Who am I? What am I like? What are the people around me like? What are people of different backgrounds, religions, and nations like? How much am I like others? How much am I unlike them? What kind of a world do I live in? When should I trust? When should I distrust? What should I accept? What should I question? How should I understand my past, the pasts of my parents, my ethnic group, my religion, my nation? Who are my friends? Who are my enemies? What is a friend? How am I like and unlike my enemy? What is most important to me? How should I live my life? What responsibilities do I have to others? What responsibilities do they have to me? What responsibilities do I have to my friends? Do I have any responsibilities to people I don’t like? To people who don’t like me? To my enemies? Do my parents love me? Do I love them? What is love? What is hate? What is indifference? Does it matter if others do not approve of me? When does it matter? When should I ignore what others think? What rights do I have? What rights should I give to others? What should I do if others do not respect my rights? Should I get what I want? Should I question what I want? Should I take what I want if I am strong or smart enough to get await with it? Who comes out ahead in this world, the strong or the good person? Is it worthwhile to be good? Are authorities good or just strong?

I do not assume that children must reflect on all or even most of the questions that professional philosophers consider – although the preceding list contains many concepts that professional philosophers tackle. To cultivate philosophical thinking, one does not . . .

Continue Reading & Comment

{"id":"5678","title":"[Part 5] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"[Missed Part 4? <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=244\" target=\"_blank\">Read It Here</a>]\r\nWhy Children Need to Think Philosophically [3 of 3]\r\nLet me now explore the conceptual side of the question further by suggesting some kinds of philosophical issues embedded, not only in the lives of children, but also in the lives of adults:\r\nWho am I? What am I like? What are the people around me like? What are people of different backgrounds, religions, and nations like? How much am I like others? How much am I unlike them? What kind of a world do I live in? When should I trust? When should I distrust? What should I accept? What should I question? How should I understand my past, the pasts of my parents, my ethnic group, my religion, my nation? Who are my friends? Who are my enemies? What is a friend? How am I like and unlike my enemy? What is most important to me? How should I live my life? What responsibilities do I have to others? What responsibilities do they have to me? What responsibilities do I have to my friends? Do I have any responsibilities to people I don’t like? To people who don’t like me? To my enemies? Do my parents love me? Do I love them? What is love? What is hate? What is indifference? Does it matter if others do not approve of me? When does it matter? When should I ignore what others think? What rights do I have? What rights should I give to others? What should I do if others do not respect my rights? Should I get what I want? Should I question what I want? Should I take what I want if I am strong or smart enough to get await with it? Who comes out ahead in this world, the strong or the good person? Is it worthwhile to be good? Are authorities good or just strong?\r\nI do not assume that children must reflect on all or even most of the questions that professional philosophers consider – although the preceding list contains many concepts that professional philosophers tackle. To cultivate philosophical thinking, one does not . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=246\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading & Comment</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=246\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] On Self Deception and Egocentric and Sociocentric Thinking as Barriers to Ethical Reasoning - Linda Elder

Oct 08, 2024

Any rich conception of critical thinking must take into account and appropriately address the barriers to criticality that exist to some degree (or a large degree) in all humans. I invite you to view two of our latest videos that focus on these barriers:

A recent webinar recording with Dr. Gerald Nosich: Why Self-Deception Is a Tremendous Barrier to Critical Thinking
Our latest Podcast Release which captures a discussion between Dr. Nosich and myself focused on Ethical Reasoning, Part Two - How Egocentric and Sociocentric Thinking Are Barriers to, and the Elements of Reasoning Aid in, Ethical Reasoning

To delve deeper into these barriers and apply the theory of egocentric and sociocentric to your own life, complete the activities in the Wall of Barriers.

{"id":"5677","title":"[FULL ENTRY] On Self Deception and Egocentric and Sociocentric Thinking as Barriers to Ethical Reasoning - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nOct 08, 2024\r\nAny rich conception of critical thinking must take into account and appropriately address the barriers to criticality that exist to some degree (or a large degree) in all humans. I invite you to view two of our latest videos that focus on these barriers:\r\n<ul>\r\n<li>A recent webinar recording with Dr. Gerald Nosich: <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=359\" target=\"_blank\">Why Self-Deception Is a Tremendous Barrier to Critical Thinking</a></li>\r\n<li>Our latest Podcast Release which captures a discussion between Dr. Nosich and myself focused on <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=358\" target=\"_blank\">Ethical Reasoning, Part Two - How Egocentric and Sociocentric Thinking Are Barriers to, and the Elements of Reasoning Aid in, Ethical Reasoning</a></li>\r\n</ul>\r\nTo delve deeper into these barriers and apply the theory of egocentric and sociocentric to your own life, complete the activities in the <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/wallOfBarriers.php\" target=\"_blank\">Wall of Barriers</a>.\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 4] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

Sep 23, 2024

Why Children Need to Think Philosophically [2 of 3]

In some sense we act as though we believe, and doubtless many do believe, that children have no significant capacity, need, or right to think for themselves, Many adults do not think that children can participate mindfully in the process which shapes their own minds and behavior. Of course, at the same time we often talk to our children as though they were somehow responsible for, or in control of, the ideas they express or act upon. This contradictory attitude toward children is rarely openly admitted. We need to deal explicitly with it.

I believe that children have the need, the capacity, and the right to freedom of thought, and that the proper cultivation of that capacity requires an emphasis on the philosophical dimension of thought and action. Again, by ‘the philosophical dimension,’ I mean precisely the kind of deliberative thought that gives to thinkers the on-going disposition to mindfully create, analyze, and assess their own most basic assumptions, concepts, values, aims, and meanings, in effect to choose the very framework in which they think and on the basis of which they act. I would not go so far as to say, as Socrates was reputed to have said, that the unreflective life is not worth living, but I would say that an unreflective life is not a truly free life and is often a basic cause of personal and social problems. I claim at least this much, that philosophical thinking is necessary to freedom of thought and action and that freedom of thought and action are good in themselves and should be given a high priority in schooling. They are certainly essential for a democracy. How can the people rule, as the word democracy implies, if they do not think for themselves on issues of civic importance? And if they are not encouraged to think for themselves in school, why should they do so once they leave it?

Let me now discuss whether children are in fact capable of this sort of freedom of. . .

Continue Reading

{"id":5673,"title":"[Part 4] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Sep 23, 2024\r\nWhy Children Need to Think Philosophically [2 of 3]\r\nIn some sense we act as though we believe, and doubtless many do believe, that children have no significant capacity, need, or right to think for themselves, Many adults do not think that children can participate mindfully in the process which shapes their own minds and behavior. Of course, at the same time we often talk to our children as though they were somehow responsible for, or in control of, the ideas they express or act upon. This contradictory attitude toward children is rarely openly admitted. We need to deal explicitly with it.\r\nI believe that children have the need, the capacity, and the right to freedom of thought, and that the proper cultivation of that capacity requires an emphasis on the philosophical dimension of thought and action. Again, by ‘the philosophical dimension,’ I mean precisely the kind of deliberative thought that gives to thinkers the on-going disposition to mindfully create, analyze, and assess their own most basic assumptions, concepts, values, aims, and meanings, in effect to choose the very framework in which they think and on the basis of which they act. I would not go so far as to say, as Socrates was reputed to have said, that the unreflective life is not worth living, but I would say that an unreflective life is not a truly free life and is often a basic cause of personal and social problems. I claim at least this much, that philosophical thinking is necessary to freedom of thought and action and that freedom of thought and action are good in themselves and should be given a high priority in schooling. They are certainly essential for a democracy. How can the people rule, as the word democracy implies, if they do not think for themselves on issues of civic importance? And if they are not encouraged to think for themselves in school, why should they do so once they leave it?\r\nLet me now discuss whether children are in fact capable of this sort of freedom of. . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=244\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=244\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":null,"sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Join Us for Our Upcoming Critical Thinking Academy - Linda Elder

Sep 17, 2024

We look forward with great anticipation to our upcoming 2024 Fall Critical Thinking Academy to be held November 15-17, 2024 in the beautiful Arkansas Ozarks. This is our first in-person event in over five years, and we are delighted to have another opportunity to work with you all in an intimate retreat setting. Together we will explore critical thinking foundations and practice applying critical thinking concepts and principles across the significant domains of learning, teaching, work, and life.

In preparing for a new academy, we are reminded of core critical thinking insights articulated at our past events, including the following excerpt from the “Program of the Ninth Annual and Seventh International Conference on Critical Thinking” (1989). As you read it, remember that it applies not only to “students” in a formal educational setting, but to all of us who aspire to develop our minds to the fullest.

One who understands and values education as higher-order learning holds a very different set of assumptions, namely:

1) that students can learn what to think only as they learn how to think,

2) that knowledge is acquired only through thinking,

3) that educated persons are those who have learned how to gather, analyze, synthesize, apply, and assess information for themselves,

4) that classes with much student talk, focused on live issues, is a better sign of learning than quiet classes, focused on a passive acceptance of what the instructor says,

5) that students gain significant knowledge only by valuing it,

6) that information should be presented so as to be understandable from the point of view of the learner, and this requires that it be related to the learner’s experiences,

7) that superficial learning is often mislearning that stands as an obstacle to deeper understanding,

8) that depth is more important than coverage,

9) that students can often provide correct answers, repeat definitions, and apply formulas while yet not understanding those answers, definitions, or formulas, and

10) that students learn best by working together with other students, with a good deal of experience in mutually supportive debate and empathic exchange of ideas.

With these thoughts in mind, we do so hope you will not miss this unique learning experience led by Dr. Gerald Nosich and myself. There will be separate learning strands for new and returning registrants, while we will also be together as a whole group during part of the academy.

We will illuminate how we design instruction and training to foster intensive intellectual engagement by every learner, in every class or program, every day. If you are an educator, you will leverage your new understandings in critical thinking to rethink your model of instruction; if you are a business or government leader or trainer, you will utilize critical thinking tools to transform how you view, organize, and execute your training and other work.

This academy is concerned to foster deep internalization of critical thinking in the long run and is designed for:

educators and administrators at all levels of instruction,
business and government leaders, and
anyone desiring to advance their personal critical thinking skills, abilities and traits.

Throughout the academy, participants will work toward:

1. internalizing first principles of a rich conception of critical thinking;
2. contextualizing these principles within academic subjects and disciplines, or within business/governmental practices;
3. developing instructional strategies that foster deep learning by helping students, employees, colleagues, and/or clients reason through your content using the concepts and principles of critical thinking;
4. understanding how to embody the character traits of the fairminded critical thinker;
5. conceptualizing critical thinking as transformative, and as essential to self-actualization and contributing significantly to the common good.

With limited space at the Academy and Early Bird rates expiring October 6th, we recommend registering soon. We also recommend taking advantage of our hotel room blocks.

Remember that developing critical thinking skills and traits – as a teacher, a learner, a professional, a citizen, a partner, a family member, etc. – is a lifelong expedition, never finished, and that it occurs to a significant degree only through disciplined, explicit, routine practice. Studying in concert with others who are also serious about advancing their thinking is an excellent (and perhaps essential) way to propel your mind forward on this highly important journey. As we undertake such study in November, we hope to have you with us.

{"id":"5671","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Join Us for Our Upcoming Critical Thinking Academy - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 35px; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nSep 17, 2024\r\nWe look forward with great anticipation to our upcoming <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/2024-fall-academy-critical-thinking/1653\" target=\"_blank\">2024 Fall Critical Thinking Academy</a> to be held November 15 -17, 2024 in the beautiful Arkansas Ozarks. This is our first in-person event in over five years, and we are delighted to have another opportunity to work with you all in an intimate retreat setting. Together we will explore critical thinking foundations and practice applying critical thinking concepts and principles across the significant domains of learning, teaching, work, and life.\r\nIn preparing for a new academy, we are reminded of core critical thinking insights articulated at our past events, including the following excerpt from the “Program of the Ninth Annual and Seventh International Conference on Critical Thinking” (1989). As you read it, remember that it applies not only to “students” in a formal educational setting, but to all of us who aspire to develop our minds to the fullest.\r\nOne who understands and values education as higher-order learning holds a very different set of assumptions, namely:\r\n1)   that students can learn what to think only as they learn how to think,\r\n2)   that knowledge is acquired only through thinking,\r\n3)   that educated persons are those who have learned how to gather, analyze, synthesize, apply, and assess information for themselves,\r\n4)   that classes with much student talk, focused on live issues, is a better sign of learning than quiet classes, focused on a passive acceptance of what the instructor says,\r\n5)   that students gain significant knowledge only by valuing it,\r\n6)   that information should be presented so as to be understandable from the point of view of the learner, and this requires that it be related to the learner’s experiences,\r\n7)   that superficial learning is often mislearning that stands as an obstacle to deeper understanding,\r\n8)   that depth is more important than coverage,\r\n9)   that students can often provide correct answers, repeat definitions, and apply formulas while yet not understanding those answers, definitions, or formulas, and\r\n10) that students learn best by working together with other students, with a good deal of experience in mutually supportive debate and empathic exchange of ideas.\r\nWith these thoughts in mind, we do so hope you will not miss this unique learning experience led by Dr. Gerald Nosich and myself. There will be separate learning strands for new and returning registrants, while we will also be together as a whole group during part of the academy. \r\nWe will illuminate how we design instruction and training to foster intensive intellectual engagement by every learner, in every class or program, every day. If you are an educator, you will leverage your new understandings in critical thinking to rethink your model of instruction; if you are a business or government leader or trainer, you will utilize critical thinking tools to transform how you view, organize, and execute your training and other work.\r\nThis academy is concerned to foster deep internalization of critical thinking in the long run and is designed for:\r\n<ul>\r\n<li>educators and administrators at all levels of instruction,</li>\r\n<li>business and government leaders, and</li>\r\n<li>anyone desiring to advance their personal critical thinking skills, abilities and traits.</li>\r\n</ul>\r\nThroughout the academy, participants will work toward:\r\n<ol> </ol>\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 35px; padding-right: 5%;\">1. internalizing first principles of a rich conception of critical thinking; 2. contextualizing these principles within academic subjects and disciplines, or within business/governmental practices; 3. developing instructional strategies that foster deep learning by helping students, employees, colleagues, and/or clients reason through your content using the concepts and principles of critical thinking; 4. understanding how to embody the character traits of the fairminded critical thinker; 5. conceptualizing critical thinking as transformative, and as essential to self-actualization and contributing significantly to the common good.</div>\r\nWith limited space at the Academy and Early Bird rates expiring October 6th, we recommend <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://www.criticalthinking.org/store/events/register_1.php?id=653\" target=\"_blank\">registering soon</a>. We also recommend taking advantage of our <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/logistics-2024-fall-academy-critical-thinking/1659\" target=\"_blank\">hotel room blocks</a>.\r\nRemember that developing critical thinking skills and traits – as a teacher, a learner, a professional, a citizen, a partner, a family member, etc. – is a lifelong expedition, never finished, and that it occurs to a significant degree only through disciplined, explicit, routine practice. Studying in concert with others who are also serious about advancing their thinking is an excellent (and perhaps essential) way to propel your mind forward on this highly important journey. As we undertake such study in November, we hope to have you with us.\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 3] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

Sep 05, 2024

Why Children Need to Think Philosophically [1 of 3]

There is a sense in which everyone has a philosophy, since human thought and actions are always embedded in a framework of foundational concepts, values, and assumptions which define a “system” of some sort. Humans are by nature inferential, meaning-creating animals. In this sense, all humans use “philosophies,” and even in some sense create them. Even the thinking of very young children presupposes philosophical foundations, as Piaget so ably demonstrated. Of course, if by “philosophy” we mean explicit and systematic reflection on the concepts, values, aims, and assumptions that structure thinking and underlie behavior, then in that sense most children do not philosophize. It all depends on whether one believes that one can have a philosophy without thinking one’s way to it.

Most children have at least the impulse to philosophize and for a time seem driven by a strong desire to know the most basic what and why of things. Of course parents or teachers rarely cultivate this tendency. Usually children are given didactic answers in ways that discourage, rather than stimulate, further inquiry. Many parents and teachers seem to think that they or textbooks have appropriate and satisfactory answers to the foundational questions that children raise, and the sooner children accept these answers the better. Such authorities unwittingly encourage children to assent to, without truly understanding, basic beliefs. In effect, we teach answers to philosophical questions as though they were like answers to chemical questions. As a result, children lose the impulse to question, as they learn to mouth the standard answers of . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5667","title":"[Part 3] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Sep 05, 2024\r\nWhy Children Need to Think Philosophically [1 of 3]\r\nThere is a sense in which everyone has a philosophy, since human thought and actions are always embedded in a framework of foundational concepts, values, and assumptions which define a “system” of some sort. Humans are by nature inferential, meaning-creating animals. In this sense, all humans use “philosophies,” and even in some sense create them. Even the thinking of very young children presupposes philosophical foundations, as Piaget so ably demonstrated. Of course, if by “philosophy” we mean explicit and systematic reflection on the concepts, values, aims, and assumptions that structure thinking and underlie behavior, then in that sense most children do not philosophize. It all depends on whether one believes that one can have a philosophy without thinking one’s way to it.\r\nMost children have at least the impulse to philosophize and for a time seem driven by a strong desire to know the most basic what and why of things. Of course parents or teachers rarely cultivate this tendency. Usually children are given didactic answers in ways that discourage, rather than stimulate, further inquiry. Many parents and teachers seem to think that they or textbooks have appropriate and satisfactory answers to the foundational questions that children raise, and the sooner children accept these answers the better. Such authorities unwittingly encourage children to assent to, without truly understanding, basic beliefs. In effect, we teach answers to philosophical questions as though they were like answers to chemical questions. As a result, children lose the impulse to question, as they learn to mouth the standard answers of . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=242\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=242\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] View Our New Podcast on Ethical Reasoning - Linda Elder

Aug 29, 2024

The proper role of ethical reasoning is to highlight acts of two kinds: those which enhance the well-being of others—that warrant our praise—and those that harm or diminish the well-being of others—and thus warrant our criticism. Developing one’s ethical reasoning abilities is crucial because there is in human nature a strong tendency toward egotism, prejudice, self-justification, and self-deception. These tendencies are exacerbated by powerful sociocentric cultural influences that shape our lives—not least of which is the mass media. These tendencies can be actively combated only through the systematic cultivation of fair-mindedness, honesty, integrity, self-knowledge, and deep concern for the welfare of others. We can never eliminate our egocentric tendencies absolutely and finally. But we can actively combat them as we learn to develop as ethical persons.

The ultimate basis for ethics is clear: Human behavior has consequences for the welfare of others. We are capable of acting toward others in such a way as to increase or decrease the quality of their lives. We are capable of helping or harming. What is more, we are theoretically capable of understanding when we are doing the one and when the other. This is so because we have the capacity to put ourselves imaginatively in the place of others and recognize how we would be affected if someone were to act toward us as we are acting toward others.

Thus nearly everyone gives at least lip service to a common core of general ethical principles—for example, that it is morally wrong to cheat, deceive, exploit, abuse, harm, or steal from others, that everyone has an ethical responsibility to respect the rights of others, including their freedom and well-being, to help those most in need of help, to seek the common good and not merely their own self-interest and egocentric pleasures, to strive in some way to make the world more just and humane.

Unfortunately, mere verbal agreement on ethical principles alone will not accomplish important moral ends nor change the world for the better. Ethical principles mean something only when manifested in behavior. They have force only when embodied in action. Yet to put them into action requires intellectual skills as well as ethical insights. The world does not present itself to us in morally transparent terms. We live in a world in which propaganda and self-deception are rife. Public discussion and media communication are not neutral centers of open debate. A tremendous amount of money is spent on persuading people to see the events of the world in one way rather than another.

Furthermore, depending on the society and culture in which we are raised, we ourselves are strongly pre-disposed to see some persons and nations on the side of good and other persons and nations on the side of evil. Humans typically take themselves to be on the side of good and their enemies on the side of evil.

In the everyday world, the ethical thing to do is sometimes viewed as obvious and self-evident when it should be a matter of debate, or, conversely, viewed as a matter of debate when it should be obvious and self-evident. One and the same act is often ethically praised by particular social, religious or political groups and ethically condemned by others.

Through example and encouragement, we can cultivate important intellectual traits. We can learn to respect the rights of others and not simply focus on fulfilling our desires. The main problem is not so much distinguishing between helping and harming, but our natural propensity to be focused almost exclusively on ourselves and those closely connected with us. This is clear in the behavior of national, religious, and ethnic groups. Few groups, in fact,value the lives and welfare of others (other nations, other religions, other ethnic groups) as they value those of their own. Few think about the consequences to other groups of their own group’s pursuit of money, power, prestige, and property. The result is that few people (in virtually any society) act consistently on ethical principles when dealing with “outsiders.” A double standard in applying ethical principles to human life is virtually universal and often flagrant.

In short, ethical persons, however strongly motivated to do what is ethically right, can do so only if they know what is ethically right. And this they cannot do if they systematically confuse their sense of what is ethically right with self-interest, personal desires, or social taboos. Ethically motivated persons must learn the art of self- and social critique, of ethical self-examination. They must recognize the pervasive everyday pitfalls of ethical judgment: moral intolerance, self-deception, and uncritical conformity. They must also learn not to confuse ethics with behaving in accordance with social conventions, religious beliefs, and the law.

To go deeper into the foundations of ethical reasoning, we invite you to view our recent podcast: "Ethical Reasoning, Part One: The Concept and How it is Confused With Other Modes of Thought." [This video is found exclusively in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online, our subscription resource and activity center, where a 30-day free trial is available.]

-----

This blog was adapted from The Thinker's Guide to Ethical Reasoning by Richard Paul and Linda Elder, 2013, Rowman & Littlefield (pp. 4-5).

{"id":"5665","title":"[FULL ENTRY] View Our New Podcast on Ethical Reasoning - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nAug 29, 2024 \r\nThe proper role of ethical reasoning is to highlight acts of two kinds: those which enhance the well-being of others—that warrant our praise—and those that harm or diminish the well-being of others—and thus warrant our criticism. Developing one’s ethical reasoning abilities is crucial because there is in human nature a strong tendency toward egotism, prejudice, self-justification, and self-deception. These tendencies are exacerbated by powerful sociocentric cultural influences that shape our lives—not least of which is the mass media. These tendencies can be actively combated only through the systematic cultivation of fair-mindedness, honesty, integrity, self-knowledge, and deep concern for the welfare of others. We can never eliminate our egocentric tendencies absolutely and finally. But we can actively combat them as we learn to develop as ethical persons.\r\nThe ultimate basis for ethics is clear: Human behavior has consequences for the welfare of others. We are capable of acting toward others in such a way as to increase or decrease the quality of their lives. We are capable of helping or harming. What is more, we are theoretically capable of understanding when we are doing the one and when the other. This is so because we have the capacity to put ourselves imaginatively in the place of others and recognize how we would be affected if someone were to act toward us as we are acting toward others.\r\nThus nearly everyone gives at least lip service to a common core of general ethical principles—for example, that it is morally wrong to cheat, deceive, exploit, abuse, harm, or steal from others, that everyone has an ethical responsibility to respect the rights of others, including their freedom and well-being, to help those most in need of help, to seek the common good and not merely their own self-interest and egocentric pleasures, to strive in some way to make the world more just and humane.\r\nUnfortunately, mere verbal agreement on ethical principles alone will not accomplish important moral ends nor change the world for the better. Ethical principles mean something only when manifested in behavior. They have force only when embodied in action. Yet to put them into action requires intellectual skills as well as ethical insights. The world does not present itself to us in morally transparent terms. We live in a world in which propaganda and self-deception are rife. Public discussion and media communication are not neutral centers of open debate. A tremendous amount of money is spent on persuading people to see the events of the world in one way rather than another.\r\nFurthermore, depending on the society and culture in which we are raised, we ourselves are strongly pre-disposed to see some persons and nations on the side of good and other persons and nations on the side of evil. Humans typically take themselves to be on the side of good and their enemies on the side of evil.\r\nIn the everyday world, the ethical thing to do is sometimes viewed as obvious and self-evident when it should be a matter of debate, or, conversely, viewed as a matter of debate when it should be obvious and self-evident. One and the same act is often ethically praised by particular social, religious or political groups and ethically condemned by others.\r\nThrough example and encouragement, we can cultivate important intellectual traits. We can learn to respect the rights of others and not simply focus on fulfilling our desires. The main problem is not so much distinguishing between helping and harming, but our natural propensity to be focused almost exclusively on ourselves and those closely connected with us. This is clear in the behavior of national, religious, and ethnic groups. Few groups, in fact,value the lives and welfare of others (other nations, other religions, other ethnic groups) as they value those of their own. Few think about the consequences to other groups of their own group’s pursuit of money, power, prestige, and property. The result is that few people (in virtually any society) act consistently on ethical principles when dealing with “outsiders.” A double standard in applying ethical principles to human life is virtually universal and often flagrant.\r\nIn short, ethical persons, however strongly motivated to do what is ethically right, can do so only if they know what is ethically right. And this they cannot do if they systematically confuse their sense of what is ethically right with self-interest, personal desires, or social taboos. Ethically motivated persons must learn the art of self- and social critique, of ethical self-examination. They must recognize the pervasive everyday pitfalls of ethical judgment: moral intolerance, self-deception, and uncritical conformity. They must also learn not to confuse ethics with behaving in accordance with social conventions, religious beliefs, and the law.  \r\nTo go deeper into the foundations of ethical reasoning, we invite you to view our recent podcast: \"<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=356\" target=\"_blank\">Ethical Reasoning, Part One: The Concept and How it is Confused With Other Modes of Thought</a>.\" [This video is found exclusively in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online, our subscription resource and activity center, where a 30-day free trial is available.] \r\n-----\r\nThis blog was adapted from <a href=\"https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780944583173/\" target=\"_blank\">The Thinker's Guide to Ethical Reasoning</a> by Richard Paul and Linda Elder, 2013, Rowman & Littlefield (pp. 4-5).\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 2] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

Aug 20, 2024

Philosophical and Unphilosophical Minds: Philosophy as a Mode of Thinking and a Framework for Thinking

Perhaps the best way to show what lies at the heart of the uniqueness and power of philosophy is to consider the contrast in general between unphilosophical and philosophical minds. In doing so, I present the two as idealized abstractions for the purpose of clarifying a paradigm; I realize that no one perfectly illustrates these idealizations.

The unphilosophical mind thinks without a clear sense of the foundations of its own thought, without conscious knowledge of the most basic concepts, aims, assumptions, and values that define and direct it. The unphilosophical mind is trapped within the system it uses, unable to deeply understand alternative or competing systems. The unphilosophical mind tends towards an intra-system closedmindedness. The unphilosophical mind may learn to think within different systems of thought if the systems are compartmentalized and apply in different contexts, but it cannot compare and contrast whole systems, because, at any given time, it thinks within a system without a clear sense of what it means to do so. This kind of intra-system thinking can be skilled, but it lacks foundational self-command. It functions well when confronted with questions and issues that fall clearly within its system, but is at its worse when having issues that cross systems, require revising a system, or presuppose explicit critique of the system used.

Unphilosophical liberals, for example, would be hard pressed to . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5660","title":"[Part 2] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Aug 20, 2024\r\nPhilosophical and Unphilosophical Minds: Philosophy as a Mode of Thinking and a Framework for Thinking\r\nPerhaps the best way to show what lies at the heart of the uniqueness and power of philosophy is to consider the contrast in general between unphilosophical and philosophical minds. In doing so, I present the two as idealized abstractions for the purpose of clarifying a paradigm; I realize that no one perfectly illustrates these idealizations.\r\nThe unphilosophical mind thinks without a clear sense of the foundations of its own thought, without conscious knowledge of the most basic concepts, aims, assumptions, and values that define and direct it. The unphilosophical mind is trapped within the system it uses, unable to deeply understand alternative or competing systems. The unphilosophical mind tends towards an intra-system closedmindedness. The unphilosophical mind may learn to think within different systems of thought if the systems are compartmentalized and apply in different contexts, but it cannot compare and contrast whole systems, because, at any given time, it thinks within a system without a clear sense of what it means to do so. This kind of intra-system thinking can be skilled, but it lacks foundational self-command. It functions well when confronted with questions and issues that fall clearly within its system, but is at its worse when having issues that cross systems, require revising a system, or presuppose explicit critique of the system used.\r\nUnphilosophical liberals, for example, would be hard pressed to . . .\r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=240\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=240\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Thinking Critically About the News to Detect and Avoid Media Bias - Linda Elder

Aug 08, 2024

It was wonderful to see so many of you at our recent 44^th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking, where we delved into the theory and application of critical thinking while working together in an atmosphere of collegiality and conviviality. Our Fellows and Scholars were impressed by the very high degree of serious study implicit throughout all focal sessions, on the part of participants.

One of my conference sessions focused on the problem of media bias. Here are some of the ideas we discussed and exemplified:

KEY CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS TO ASK WHEN SEEKING THE NEWS

The following are critical thinking questions you can immediately employ to uncover media bias and political propaganda in the news.

Is this news source reputable? In other words: Does it appear to at least attempt to present the news in an unbiased manner? Does it have a track record of reporting actual stories, rather than urban myths, conspiracy theories, and other unfounded claims?
Does this news source openly publish retractions and corrections after making errors in its reporting?
Where do these reporters get their information? What additional sources do they use to corroborate their information? Are they or their editors paid to run a story, or are they paid not to run a story?
Is this news source merely a gossip column, a political smear organization, or some other dysfunctional information source with an unsavory agenda? If so, why would I waste my time with, and potentially be led astray by, these sources? (Realize that it is easy to be influenced by irrational thinking merely through exposure, even when you think you are guarding against it).
What is the purpose of this news outlet? Is the purpose clearly stated? Is there a hidden agenda? If so, how can I identify that agenda?
Do professional journalists write for this news outlet? What are the credentials of these journalists?
Is this news source reputable? Does it present the news in an unbiased manner? Does it have a track record of reporting actual stories, rather than urban myths, conspiracy theories, and other unfounded claims?
Am I seeking news on websites such as social media sites? If so, do I realize I’m getting the news filtered to me, often through unreliable sources? (Bottom line: avoid getting news from any social media sites since you would have to work doubly hard to assess the “news” found there—and who has the time?)
Does this news source attempt at all to enlighten people, or does it merely pander to the views of consumers by maintaining the status quo?
To what degree is sensationalism a goal of this news source? Why am I drawn to sensationalism, scandal, and melodrama?
Am I seeking news on websites such as social media sites? If so, do I realize I’m getting the news filtered to me, often through unreliable sources? (Bottom line: avoid getting news from any social media sites since you would have to work doubly hard to assess the “news” found there—and who has the time?)
Does this news source attempt at all to enlighten people, or does it merely pander to the views of consumers by maintaining the status quo?
To what degree is sensationalism a goal of this news source? Why am I drawn to sensationalism, scandal, and melodrama?

These questions can help you (and your students) focus on the most reputable news sources. And of course, people should never read the news without using skills of criticality, since problems are potentially inherent in any and all news sources, however “reputable.”

REALITIES THAT IMPEDE OUR ABILITY TO GET OBJECTIVE NEWS

In the past decade, with the explosion of the internet and its attendant realities, it has become increasingly difficult to get objective news (and it was difficult even before this explosion). Many of these realities are now being documented in articles and books, though none of us can keep up with them, so rapid are these changes.

However, we can identify the most powerful trends now facing consumers of news. Here are some of the most prominent:

1. It is now very easy to find enclaves of specialized (and biased) news outlets, and social media news-related threads or webpages, that fit one’s own worldview and presuppositions. News consumers can therefore effortlessly find news sources in keeping with their preconceived notions of the world, and can connect with people of like mind, however distorted their collective views may be. Through these news sources, their biases are collectively validated, enabling them to incorporate news stories (however inaccurate or misleading) into their worldview based on how the stories make them feel—that is, how well these stories fit into their existing views, how much they wish the claims were true, or how well the stories fit the views of their friends and colleagues. These consumers seem to rarely corroborate news reports on their own. They rarely or never seek out the same stories as reported by other sources, where the stories may be reported with a broader context, or with more details or with emphasis on different elements. Consequently, these news consumers are able to keep their biased views intact, and thereby avoid facing objective reality.

2. Indeed, many people get their “news” solely from free-for-all social media websites that adhere to no standards of reasonability, and which are hodgepodges of poorly reasoned and well-reasoned thoughts and ideas mixed together in ways that cannot delineate to the consumer which “news” is reputable. On the other hand, many well-meaning people try to critique and even investigate what appear to be biased news sources, but, lacking critical thinking skills, they are unclear how to do so.

3. With the decline of newspaper circulation has come the rise of advocacy journalism, in which many news outlets actively take positions on the news as if the primary purpose were to editorialize rather than simply report the news in its most objective form. This phenomenon can be found across the political spectrum, from conservative to post-modern liberal journalism—whether moderate, far-right, or far-left.

And people are now flocking and clustering to these advocacy news outlets.

4. Of course, all advocacy journalism is not of the same quality. Whether and to what degree a position should be taken in journalism entirely depends on the case at hand and the arguments being given. In the final analysis, each of us must use our critical thinking abilities to determine the best position to take Where do these reporters get their information? What additional sources do they use to corroborate their information? Are they or their editors paid to run a story, or are they paid not to run a story? on an issue, once we are informed of all reasonable sides. We must be open to considering all rational perspectives on an issue, the complexities of which should be reflected in news reporting.

5. Perhaps surprisingly, many people are still unaware of the prevalence of fake news throughout social media and the web. It is now well-known that people and organizations (including private interest groups, businesses, and governments) can create authentic-looking websites featuring deliberately misleading or utterly fabricated stories. Fake news can spread quickly through social media, and a fake story can become “common knowledge” amongst a large segment of the population in a matter of days.

Conspiracy theorists claimed that the emails entailed coded messages connecting several U.S. restaurants and high-ranking officials of the Democratic Party with purported human trafficking and a child sex ring. These unfounded claims went viral, spreading through the use of several social media sites), among ultra-conservatives and other groups antagonistic to Clinton or the Democratic Party.

6. Many people are unable to distinguish between news stories and news commentary. These people are therefore unaware that a news story should not entail judgment on the part of the story’s author, but rather should simply report accurate, verifiable, undistorted information, or in other words facts. News commentary, on the other hand, involves taking a position on an issue and therefore may be well or poorly reasoned. When news reporters do editorialize, they should make it clear when they are presenting facts versus when they are suggesting their inferences or conclusions based on the facts.

7. Many people get their news from news-based comedy programs—television and internet broadcasts whose purpose is to make people laugh by focusing on current events. This can include sketches with exaggerated or otherwise altered versions of events (e.g., Saturday Night Live), as well as comedic commentary on current news (e.g., The Daily Show). Of course, such shows have financial incentives to prioritize comedy above unbiased and even-handed delivery of objective information. At the same time, comedy writers often voice, through wit, their own views on politics and the news, and hence their “jokes” are frequently intended to, and frequently do, influence consumers’ views.

Media bias and propaganda are effective only when people lack the critical thinking skills to see through them. Hopefully these ideas give you (and your students) a richer sense of how to avoid being manipulated through partial media sources, wherever they are found.

For more on media bias and propaganda, see Fact Over Fake: A Critical Thinker's Guide to Media Bias and Political Propaganda.

---

This blog was adapted from pp. 12 – 14 found in: Fact Over Fake: A Critical Thinker's Guide to Media Bias and Political Propaganda, by Richard Paul and Linda Elder (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2020: www.rowman.com).

[Comment on this blog in the Community Online.]

{"id":"5659","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Thinking Critically About the News to Detect and Avoid Media Bias - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nAug 08, 2024\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nIt was wonderful to see so many of you at our recent 44th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking, where we delved into the theory and application of critical thinking while working together in an atmosphere of collegiality and conviviality. Our Fellows and Scholars were impressed by the very high degree of serious study implicit throughout all focal sessions, on the part of participants.\r\nOne of my conference sessions focused on the problem of media bias. Here are some of the ideas we discussed and exemplified:\r\nKEY CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS TO ASK WHEN SEEKING THE NEWS\r\nThe following are critical thinking questions you can immediately employ to uncover media bias and political propaganda in the news.\r\n<ul>\r\n<li>Is this news source reputable? In other words: Does it appear to at least attempt to present the news in an unbiased manner? Does it have a track record of reporting actual stories, rather than urban myths, conspiracy theories, and other unfounded claims?</li>\r\n<li>Does this news source openly publish retractions and corrections after making errors in its reporting?</li>\r\n<li>Where do these reporters get their information? What additional sources do they use to corroborate their information? Are they or their editors paid to run a story, or are they paid not to run a story?</li>\r\n<li>Is this news source merely a gossip column, a political smear organization, or some other dysfunctional information source with an unsavory agenda? If so, why would I waste my time with, and potentially be led astray by, these sources? (Realize that it is easy to be influenced by irrational thinking merely through exposure, even when you think you are guarding against it).</li>\r\n<li>What is the purpose of this news outlet? Is the purpose clearly stated? Is there a hidden agenda? If so, how can I identify that agenda?</li>\r\n<li>Do professional journalists write for this news outlet? What are the credentials of these journalists?</li>\r\n<li>Is this news source reputable? Does it present the news in an unbiased manner? Does it have a track record of reporting actual stories, rather than urban myths, conspiracy theories, and other unfounded claims?</li>\r\n<li>Am I seeking news on websites such as social media sites? If so, do I realize I’m getting the news filtered to me, often through unreliable sources? (Bottom line: avoid getting news from any social media sites since you would have to work doubly hard to assess the “news” found there—and who has the time?)</li>\r\n<li>Does this news source attempt at all to enlighten people, or does it merely pander to the views of consumers by maintaining the status quo?</li>\r\n<li>To what degree is sensationalism a goal of this news source? Why am I drawn to sensationalism, scandal, and melodrama?</li>\r\n<li>Am I seeking news on websites such as social media sites? If so, do I realize I’m getting the news filtered to me, often through unreliable sources? (Bottom line: avoid getting news from any social media sites since you would have to work doubly hard to assess the “news” found there—and who has the time?)</li>\r\n<li>Does this news source attempt at all to enlighten people, or does it merely pander to the views of consumers by maintaining the status quo?</li>\r\n<li>To what degree is sensationalism a goal of this news source? Why am I drawn to sensationalism, scandal, and melodrama?</li>\r\n</ul>\r\nThese questions can help you (and your students) focus on the most reputable news sources. And of course, people should never read the news without using skills of criticality, since problems are potentially inherent in any and all news sources, however “reputable.”\r\nREALITIES THAT IMPEDE OUR ABILITY TO GET OBJECTIVE NEWS\r\nIn the past decade, with the explosion of the internet and its attendant realities, it has become increasingly difficult to get objective news (and it was difficult even before this explosion). Many of these realities are now being documented in articles and books, though none of us can keep up with them, so rapid are these changes.\r\nHowever, we can identify the most powerful trends now facing consumers of news. Here are some of the most prominent:\r\n1. It is now very easy to find enclaves of specialized (and biased) news outlets, and social media news-related threads or webpages, that fit one’s own worldview and presuppositions. News consumers can therefore effortlessly find news sources in keeping with their preconceived notions of the world, and can connect with people of like mind, however distorted their collective views may be. Through these news sources, their biases are collectively validated, enabling them to incorporate news stories (however inaccurate or misleading) into their worldview based on how the stories make them feel—that is, how well these stories fit into their existing views, how much they wish the claims were true, or how well the stories fit the views of their friends and colleagues. These consumers seem to rarely corroborate news reports on their own. They rarely or never seek out the same stories as reported by other sources, where the stories may be reported with a broader context, or with more details or with emphasis on different elements. Consequently, these news consumers are able to keep their biased views intact, and thereby avoid facing objective reality.\r\n2. Indeed, many people get their “news” solely from free-for-all social media websites that adhere to no standards of reasonability, and which are hodgepodges of poorly reasoned and well-reasoned thoughts and ideas mixed together in ways that cannot delineate to the consumer which “news” is reputable. On the other hand, many well-meaning people try to critique and even investigate what appear to be biased news sources, but, lacking critical thinking skills, they are unclear how to do so.\r\n3. With the decline of newspaper circulation has come the rise of advocacy journalism, in which many news outlets actively take positions on the news as if the primary purpose were to editorialize rather than simply report the news in its most objective form. This phenomenon can be found across the political spectrum, from conservative to post-modern liberal journalism—whether moderate, far-right, or far-left.\r\nAnd people are now flocking and clustering to these advocacy news outlets.\r\n4. Of course, all advocacy journalism is not of the same quality. Whether and to what degree a position should be taken in journalism entirely depends on the case at hand and the arguments being given. In the final analysis, each of us must use our critical thinking abilities to determine the best position to take Where do these reporters get their information? What additional sources do they use to corroborate their information? Are they or their editors paid to run a story, or are they paid not to run a story? on an issue, once we are informed of all reasonable sides. We must be open to considering all rational perspectives on an issue, the complexities of which should be reflected in news reporting.\r\n5. Perhaps surprisingly, many people are still unaware of the prevalence of fake news throughout social media and the web. It is now well-known that people and organizations (including private interest groups, businesses, and governments) can create authentic-looking websites featuring deliberately misleading or utterly fabricated stories. Fake news can spread quickly through social media, and a fake story can become “common knowledge” amongst a large segment of the population in a matter of days. \r\nConspiracy theorists claimed that the emails entailed coded messages connecting several U.S. restaurants and high-ranking officials of the Democratic Party with purported human trafficking and a child sex ring. These unfounded claims went viral, spreading through the use of several social media sites), among ultra-conservatives and other groups antagonistic to Clinton or the Democratic Party.\r\n6. Many people are unable to distinguish between news stories and news commentary. These people are therefore unaware that a news story should not entail judgment on the part of the story’s author, but rather should simply report accurate, verifiable, undistorted information, or in other words facts. News commentary, on the other hand, involves taking a position on an issue and therefore may be well or poorly reasoned. When news reporters do editorialize, they should make it clear when they are presenting facts versus when they are suggesting their inferences or conclusions based on the facts.\r\n7. Many people get their news from news-based comedy programs—television and internet broadcasts whose purpose is to make people laugh by focusing on current events. This can include sketches with exaggerated or otherwise altered versions of events (e.g., Saturday Night Live), as well as comedic commentary on current news (e.g., The Daily Show). Of course, such shows have financial incentives to prioritize comedy above unbiased and even-handed delivery of objective information. At the same time, comedy writers often voice, through wit, their own views on politics and the news, and hence their “jokes” are frequently intended to, and frequently do, influence consumers’ views.\r\nMedia bias and propaganda are effective only when people lack the critical thinking skills to see through them. Hopefully these ideas give you (and your students) a richer sense of how to avoid being manipulated through partial media sources, wherever they are found.\r\nFor more on media bias and propaganda, see <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/55/FactOverFake.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">Fact Over Fake: A Critical Thinker's Guide to Media Bias and Political Propaganda</a>.\r\n---\r\nThis blog was adapted from pp. 12 – 14 found in: Fact Over Fake: A Critical Thinker's Guide to Media Bias and Political Propaganda, by Richard Paul and Linda Elder (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2020: www.rowman.com).\r\n[<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=239\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on this blog</a> in the Community Online.]\r\n</div>\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 1] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives

Abstract

In this paper, originally part of “Philosophy and Cognitive Psychology,” Paul argues for the power of philosophy and philosophical thinking for intellectual autonomy. He claims that even children have a need and right to think philosophically and are very much inclined to do so, but are typically discouraged by the didactic absolutistic answers and attitudes of adults. Consequently, the inquiring minds of children soon become jaded by the self-assured absolutistic environment which surrounds them.

The potential of children to philosophize is suggested in a transcript of a 4th grade classroom discussion of a series of abstract questions. Following the transcript, Paul illustrates a variety of ways in which traditional school subjects can be approached philosophically. He closes with a discussion of the values and intellectual traits fostered by philosophical thought, the skills and processes of thought, and the relation of philosophical to critical thought.

Introduction

In this paper I lay the foundation for a philosophy-based, in contrast to a psychology-based, approach to teaching critical thinking across the curriculum. I lay out the general theory and provide some examples of how it could be used to transform classroom instruction and activities. Nevertheless, I want to underscore the point that I lack the space to cover my subject comprehensively. Interested readers must independently pursue the leads I provide, to see the power and flexibility of philosophy-based approaches to critical thinking instruction. I must content myself with modest goals, with a few basic insights into philosophical thinking, with a few of its advantages for instruction.

There are three overlapping senses of philosophy that can play a role in explicating the nature of philosophical thinking: philosophy as a field of study, philosophy as a mode of . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5649","title":"[Part 1] The Contribution of Philosophy to Thinking - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Abstract\r\nIn this paper, originally part of “Philosophy and Cognitive Psychology,” Paul argues for the power of philosophy and philosophical thinking for intellectual autonomy. He claims that even children have a need and right to think philosophically and are very much inclined to do so, but are typically discouraged by the didactic absolutistic answers and attitudes of adults. Consequently, the inquiring minds of children soon become jaded by the self-assured absolutistic environment which surrounds them.\r\nThe potential of children to philosophize is suggested in a transcript of a 4th grade classroom discussion of a series of abstract questions. Following the transcript, Paul illustrates a variety of ways in which traditional school subjects can be approached philosophically. He closes with a discussion of the values and intellectual traits fostered by philosophical thought, the skills and processes of thought, and the relation of philosophical to critical thought.\r\nIntroduction\r\nIn this paper I lay the foundation for a philosophy-based, in contrast to a psychology-based, approach to teaching critical thinking across the curriculum. I lay out the general theory and provide some examples of how it could be used to transform classroom instruction and activities. Nevertheless, I want to underscore the point that I lack the space to cover my subject comprehensively. Interested readers must independently pursue the leads I provide, to see the power and flexibility of philosophy-based approaches to critical thinking instruction. I must content myself with modest goals, with a few basic insights into philosophical thinking, with a few of its advantages for instruction.\r\nThere are three overlapping senses of philosophy that can play a role in explicating the nature of philosophical thinking: philosophy as a field of study, philosophy as a mode of . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=238\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=238\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] How to Foster Critical Thinking in Students on a Typical Day - Linda Elder

Jul 12, 2024

When students learn to reason with skill within the content of their courses, they take ownership of the most basic principles and concepts within the subjects they are studying. The instructional ideas in all of our work are premised in this understanding. These ideas are based on a vision of instruction implied by critical thinking and an analysis of the weaknesses typically found in most traditional didactic lecture/quiz/test formats of instruction. We begin with two premises:

that to learn a subject well, students must master the thinking that defines that subject, and
that we, in turn, as their instructors, must design activities and assignments that require students to think actively within the concepts and principles of the subject.

The essence of studying academic subjects with discipline entails learning the tools employed by the intellectually developed mind. This means internalizing fundamental concepts and principles before attempting to learn more advanced concepts. This requires that instructors design coursework that makes intellectual work and deep learning manageable, practical, and intuitive to students.

One of the goals of critical thinking is to foster lifelong learning and the traditional ideal of a liberally educated mind: a mind that questions, probes, and masters a variety of forms of knowledge, through command of itself, intellectual perseverance, and the tools of learning.

Critical thinking helps put questions into clearer perspective. It illuminates that all bona fide fields of study share common intellectual structures and standards of reasonability. It emphasizes that foundational intellectual structures and standards of reasonability are worth learning explicitly and in themselves, since they help us more deeply interconnect and understand all that we learn. It also emphasizes foundational intellectual dispositions and values that define the traits of the disciplined thinker in all fields: intellectual autonomy, intellectual humility, intellectual integrity, intellectual perseverance, intellectual empathy, confidence in reason, and fairmindedness.

To learn specific strategies for fostering critical thinking in instruction, read the many resources in our libraries for educators and students. Also view our many instructional design videos in our video library. Here are few of the resources in these libraries:

How to Foster Critical Thinking in Students on a Typical Day (recently released webinar with Dr. Gerald Nosich)
How to Improve Student Learning
The Thinkers Guide for Students on How to Study and Learn a Discipline

Comment in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online

{"id":"5630","title":"[FULL ENTRY] How to Foster Critical Thinking in Students on a Typical Day - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Jul 12, 2024\r\nWhen students learn to reason with skill within the content of their courses, they take ownership of the most basic principles and concepts within the subjects they are studying. The instructional ideas in all of our work are premised in this understanding. These ideas are based on a vision of instruction implied by critical thinking and an analysis of the weaknesses typically found in most traditional didactic lecture/quiz/test formats of instruction. We begin with two premises:\r\n<ul>\r\n<li class=\"ql-indent-1\">that to learn a subject well, students must master the thinking that defines that subject, and </li>\r\n<li class=\"ql-indent-1\">that we, in turn, as their instructors, must design activities and assignments that require students to think actively within the concepts and principles of the subject.</li>\r\n</ul>\r\nThe essence of studying academic subjects with discipline entails learning the tools employed by the intellectually developed mind. This means internalizing fundamental concepts and principles before attempting to learn more advanced concepts. This requires that instructors design coursework that makes intellectual work and deep learning manageable, practical, and intuitive to students.\r\nOne of the goals of critical thinking is to foster lifelong learning and the traditional ideal of a liberally educated mind: a mind that questions, probes, and masters a variety of forms of knowledge, through command of itself, intellectual perseverance, and the tools of learning.\r\nCritical thinking helps put questions into clearer perspective. It illuminates that all bona fide fields of study share common intellectual structures and standards of reasonability. It emphasizes that foundational intellectual structures and standards of reasonability are worth learning explicitly and in themselves, since they help us more deeply interconnect and understand all that we learn. It also emphasizes foundational intellectual dispositions and values that define the traits of the disciplined thinker in all fields: intellectual autonomy, intellectual humility, intellectual integrity, intellectual perseverance, intellectual empathy, confidence in reason, and fairmindedness.\r\nTo learn specific strategies for fostering critical thinking in instruction, read the many resources in our libraries for educators and students. Also view our many instructional design videos in our video library. Here are few of the resources in these libraries:\r\n<ul>\r\n<li><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=354\" target=\"_blank\">How to Foster Critical Thinking in Students on a Typical Day</a> (recently released webinar with Dr. Gerald Nosich) </li>\r\n<li><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_educators/120/HowtoImproveStudentLearningforCommunityOnline.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">How to Improve Student Learning </a></li>\r\n<li><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_students/29/Thinker__sGuideonHowtoStudyandLearnaDiscipline.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">The Thinkers Guide for Students on How to Study and Learn a Discipline</a></li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=237\" target=\"_blank\"> Comment in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online</a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 9 - Final] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

Jul 01, 2024

Conclusions

We do not live in a disembodied world of objects and physical laws. Neither do we live in a world of nature-created economic laws. We live in a world of people. The fundamental institutional structures, the rules, laws, principles, mores, and folkways are, consciously or unconsciously, created by people. The conditions for and the nature of productivity are not things-in-themselves, but products of multitudes of human decisions embodied in human activity and behavior. The benefits yielded by any mode of production can be viewed narrowly or broadly. They can be treated technically as a function of production curves, of so much raw material and labor costs, of product output and input factors, of production standards expressible in time per unit or units per hour. They can, of course, be viewed from the perspective of management as skill in using labor and equipment or of maximizing profits for investors. In many settings, the narrow view will inevitably prevail as determined by pressing agendas and the imperatives that result from functioning essentially in the service of narrowed vested interests. Stockholders do not gather together to hear reports of service to the broader public good but to hear what the balance sheets say, what the present profits are and, given intelligent projections, can be expected to be in the near future.

But educators, whether concerned with “liberal,” “professional,” or “vocational” programs, should not function as representatives of any vested interest but rather as public servants working to advance the public good. Such a responsibility requires a broad, a comprehensive, and a critical view of society as a whole. Our understanding of the role of our specialization must be determined by our vision of its place in service of a critically sophisticated view of the problems of working to achieve a society that serves the public rather than private interests. Our global vision must shape our understanding of our specialty; our specialty as a thing-in-itself, as a system of narrow loyalties must not be used as a model for generalizing our vision of the world as a whole. The vocational or professional educator who adopts the philosophy, “What’s good for General Motors is good for the United States” uncritically confuses vested and public interests.

A market economy is compatible with democracy only insofar as large accumulations of capital cannot be used to harness mass communications to manipulate the public into the service of vested interest and private greed. There is no way to prevent such practices except through . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5625","title":"[Part 9 - Final] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Jul 01, 2024\r\nConclusions\r\nWe do not live in a disembodied world of objects and physical laws. Neither do we live in a world of nature-created economic laws. We live in a world of people. The fundamental institutional structures, the rules, laws, principles, mores, and folkways are, consciously or unconsciously, created by people. The conditions for and the nature of productivity are not things-in-themselves, but products of multitudes of human decisions embodied in human activity and behavior. The benefits yielded by any mode of production can be viewed narrowly or broadly. They can be treated technically as a function of production curves, of so much raw material and labor costs, of product output and input factors, of production standards expressible in time per unit or units per hour. They can, of course, be viewed from the perspective of management as skill in using labor and equipment or of maximizing profits for investors. In many settings, the narrow view will inevitably prevail as determined by pressing agendas and the imperatives that result from functioning essentially in the service of narrowed vested interests. Stockholders do not gather together to hear reports of service to the broader public good but to hear what the balance sheets say, what the present profits are and, given intelligent projections, can be expected to be in the near future.\r\nBut educators, whether concerned with “liberal,” “professional,” or “vocational” programs, should not function as representatives of any vested interest but rather as public servants working to advance the public good. Such a responsibility requires a broad, a comprehensive, and a critical view of society as a whole. Our understanding of the role of our specialization must be determined by our vision of its place in service of a critically sophisticated view of the problems of working to achieve a society that serves the public rather than private interests. Our global vision must shape our understanding of our specialty; our specialty as a thing-in-itself, as a system of narrow loyalties must not be used as a model for generalizing our vision of the world as a whole. The vocational or professional educator who adopts the philosophy, “What’s good for General Motors is good for the United States” uncritically confuses vested and public interests.\r\nA market economy is compatible with democracy only insofar as large accumulations of capital cannot be used to harness mass communications to manipulate the public into the service of vested interest and private greed. There is no way to prevent such practices except through . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=236\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Thinking, Feeling and Desiring as an Interactive Triad - Linda Elder

Jun 21, 202

Everyone thinks. It is our nature to do so. But always keep in mind that much of our thinking left to itself is biased, distorted, ill-founded, or prejudiced. Our thinking can easily lead to problems in our lives, including mental health problems. Our thinking can also cause problems for others, through disrespect, negligence, and cruelty, for instance.

Of course, the mind doesn’t just think, it also feels and wants. What is the connection? Our thinking shapes and determines how we feel and what we want. When we think well, we are motivated to do things that make sense and to act in ways that help rather than harm ourselves and others. At the same time, powerful emotions or desires may influence our thinking, helping or hindering how well we think in a situation. At any given moment, our minds (that complex of inner thoughts, feelings and desires) can be under the sway of our irrational or rational capacities. Our thoughts, feelings and desires may be either mentally healthy or unhealthy.

Though thinking, feeling and wanting are, in principle, equally important, it is only through your thinking that you can take command of your mind. It is through your thinking that you figure out what is going wrong with your thinking. It is through your thinking that you figure out how to deal with your destructive emotions. It is through your thinking that you change unproductive desires to productive ones. It is fairminded reasonability that frees you from intellectual slavery and group conformity. If you understand your mind and its functions, if you face the barriers to your development caused by egocentric and sociocentric thought, if you work on your mind through daily, disciplined practice, you can take the steps that lead to a self-actualizing lifestyle.

For more on the relationship between thoughts, feelings and desires, view our recently released podcast: The Human Mind: Going Deeper - Thinking, Feeling & Wanting

Also work through one or all of the exercises in the Triangle of Thinking, Feeling, and Desiring.

For more on native human irrationality, view these podcasts:

Egocentricity- Going Deeper
Sociocentricity – Going Deeper

---

This material in this blog has been slightly modified from excerpts found in the upcoming book Critical Thinking Therapy for Mental Health and Self-Actualization by Linda Elder (2025), in press.

[Comment on this blog in the Community Online.]

{"id":"5622","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Thinking, Feeling and Desiring as an Interactive Triad - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Jun 21, 202 \r\nEveryone thinks. It is our nature to do so. But always keep in mind that much of our thinking left to itself is biased, distorted, ill-founded, or prejudiced. Our thinking can easily lead to problems in our lives, including mental health problems. Our thinking can also cause problems for others, through disrespect, negligence, and cruelty, for instance. \r\nOf course, the mind doesn’t just think, it also feels and wants. What is the connection? Our thinking shapes and determines how we feel and what we want. When we think well, we are motivated to do things that make sense and to act in ways that help rather than harm ourselves and others. At the same time, powerful emotions or desires may influence our thinking, helping or hindering how well we think in a situation. At any given moment, our minds (that complex of inner thoughts, feelings and desires) can be under the sway of our irrational or rational capacities. Our thoughts, feelings and desires may be either mentally healthy or unhealthy.\r\nThough thinking, feeling and wanting are, in principle, equally important, it is only through your thinking that you can take command of your mind. It is through your thinking that you figure out what is going wrong with your thinking. It is through your thinking that you figure out how to deal with your destructive emotions. It is through your thinking that you change unproductive desires to productive ones. It is fairminded reasonability that frees you from intellectual slavery and group conformity. If you understand your mind and its functions, if you face the barriers to your development caused by egocentric and sociocentric thought, if you work on your mind through daily, disciplined practice, you can take the steps that lead to a self-actualizing lifestyle.\r\nFor more on the relationship between thoughts, feelings and desires, view our recently released podcast: <a style=\"color: #0563c1;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=352\" target=\"_blank\">The Human Mind: Going Deeper - Thinking, Feeling & Wanting</a>\r\nAlso work through one or all of the exercises in the <a style=\"color: #0563c1;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/triangleOfThinking.php\" target=\"_blank\">Triangle of Thinking, Feeling, and Desiring</a>.\r\nFor more on native human irrationality, view these podcasts:\r\n<ul>\r\n<li><a style=\"color: #0563c1;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=341\" target=\"_blank\">Egocentricity</a>- Going Deeper</li>\r\n<li><a style=\"color: #0563c1;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=339\" target=\"_blank\">Sociocentricity</a> – Going Deeper</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n---\r\nThis material in this blog has been slightly modified from excerpts found in the upcoming book Critical Thinking Therapy for Mental Health and Self-Actualization by Linda Elder (2025), in press.\r\n[<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=233\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on this blog</a> in the Community Online.]","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 8] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

Jun 11, 2024

Two Objections [2 of 2]

Here is a second objection:

The dominant trend in business is toward giant corporations. Within them relations are direct, hierarchical, and bureaucratic. Directions flow from the top down. There is minute specialization of tasks. The entire task is accomplished by orchestrating the diverse specialized contributions. Very few specialists are in a position to judge the contributions of other specialists, or to judge the productive process as a whole. What we need are specialists who know their own specialty well, not generalists who judge this process as a whole.

My argument is not an argument against specialization but rather an argument for how to teach specialized skills. It is an argument in favor of specialists with the skills of generalists. There are two different modes of specialization. A narrowing and a broadening one. Most tools nowadays have a narrow specialized function. They are increasingly designed to serve a specific purpose in a specific process. But, as such, they are quickly rendered obsolete. We cannot afford vocational education or training that renders workers obsolete. Precisely because information and technology are quickly being replaced and transformed, we need workers who can adapt to profound changes.

Mindless, routine jobs are quickly being automated. The jobs that remain require increasing ability to . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5618","title":"[Part 8] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Jun 11, 2024\r\nTwo Objections [2 of 2]\r\nHere is a second objection:\r\nThe dominant trend in business is toward giant corporations. Within them relations are direct, hierarchical, and bureaucratic. Directions flow from the top down. There is minute specialization of tasks. The entire task is accomplished by orchestrating the diverse specialized contributions. Very few specialists are in a position to judge the contributions of other specialists, or to judge the productive process as a whole. What we need are specialists who know their own specialty well, not generalists who judge this process as a whole.\r\nMy argument is not an argument against specialization but rather an argument for how to teach specialized skills. It is an argument in favor of specialists with the skills of generalists. There are two different modes of specialization. A narrowing and a broadening one. Most tools nowadays have a narrow specialized function. They are increasingly designed to serve a specific purpose in a specific process. But, as such, they are quickly rendered obsolete. We cannot afford vocational education or training that renders workers obsolete. Precisely because information and technology are quickly being replaced and transformed, we need workers who can adapt to profound changes.\r\nMindless, routine jobs are quickly being automated. The jobs that remain require increasing ability to . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=234\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=234\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Where Do You Begin With Critical Thinking, and How do You Continue Developing as a Critical Thinker? - Linda Elder

Jun 05, 2024

Many of those new to critical thinking will ask us how to begin learning critical thinking and where to access introductory resources. Because critical thinking theory is dynamic and interactive, there are many ways to begin learning critical thinking. For a basic overview of critical thinking, below are good starting places.

Read these excerpts in our Library of Publications for Everyone:

For ethical reasoning foundations, read The Thinker's Guide to Ethical Reasoning.

To go deeper into the theory and application of critical thinking to everyday life, view our Critical Thinking: Going Deeper podcast series.

We also hope you will join any or all of our many learning opportunities, which you can read about on our Webinars and Announcements page.

We offer study groups, webinars, webinar workshops, conferences, and academies – all of which are designed to help you continue your development as a self-actualizing person through critical thinking. Learning critical thinking and developing as critical thinkers is challenging at best. Together we can learn at higher levels of understanding and insight.

[Comment on this blog in the Community Online.]

{"id":"5616","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Where Do You Begin With Critical Thinking, and How do You Continue Developing as a Critical Thinker? - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Jun 05, 2024\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nMany of those new to critical thinking will ask us how to begin learning critical thinking and where to access introductory resources. Because critical thinking theory is dynamic and interactive, there are many ways to begin learning critical thinking. For a basic overview of critical thinking, below are good starting places.\r\nRead these excerpts in our <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/libraryForEveryone.php\" target=\"_blank\">Library of Publications for Everyone</a>:\r\n<ul>\r\n<li><a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/127/MiniatureGuidetoCriticalThinkingConcepts_Tools.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools </a></li>\r\n<li><a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/44/Thinker__sGuidetoAnalyticThinking.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">The Thinker's Guide to Analytic Thinking </a></li>\r\n<li><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/47/HumanMindCOcopy.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">The Thinker's Guide to the Human Mind </a></li>\r\n</ul>\r\nFor ethical reasoning foundations, read <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/51/TheThinker__sGuidetoEthicalReasoning.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">The Thinker's Guide to Ethical Reasoning</a>.\r\nTo go deeper into the theory and application of critical thinking to everyday life, view our <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/videoSeries.php?id=29\" target=\"_blank\">Critical Thinking: Going Deeper </a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/videoSeries.php?id=29\" target=\"_blank\">podcast series</a>.\r\nWe also hope you will join any or all of our many learning opportunities, which you can read about on our <a style=\"color: blue;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/webinarsAndAnnouncements.php\" target=\"_blank\">Webinars and Announcements</a> page.\r\nWe offer study groups, webinars, webinar workshops, conferences, and academies – all of which are designed to help you continue your development as a self-actualizing person through critical thinking. Learning critical thinking and developing as critical thinkers is challenging at best. Together we can learn at higher levels of understanding and insight.\r\n[<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=233\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on this blog</a> in the Community Online.] \r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 7] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

May 21, 2024

Two Objections [1 of 2]

Before concluding, I should air a couple of obvious objections. One may be put as follows:

So far you have not dealt with the most obvious problem of productivity, the unproductive worker, the employee who, through lack of knowledge, training, or motivation, fails to perform in an optimal or adequate fashion. What employers want are dedicated, motivated, conscientious, and skilled employees who carry out their tasks as prescribed, not reflective thinkers who ponder the global problems of society.

This objection, you should note, assumes that the fundamental problem of productivity is “the worker.” This is, of course, a natural assumption to make if the role one has played is one of traditional management in U.S. industry. From that vantage point, it is natural to key in on employee performance standards and to see those standards as a function of employees in themselves. Studies have demonstrated, however, that in most of the Western world, management and labor both operate with a strong caricature or stereotype of each other. The fact is that each tends to function with a narrow view of its own immediate vested interest. Hence, while it may be in the immediate vested interest of employers to get the most labor from the least investment of capital, it is also in the immediate vested interest of employees to get the highest pay for the least labor. There is minimal incentive in the system to cooperate toward mutual advantage, and maximal incentive to compete as adversaries for available capital.

The Japanese system of management with its guarantees to the worker of life-long employment and its provision for child care, recreation, profit-sharing, and job-retraining (if necessary) suggests the possibility of the accent being focused on . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5613","title":"[Part 7] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"May 21, 2024\r\nTwo Objections [1 of 2]\r\nBefore concluding, I should air a couple of obvious objections. One may be put as follows:\r\nSo far you have not dealt with the most obvious problem of productivity, the unproductive worker, the employee who, through lack of knowledge, training, or motivation, fails to perform in an optimal or adequate fashion. What employers want are dedicated, motivated, conscientious, and skilled employees who carry out their tasks as prescribed, not reflective thinkers who ponder the global problems of society.\r\nThis objection, you should note, assumes that the fundamental problem of productivity is “the worker.” This is, of course, a natural assumption to make if the role one has played is one of traditional management in U.S. industry. From that vantage point, it is natural to key in on employee performance standards and to see those standards as a function of employees in themselves. Studies have demonstrated, however, that in most of the Western world, management and labor both operate with a strong caricature or stereotype of each other. The fact is that each tends to function with a narrow view of its own immediate vested interest. Hence, while it may be in the immediate vested interest of employers to get the most labor from the least investment of capital, it is also in the immediate vested interest of employees to get the highest pay for the least labor. There is minimal incentive in the system to cooperate toward mutual advantage, and maximal incentive to compete as adversaries for available capital.\r\nThe Japanese system of management with its guarantees to the worker of life-long employment and its provision for child care, recreation, profit-sharing, and job-retraining (if necessary) suggests the possibility of the accent being focused on . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=232\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] View Our Recent Videos on Criticality and Creativity, and Why Critical Thinking is Essential to Democracies - Linda Elder

May 14, 2024

Thank you to all of you who have been able to join our complimentary webinars. For those who missed our latest two, I invite you to view the following videos of those webinars. The first is a recording of the webinar workshop on Why Critical and Creative Thinking Depend on One Another, led by my colleague, Dr. Gerald Nosich.

The relationship between critical and creative thinking is frequently misunderstood. And yet, quite simply, critical thinking necessarily involves creativity while creativity pre-supposes critical thinking. Critical thinking, without creativity, is merely focused on pointing out flaws in reasoning and in products of reasoning. It offers no solutions. It offers no contributions of substance and value, and therefore is only a partial form of critical thinking. Though it is frequently essential to seek problems in thinking as a part of critical thinking, this is not sufficient to achieve the highest levels of criticality in most contexts. These highest levels typically require creativity.

At the same time, creativity without critical thinking merely results in novelty, or in other words, something that may indeed be new (or perceived as new) but is not necessarily of value, substance, or quality.

In critical thinking, one of our primary goals is to identify problems in thinking and create solutions to deal with those problems, whether it is our own problematic thinking or that of others.

Those people who make the most important contributions to human societies, the common good, and to sustenance of the earth’s resources illuminate well the relationship between criticality and creativity. They embody intellectual perseverance, as well as other intellectual virtues and abilities, while working within and actively developing their creative capacities.

View the video here:
How Critical and Creative Thinking Depend on One Another (Gerald Nosich, 05-07-2024)

I also invite you to view the webinar I presented on April 15th:
Why a Thriving Democracy Requires Critical Thinking

In this webinar, I focus on the fact that critical thinking is essential to successful democracies because education is required for successful democracies (which has long been understood) and because critical thinking is essential to education (which is far less understood).

Critical thinking is required to both:

a. critique existing systems of government, such as democracy, and

b. build and maintain any successful government (through all human systems within the society – educational, social, cultural, familial, political, professional, business, government, etc.)

Delineating or identifying the best democratic systems begins with articulating the core concept of democracy itself. This also requires critical thinking.

In the webinar, I briefly address these issues, focusing primarily on the overarching questions:

What is the relationship between democracy and critical thinking?
- What is democracy?
- What is critical thinking?

I hope you will take some time to view these videos and that you can join us for future webinars.

[Comment on this blog in the Community Online.]

{"id":"5612","title":"[FULL ENTRY] View Our Recent Videos on Criticality and Creativity, and Why Critical Thinking is Essential to Democracies - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"May 14, 2024\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nThank you to all of you who have been able to join our complimentary webinars. For those who missed our latest two, I invite you to view the following videos of those webinars. The first is a recording of the webinar workshop on Why Critical and Creative Thinking Depend on One Another, led by my colleague, Dr. Gerald Nosich. \r\nThe relationship between critical and creative thinking is frequently misunderstood. And yet, quite simply, critical thinking necessarily involves creativity while creativity pre-supposes critical thinking. Critical thinking, without creativity, is merely focused on pointing out flaws in reasoning and in products of reasoning. It offers no solutions. It offers no contributions of substance and value, and therefore is only a partial form of critical thinking. Though it is frequently essential to seek problems in thinking as a part of critical thinking, this is not sufficient to achieve the highest levels of criticality in most contexts. These highest levels typically require creativity.\r\nAt the same time, creativity without critical thinking merely results in novelty, or in other words, something that may indeed be new (or perceived as new) but is not necessarily of value, substance, or quality.\r\nIn critical thinking, one of our primary goals is to identify problems in thinking and create solutions to deal with those problems, whether it is our own problematic thinking or that of others.\r\nThose people who make the most important contributions to human societies, the common good, and to sustenance of the earth’s resources illuminate well the relationship between criticality and creativity. They embody intellectual perseverance, as well as other intellectual virtues and abilities, while working within and actively developing their creative capacities. \r\nView the video here: <a style=\"color: #0563c1;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=349\" target=\"_blank\">How Critical and Creative Thinking Depend on One Another (Gerald Nosich, 05-07-2024)</a>\r\nI also invite you to view the webinar I presented on April 15th: <a style=\"color: #0563c1;\" href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=350\" target=\"_blank\">Why a Thriving Democracy Requires Critical Thinking</a>\r\nIn this webinar, I focus on the fact that critical thinking is essential to successful democracies because education is required for successful democracies (which has long been understood) and because critical thinking is essential to education (which is far less understood).\r\nCritical thinking is required to both:\r\na. critique existing systems of government, such as democracy, and\r\nb. build and maintain any successful government (through all human systems within the society – educational, social, cultural, familial, political, professional, business, government, etc.)\r\nDelineating or identifying the best democratic systems begins with articulating the core concept of democracy itself. This also requires critical thinking. \r\nIn the webinar, I briefly address these issues, focusing primarily on the overarching questions:\r\n<ul>\r\n<li>What is the relationship between democracy and critical thinking? \r\n<ul>\r\n<li class=\"ql-indent-1\">What is democracy?</li>\r\n<li class=\"ql-indent-1\">What is critical thinking?</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n \r\nI hope you will take some time to view these videos and that you can join us for future webinars. [<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=233\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on this blog</a> in the Community Online.]\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 6] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

Apr 30, 2024

What Is the Significance for Education of Irrational Learning and Irrational Production as Social Phenomena?

Wentworth Eldredge has put part of the background of the problem in a stark light:

The traditional democratic assumption is that rational adults in a rational society have the necessary hereditary intelligence and social training, coupled with a determined interest and sufficient time, to absorb the available facts which will enable them to make in the political process wise decisions among offered choices and upon occasion to invent and make real alternate choices. A majority vote of such reasoning citizens shall constitute the truth and the ship of state will sail a true course . . . Most adults have completely inadequate training to understand even remotely the complexity of the contemporary scene. They lack interest and feel hopeless to think and act correctly in other than purely private concerns; and moreover, they have neither the time nor the information – assuming they could cope with the latter if by chance it were made available. They are merely carrying out the trite inculcated orders of their culture which have been drilled into them formally and informally since birth. Most adults are feeble reeds in the wild, whistling storm of a dangerous world they neither made nor could ever understand. To ask for the people’s reasoned decision and advice on weighty matters of policy would seem to be a waste of everyone’s time and energy, including their own. One might as well inquire of a five-year-old if he wanted polio vaccine injections.

In a rational society three general conditions would prevail . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5610","title":"[Part 6] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Apr 30, 2024\r\nWhat Is the Significance for Education of Irrational Learning and Irrational Production as Social Phenomena? \r\nWentworth Eldredge has put part of the background of the problem in a stark light:\r\nThe traditional democratic assumption is that rational adults in a rational society have the necessary hereditary intelligence and social training, coupled with a determined interest and sufficient time, to absorb the available facts which will enable them to make in the political process wise decisions among offered choices and upon occasion to invent and make real alternate choices. A majority vote of such reasoning citizens shall constitute the truth and the ship of state will sail a true course . . . Most adults have completely inadequate training to understand even remotely the complexity of the contemporary scene. They lack interest and feel hopeless to think and act correctly in other than purely private concerns; and moreover, they have neither the time nor the information – assuming they could cope with the latter if by chance it were made available. They are merely carrying out the trite inculcated orders of their culture which have been drilled into them formally and informally since birth. Most adults are feeble reeds in the wild, whistling storm of a dangerous world they neither made nor could ever understand. To ask for the people’s reasoned decision and advice on weighty matters of policy would seem to be a waste of everyone’s time and energy, including their own. One might as well inquire of a five-year-old if he wanted polio vaccine injections.\r\nIn a rational society three general conditions would prevail . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=230\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Cultivating Your Mind by Commanding Your Egocentricity and Register Now for Our Conference! - Linda Elder

Apr 24, 2024

There are so many resources and opportunities in our community that it may be difficult to know where to begin or how to proceed with your learning. I hope you will take advantage of our ongoing webinars and that you join us for our upcoming conference which you can learn about here. Register now for the 44^th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking, and take advantage of our Early Early bird discount of 10% off registration fees.

In this blog, and others to follow, I will offer assignments from the community for you to work through, with the goal of helping you continually cultivate your own critical thinking abilities and dispositions. Remember that we learn critical thinking by actively incorporating it into our thinking routinely, systematically, and on a daily basis. Nothing short of active commitment to the cultivation of your own mind will lead you through the higher stages of critical thinking development and into the self-actualizing process.

People frequently miss the barriers to criticality, so this first set of assignments focuses on this irrational aspect of human reasoning. Specifically, you will be focused on the problem of egocentricity in human life and identifying it in your own thoughts and actions.

Here are your assignments, should you choose to take this journey:

1. View this dialogue on the problem of egocentricity.

2. Read the excerpts found here from The Thinker’s Guide to the Human Mind.

3. Complete these activities:

a. Analyze a Self-Centered Person You Know Well

b. Identify Your Irrational Purposes

4. Please share in our ConneCT section any of your thoughts on these activities.

[Comment on this blog in the Community Online.]

{"id":"5609","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Cultivating Your Mind by Commanding Your Egocentricity and Register Now for Our Conference! - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nApr 24, 2024\r\nThere are so many resources and opportunities in our community that it may be difficult to know where to begin or how to proceed with your learning. I hope you will take advantage of our ongoing webinars and that you join us for our upcoming conference which you can learn about <a href=\"https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/44th-critical-thinking-conference-main/1631\" target=\"_blank\">here</a>. Register now for the 44th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking, and take advantage of our Early Early bird discount of 10% off registration fees.  \r\nIn this blog, and others to follow, I will offer assignments from the community for you to work through, with the goal of helping you continually cultivate your own critical thinking abilities and dispositions. Remember that we learn critical thinking by actively incorporating it into our thinking routinely, systematically, and on a daily basis. Nothing short of active commitment to the cultivation of your own mind will lead you through the higher stages of critical thinking development and into the self-actualizing process.\r\nPeople frequently miss the barriers to criticality, so this first set of assignments focuses on this irrational aspect of human reasoning. Specifically, you will be focused on the problem of egocentricity in human life and identifying it in your own thoughts and actions.\r\nHere are your assignments, should you choose to take this journey:\r\n1. View <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=341\" target=\"_blank\">this dialogue</a> on the problem of egocentricity.\r\n2. Read the excerpts <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/47/HumanMindCOcopy.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">found here</a> from The Thinker’s Guide to the Human Mind. \r\n3. Complete these activities:\r\na. <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/wallOfBarriersActivityAnalyzeSelfCenteredPerson?activity=none\" target=\"_blank\">Analyze a Self-Centered Person You Know Well</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/wallOfBarriersActivityAnalyzeSelfCenteredPerson?activity=none\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\nb. <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/wallOfBarriersActivityIrrationalPurposes?activity=none\" target=\"_blank\">Identify Your Irrational Purposes</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/wallOfBarriersActivityIrrationalPurposes?activity=none\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n4. Please share in our <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/connect.php\" target=\"_blank\">ConneCT section</a> any of your thoughts on these activities. \r\n[<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=233\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on this blog</a> in the Community Online.]\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 5] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

What Is Irrational Production? [2 of 2]

As Adam Smith recognized, private vested interests naturally try to increase their wealth regardless of the public good. Hence, ironically, no private interest is in favor of more, but rather in favor of less competition in its own industry (unless an increase in competition would increase its own profits). When it is possible to take advantage of the public, private interests will almost inevitably do so. Thus, during OPEC’s oil embargo, U.S. oil companies raised their own prices at home as well as abroad even though internal consumption of Arab oil was no more than 10% of our market. The OPEC action, in other words, provided a convenient excuse to join in a monopolistic practice of a special interest cartel. The result was windfall profits extracted from the U.S. public under artificially created, non-competitive conditions. The public, on the other hand, was continually led to believe that “Arabs” were exclusively to blame, as though U.S. companies hadn’t taken advantage of the situation to advance their own interests, irrespective of the public good.

I am arguing that the nature and conditions of production and productivity are never things-in-themselves, forces independent of political and social decisions, but rather intimately bound to such decisions. These decisions may be rational (in the public interest) or irrational (against the public interest). Whether they are the one or the other, can only be determined by full and fair public argument. If a nation is to function as a democracy, then its citizens must be armed with the critical thinking skills which enable them to penetrate the propagandistic arguments which are creatively and adroitly developed by private interests to keep violations of the public good from public recognition. The history of the country is shot through with cases in which the public was deceived into supporting policies in which public interest was sacrificed to private greed. A tremendous price in lives and resources has been paid as a result of the public’s inability to think critically to a sufficient degree to protect itself from irrational modes of production. We are, in my opinion, very far from . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5594","title":"[Part 5] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"What Is Irrational Production? [2 of 2]\r\nAs Adam Smith recognized, private vested interests naturally try to increase their wealth regardless of the public good. Hence, ironically, no private interest is in favor of more, but rather in favor of less competition in its own industry (unless an increase in competition would increase its own profits). When it is possible to take advantage of the public, private interests will almost inevitably do so. Thus, during OPEC’s oil embargo, U.S. oil companies raised their own prices at home as well as abroad even though internal consumption of Arab oil was no more than 10% of our market. The OPEC action, in other words, provided a convenient excuse to join in a monopolistic practice of a special interest cartel. The result was windfall profits extracted from the U.S. public under artificially created, non-competitive conditions. The public, on the other hand, was continually led to believe that “Arabs” were exclusively to blame, as though U.S. companies hadn’t taken advantage of the situation to advance their own interests, irrespective of the public good.\r\nI am arguing that the nature and conditions of production and productivity are never things-in-themselves, forces independent of political and social decisions, but rather intimately bound to such decisions. These decisions may be rational (in the public interest) or irrational (against the public interest). Whether they are the one or the other, can only be determined by full and fair public argument. If a nation is to function as a democracy, then its citizens must be armed with the critical thinking skills which enable them to penetrate the propagandistic arguments which are creatively and adroitly developed by private interests to keep violations of the public good from public recognition. The history of the country is shot through with cases in which the public was deceived into supporting policies in which public interest was sacrificed to private greed. A tremendous price in lives and resources has been paid as a result of the public’s inability to think critically to a sufficient degree to protect itself from irrational modes of production. We are, in my opinion, very far from . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=228\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=228\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] View My Latest Interview and Hats Off to Leaders Bringing Critical Thinking to Poland - Linda Elder

Apr 08, 2024

Though explicit fairminded critical thinking is still rarely fostered in any country in a broad way, we applaud the good efforts of Maciej Winiarek and Katarzyna Winiarek who are working to bring initial understandings of critical thinking to their home country of Poland. Mr. Winiarek recently invited me to be interviewed for their podcast, which will be translated into Polish and is soon to be released through their youtube channel. In this interview, Mr. Winiarek brought us into the current history of critical thinking and some of the academic and intrinsic human barriers to critical thinking. He also asked me to illuminate additional core concepts in critical thinking.

You can view the full video interview in the Community Online here. If you lack an existing account, a 30-day free trial is available.

Some brief clips from the interview are being released on our YouTube channel.

We look forward to our continued work with Maciej and Katarzyna in helping them lay the groundwork for cultivating critical thinking throughout Poland. Let us know what you are doing to advance critical thinking in your country, school, college, university or organization.

[Comment on this blog in the Community Online.]

{"id":"5586","title":"[FULL ENTRY] View My Latest Interview and Hats Off to Leaders Bringing Critical Thinking to Poland - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nApr 08, 2024 \r\nThough explicit fairminded critical thinking is still rarely fostered in any country in a broad way, we applaud the good efforts of Maciej Winiarek and Katarzyna Winiarek who are working to bring initial understandings of critical thinking to their home country of Poland. Mr. Winiarek recently invited me to be interviewed for their podcast, which will be translated into Polish and is soon to be released through their youtube channel. In this interview, Mr. Winiarek brought us into the current history of critical thinking and some of the academic and intrinsic human barriers to critical thinking. He also asked me to illuminate additional core concepts in critical thinking.\r\nYou can view the full video interview in the Community Online <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=347\" target=\"_blank\">here</a>. If you lack an existing account, a 30-day free trial is available.\r\nSome brief clips from the interview are being released on our <a href=\"https://www.youtube.com/@CriticalThinkingOrg/videos\" target=\"_blank\">YouTube channel</a>. \r\nWe look forward to our continued work with Maciej and Katarzyna in helping them lay the groundwork for cultivating critical thinking throughout Poland. Let us know what you are doing to advance critical thinking in your country, school, college, university or organization.\r\n</div>\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\"></div>\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">[<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=233\" target=\"_blank\">Comment on this blog</a> in the Community Online.]</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 4] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

Mar 25, 2024

What Is Irrational Production? [1 of 2]

It is a platitude, but an important platitude to keep in mind, that the productive resources of society should be marshaled to serve public need and public good, as against the vested interests of a relative few at the expense of the public good. Production is irrational to the extent that it fails to serve the public good, insofar as it is production wasteful of non-renewable resources, destructive of public health, or at the expense of basic human needs. One valuable rule of thumb is this: any economic practice is of questionable rationality if it can be maintained only by keeping the public in ignorance as to specific nature and modes of operation. The public cannot be understood to sanction that which it does not comprehend.

Production and productivity are to be viewed as collective as well as individual decisions in a functioning democracy. For these decisions to be made in a rational fashion, the public must have been educated to think critically, for when some narrow interest group seeks to maintain some form of irrational production (either as a whole or in part), it is inevitable that public relations and lobbying efforts will be launched which function, at least in part, to obfuscate public recognition of its own interests. For instance, it was in the narrow egocentric interest of asbestos manufacturers to minimize public disclosure of the health hazards of working and building with asbestos. The asbestos industry obscured the public interest to serve its own. As a result of the industry successfully protecting its vested interest, a mode of production was maintained for decades at great expense and loss in public health.

Since it is unrealistic to expect industries with narrow vested interests to abandon those interests for the public good, it becomes necessary that the public be armed with the . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5584","title":"[Part 4] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Mar 25, 2024\r\nWhat Is Irrational Production? [1 of 2]\r\nIt is a platitude, but an important platitude to keep in mind, that the productive resources of society should be marshaled to serve public need and public good, as against the vested interests of a relative few at the expense of the public good. Production is irrational to the extent that it fails to serve the public good, insofar as it is production wasteful of non-renewable resources, destructive of public health, or at the expense of basic human needs. One valuable rule of thumb is this: any economic practice is of questionable rationality if it can be maintained only by keeping the public in ignorance as to specific nature and modes of operation. The public cannot be understood to sanction that which it does not comprehend. \r\nProduction and productivity are to be viewed as collective as well as individual decisions in a functioning democracy. For these decisions to be made in a rational fashion, the public must have been educated to think critically, for when some narrow interest group seeks to maintain some form of irrational production (either as a whole or in part), it is inevitable that public relations and lobbying efforts will be launched which function, at least in part, to obfuscate public recognition of its own interests. For instance, it was in the narrow egocentric interest of asbestos manufacturers to minimize public disclosure of the health hazards of working and building with asbestos. The asbestos industry obscured the public interest to serve its own. As a result of the industry successfully protecting its vested interest, a mode of production was maintained for decades at great expense and loss in public health.\r\nSince it is unrealistic to expect industries with narrow vested interests to abandon those interests for the public good, it becomes necessary that the public be armed with the . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=226\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=226\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] How Critical Thinking is Sabotaged by Philosophers, Other Academicians and Business Charlatans - Linda Elder

Mar 11, 2024

We have recently been reviewing, editing, and beginning to release some of our older archive video and audio, including this audio from the 8th International Conference on Critical Thinking and Educational Reform sponsored by the Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique, our sister institution.

In this video, you can hear an early introduction by Gerald Nosich, along with some of Richard Paul’s 1988 comments on the state of critical thinking in education, as well as some lively personal anecdotes from his own higher education experiences.

Sadly, much of what Richard discusses in this keynote address in terms of problems in schooling are still prevalent today, 44 years after he established the Center for Critical Thinking. During the 1980’s, when these comments were made, Richard envisioned critical thinking being gradually but steadily incorporated and integrated across schooling at all levels. He imagined centers for critical thinking being established, first across the country and then internationally. This has not happened.

In some ways, the problem of the lack of critical thinking in K-12 schooling and higher education has worsened since before we had a rich conception of critical thinking from which to draw. This is true for several reasons. One primary reason is that the field of Informal Logic in philosophy early on grabbed the title Critical Thinking, so that critical thinking in academia continues to be dogged by argumentation and fallacy theory, both of which are secondary or peripheral, not primary, concepts in critical thinking (and both of which were prevalent before the concept of critical thinking was developed far beyond the narrow vision of philosophers).

Further, academicians from fields outside philosophy and outside critical thinking increasingly claim expertise in critical thinking when these academicians have little to no knowledge of explicit critical thinking concepts and principles, nor how to broadly foster critical thinking skills, abilities, and character traits in student thinking. These academicians treat the field of critical thinking as if they themselves are (without studying critical thinking) naturally versed in critical thinking. For instance, we now commonly see such course titles in higher education as Sociology and Critical Thinking, Psychology and Critical Thinking, Literature and Critical Thinking. This attitude and behavior toward critical thinking these same academicians would never countenance from others outside their fields laying claim to expertise within it.

Because critical thinking has not managed to establish itself as a field of study distinct from other academic fields, we increasingly hear that there is no established conception of critical thinking – when there is a shared conception based in first principles in critical thinking. And to make matters worse, because the term critical thinking appeals to the public as something naturally desirable (however vague their conceptions of it may be), we increasingly see charlatans hanging out their signs, digital or otherwise, in which they claim expertise in critical thinking. Business and academic leaders are led astray by the spurious or partial conceptions now parading as critical thinking.

For more on the history, concept and problems facing the advancement of critical thinking, read these articles from Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines:

https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/135/Elder_Paul__sContributionstotheFieldofCriticalThinkingStudies.pdf&page=1

https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/145/ReflectionsontheNatureofCriticalThinking_ItsHistory_Politics_andBarriers_andonItsStatusacrosstheCollege_UniversityCurriculumPartI.pdf&page=1

https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/146/ReflectionsontheNatureofCriticalThinking_ItsHistory_Politics_andBarriers_andonItsStatusacrosstheCollege_UniversityCurriculumPartII.pdf&page=1

{"id":"5580","title":"[FULL ENTRY] How Critical Thinking is Sabotaged by Philosophers, Other Academicians and Business Charlatans - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Mar 11, 2024\r\nWe have recently been reviewing, editing, and beginning to release some of our older archive video and audio, including <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=343\" target=\"_blank\">this audio</a> from the 8th International Conference on Critical Thinking and Educational Reform sponsored by the Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique, our sister institution. In this video, you can hear an early introduction by Gerald Nosich, along with some of Richard Paul’s 1988 comments on the state of critical thinking in education, as well as some lively personal anecdotes from his own higher education experiences. Sadly, much of what Richard discusses in this keynote address in terms of problems in schooling are still prevalent today, 44 years after he established the Center for Critical Thinking. During the 1980’s, when these comments were made, Richard envisioned critical thinking being gradually but steadily incorporated and integrated across schooling at all levels. He imagined centers for critical thinking being established, first across the country and then internationally. This has not happened. In some ways, the problem of the lack of critical thinking in K-12 schooling and higher education has worsened since before we had a rich conception of critical thinking from which to draw. This is true for several reasons. One primary reason is that the field of Informal Logic in philosophy early on grabbed the title Critical Thinking, so that critical thinking in academia continues to be dogged by argumentation and fallacy theory, both of which are secondary or peripheral, not primary, concepts in critical thinking (and both of which were prevalent before the concept of critical thinking was developed far beyond the narrow vision of philosophers). Further, academicians from fields outside philosophy and outside critical thinking increasingly claim expertise in critical thinking when these academicians have little to no knowledge of explicit critical thinking concepts and principles, nor how to broadly foster critical thinking skills, abilities, and character traits in student thinking. These academicians treat the field of critical thinking as if they themselves are (without studying critical thinking) naturally versed in critical thinking. For instance, we now commonly see such course titles in higher education as Sociology and Critical Thinking, Psychology and Critical Thinking, Literature and Critical Thinking. This attitude and behavior toward critical thinking these same academicians would never countenance from others outside their fields laying claim to expertise within it. Because critical thinking has not managed to establish itself as a field of study distinct from other academic fields, we increasingly hear that there is no established conception of critical thinking – when there is a shared conception based in first principles in critical thinking. And to make matters worse, because the term critical thinking appeals to the public as something naturally desirable (however vague their conceptions of it may be), we increasingly see charlatans hanging out their signs, digital or otherwise, in which they claim expertise in critical thinking. Business and academic leaders are led astray by the spurious or partial conceptions now parading as critical thinking. For more on the history, concept and problems facing the advancement of critical thinking, read these articles from Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/135/Elder_Paul__sContributionstotheFieldofCriticalThinkingStudies.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/135/Elder_Paul__sContributionstotheFieldofCriticalThinkingStudies.pdf&page=1</a> <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/145/ReflectionsontheNatureofCriticalThinking_ItsHistory_Politics_andBarriers_andonItsStatusacrosstheCollege_UniversityCurriculumPartI.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/145/ReflectionsontheNatureofCriticalThinking_ItsHistory_Politics_andBarriers_andonItsStatusacrosstheCollege_UniversityCurriculumPartI.pdf&page=1</a> <a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/146/ReflectionsontheNatureofCriticalThinking_ItsHistory_Politics_andBarriers_andonItsStatusacrosstheCollege_UniversityCurriculumPartII.pdf&page=1\" target=\"_blank\">https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/146/ReflectionsontheNatureofCriticalThinking_ItsHistory_Politics_andBarriers_andonItsStatusacrosstheCollege_UniversityCurriculumPartII.pdf&page=1</a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 3] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

Mar 05, 2024

What is the Nature of Human Productivity?

Production is, quite simply, the creation of some utility. The first question to ask, then, in probing the roots of productivity is, whose utility? Beyond production for sheer survival, utility must be judged from a human point of view; and all of the diversity and opposition that exists between conflicting points of view is reflected in judgments of the relative utility of diverse forms and modes of production and productivity.

Production and productivity can be looked at both quantitatively and qualitatively. Of greatest significance are the standards we use to assess production qualitatively. I suggest that the most pressing problem the world faces today is the problem of irrational production, of that production which wastefully expends human labor and precious resources for ends that would not be valued by rational persons nor be given priority in a rational society.

The modes and nature of production within any given society reflect the nature, development, and values of that society. Insofar as a society is democratic, the modes and nature of production will reflect democratic decision making regarding production. This reflects not only individual decisions that one might make as an autonomous “consumer” and vocational decision-maker but also collective decisions as a citizen who supports some given social and economic philosophy or other. For example, the decision to provide many hundreds of millions of dollars to subsidize . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5577","title":"[Part 3] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Mar 05, 2024\r\nWhat is the Nature of Human Productivity?\r\nProduction is, quite simply, the creation of some utility. The first question to ask, then, in probing the roots of productivity is, whose utility? Beyond production for sheer survival, utility must be judged from a human point of view; and all of the diversity and opposition that exists between conflicting points of view is reflected in judgments of the relative utility of diverse forms and modes of production and productivity.\r\nProduction and productivity can be looked at both quantitatively and qualitatively. Of greatest significance are the standards we use to assess production qualitatively. I suggest that the most pressing problem the world faces today is the problem of irrational production, of that production which wastefully expends human labor and precious resources for ends that would not be valued by rational persons nor be given priority in a rational society.\r\nThe modes and nature of production within any given society reflect the nature, development, and values of that society. Insofar as a society is democratic, the modes and nature of production will reflect democratic decision making regarding production. This reflects not only individual decisions that one might make as an autonomous “consumer” and vocational decision-maker but also collective decisions as a citizen who supports some given social and economic philosophy or other. For example, the decision to provide many hundreds of millions of dollars to subsidize . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=224\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] View our Latest Podcasts: Going Deeper - Egocentric and Sociocentric Thinking - Linda Elder

Feb 27, 2024

Dr. Nosich and I continue to discuss and explore the more complex theory and application of critical thinking through our podcast series, Critical Thinking: Going Deeper. I invite you to view our two latest podcasts focused on the twin barriers to critical thinking – Egocentric and sociocentric thinking:

1. The Human Mind: Going Deeper - Barriers to Critical Thinking, Part 1: Sociocentricity

2. The Human Mind: Going Deeper - Barriers to Critical Thinking, Part 1: Egocentricity

[Part 2] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

Feb 13, 2024

What is the Nature of Irrational Human Learning?

All learning has social and psychological as well as epistemological roots. Whatever we learn, we learn in some social setting and in the light of the inborn constitution of the human mind. There is a natural reciprocity between the nature of the human mind as we know it and society as we know it. The human mind – and we must understand it as it is, not as we may judge it ought to be – has a profound and natural tendency toward ethnocentrism. Both egocentrism and ethnocentrism are powerful impediments to rational learning and rational production. An irrational society tends to spawn irrational learning and inevitably generates irrational productivity. Both socially and individually, irrationality is the normal state of affairs in human life. It represents our primary nature, the side of us that needs no cultivation, that emerges willy-nilly in our earliest behaviors.

No one needs to teach young children to focus on their own interests and desires (to the relative exclusion of the rights, interests, and desires of others), to experience their desires as self-evidently “justified”, and to structure experience with their own egos at the center. They do this quite naturally and spontaneously. They and we are spontaneously motivated to . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5532","title":"[Part 2] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Feb 13, 2024\r\nWhat is the Nature of Irrational Human Learning? \r\nAll learning has social and psychological as well as epistemological roots. Whatever we learn, we learn in some social setting and in the light of the inborn constitution of the human mind. There is a natural reciprocity between the nature of the human mind as we know it and society as we know it. The human mind – and we must understand it as it is, not as we may judge it ought to be – has a profound and natural tendency toward ethnocentrism. Both egocentrism and ethnocentrism are powerful impediments to rational learning and rational production. An irrational society tends to spawn irrational learning and inevitably generates irrational productivity. Both socially and individually, irrationality is the normal state of affairs in human life. It represents our primary nature, the side of us that needs no cultivation, that emerges willy-nilly in our earliest behaviors.\r\nNo one needs to teach young children to focus on their own interests and desires (to the relative exclusion of the rights, interests, and desires of others), to experience their desires as self-evidently “justified”, and to structure experience with their own egos at the center. They do this quite naturally and spontaneously. They and we are spontaneously motivated to . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=222\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=222\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Target Major Stressors in Your Life that Lead to Anxiety, Depression or Other Negative Emotional States - Linda Elder

Feb 02, 2024

If you want to see your life change for the better, and if you find yourself frequently depressed, anxious or experiencing other pervasive negative emotional states that result from stress, you will need to change the way you think and react to ordinary, everyday events in your life that you perceive as stressful. You may need to change something about how you are living to remove this stress, or you may need to change the way you are perceiving the situation. Realize that dealing with complexities is simply part of living a human life. To eliminate them is impossible. The question is, how can you deal with the issues you face and the people around you without becoming unnecessarily stressed, worried, anxious, drained, or fatigued?

Some people more easily deflect unpleasant experiences and realities than others. They handle these circumstances as “water off a duck’s back,” which means not upsetting themselves about circumstances and people over which they have no control. Others must struggle to achieve this perspective on life; many never do. But all of us are capable of moving towards it by retraining our minds. This requires intellectual autonomy, or in other words, the willingness to stand alone in your beliefs while adhering to the principles of ethical critical thinking. It means keeping things in perspective and commanding your reactions and responses. Of course, in dire circumstances, it may or will be impossible not to be affected by life’s dark side; even then, and in every context, we want to be as little stressed over external circumstances as possible. Through this perspective, you are better able to use your energy to solve the problems that you face, both personally and in terms of contributing to a more civilized society.

Would you say you frequently feel stressed and tense? If so, write out in detail why this is so:

1. I feel stressed _____% of the time.

2. The primary conditions in my life that lead to this stress are . . .

3. The specific things I am doing to cause me to feel stressed are . . .

4. I need to change the following things in my thinking and my life to reduce my stress level . . .

5. Based on this analysis, I plan to make the following changes right away . . .

Be keenly aware of what situations lead you to high levels of stress. To help target specific causes of stress in these situations, work through the following activity each time you feel excessive stress:

1. Today the following situation happened in which I felt stressed . . .

2. I reacted as follows . . .

3. I realize now I could instead have reacted in the following way . . .

4. If I had reacted in this more reasonable way, I would have been happier because . . .

Come up with a long-term plan to keep from becoming overly stressed. Do you need new amusements or outlets for your stress? If so, detail what these might be and then act upon them in positive ways.

---

This material in this blog has been slightly modified from the upcoming book: Critical Thinking Therapy for Mental Health and Self-Actualization: Workbook, by Linda Elder, in press.

{"id":"5529","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Target Major Stressors in Your Life that Lead to Anxiety, Depression or Other Negative Emotional States - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Feb 02, 2024 \r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nIf you want to see your life change for the better, and if you find yourself frequently depressed, anxious or experiencing other pervasive negative emotional states that result from stress, you will need to change the way you think and react to ordinary, everyday events in your life that you perceive as stressful. You may need to change something about how you are living to remove this stress, or you may need to change the way you are perceiving the situation. Realize that dealing with complexities is simply part of living a human life. To eliminate them is impossible. The question is, how can you deal with the issues you face and the people around you without becoming unnecessarily stressed, worried, anxious, drained, or fatigued?\r\nSome people more easily deflect unpleasant experiences and realities than others. They handle these circumstances as “water off a duck’s back,” which means not upsetting themselves about circumstances and people over which they have no control. Others must struggle to achieve this perspective on life; many never do. But all of us are capable of moving towards it by retraining our minds. This requires intellectual autonomy, or in other words, the willingness to stand alone in your beliefs while adhering to the principles of ethical critical thinking. It means keeping things in perspective and commanding your reactions and responses. Of course, in dire circumstances, it may or will be impossible not to be affected by life’s dark side; even then, and in every context, we want to be as little stressed over external circumstances as possible. Through this perspective, you are better able to use your energy to solve the problems that you face, both personally and in terms of contributing to a more civilized society.\r\nWould you say you frequently feel stressed and tense? If so, write out in detail why this is so:\r\n1. I feel stressed _____% of the time.\r\n2. The primary conditions in my life that lead to this stress are . . .\r\na.\r\nb.\r\nc.\r\nd.\r\n3. The specific things I am doing to cause me to feel stressed are . . .\r\na.\r\nb.\r\nc.\r\nd.\r\n4. I need to change the following things in my thinking and my life to reduce my stress level . . .\r\na.\r\nb.\r\nc.\r\nd.\r\n5. Based on this analysis, I plan to make the following changes right away . . .\r\na.\r\nb.\r\nc.\r\nd.\r\nBe keenly aware of what situations lead you to high levels of stress. To help target specific causes of stress in these situations, work through the following activity each time you feel excessive stress:\r\n1. Today the following situation happened in which I felt stressed . . .\r\n2. I reacted as follows . . .\r\n3. I realize now I could instead have reacted in the following way . . .\r\n4. If I had reacted in this more reasonable way, I would have been happier because . . .\r\nCome up with a long-term plan to keep from becoming overly stressed. Do you need new amusements or outlets for your stress? If so, detail what these might be and then act upon them in positive ways.\r\n \r\n---\r\nThis material in this blog has been slightly modified from the upcoming book: Critical Thinking Therapy for Mental Health and Self-Actualization: Workbook, by Linda Elder, in press.\r\n</div>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[Part 1] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives

Jan 16, 2024

Abstract

In this paper, originally presented at the Annual Rupert N. Evans Symposium at the University of Illinois in 1985, Paul argues that productivity, development, and thinking are deeply interrelated. Consequently, societies concerned with their development and productivity must concern themselves with the nature of their educational systems, especially with whether or not the mass of citizens learn to think critically. Paul distinguishes rational from irrational productivity and argues that critical thinking is essential to rational productivity in a democratic world.

Irrational production, in Paul’s view, is productivity which “fails to serve the public good, insofar as it is production wasteful of non-renewable resources, destructive of public health, or at the expense of basic human needs”. As both capitalism and democracy develop as world forces, it is important that we recognize the struggle “between the ideal of democracy and protection of the public good, on the one hand, and the predictable drive on the part of vested interests to multiply their wealth and power irrespective of the public need or good, on the other . . . To the extent that it is possible for concentrations of wealth to saturate the media with images and messages that manipulate the public against its own interest, the forms of democracy become mere window dressing, mere appearance with no substantial reality.”

Paul believes that the human world we have created has been created with a minimum of critical thought, a minimum of public rationality. He is convinced, however, that we can no longer afford mass irrationality. For Paul, the tensions between democracy, unbridled capitalism, and the public good must be increasingly resolved by a genuinely educated, rational, citizenry.

Introduction

When we look upon learning in itself or productivity in itself or any other dimension of human life in itself, we look upon it with a partial view, as an abstraction from the real world in which all things exist in relationship. We then fail to see how it derives from relationship its true qualities. We view our object uncritically and narrowly. We fail to achieve the comprehensiveness genuine and deep understanding presupposes. In this paper, I emphasize the intimate reciprocal relation between learning and productivity, arguing that what we learn about the nature and problems of learning sheds light on the nature and problems of . . .

Continue Reading

{"id":"5523","title":"[Part 1] Critical Thinking, Human Development, and Rational Productivity - Richard Paul Archives","author":"","content":"Jan 16, 2024 \r\nAbstract\r\nIn this paper, originally presented at the Annual Rupert N. Evans Symposium at the University of Illinois in 1985, Paul argues that productivity, development, and thinking are deeply interrelated. Consequently, societies concerned with their development and productivity must concern themselves with the nature of their educational systems, especially with whether or not the mass of citizens learn to think critically. Paul distinguishes rational from irrational productivity and argues that critical thinking is essential to rational productivity in a democratic world.\r\nIrrational production, in Paul’s view, is productivity which “fails to serve the public good, insofar as it is production wasteful of non-renewable resources, destructive of public health, or at the expense of basic human needs”. As both capitalism and democracy develop as world forces, it is important that we recognize the struggle “between the ideal of democracy and protection of the public good, on the one hand, and the predictable drive on the part of vested interests to multiply their wealth and power irrespective of the public need or good, on the other . . . To the extent that it is possible for concentrations of wealth to saturate the media with images and messages that manipulate the public against its own interest, the forms of democracy become mere window dressing, mere appearance with no substantial reality.”\r\nPaul believes that the human world we have created has been created with a minimum of critical thought, a minimum of public rationality. He is convinced, however, that we can no longer afford mass irrationality. For Paul, the tensions between democracy, unbridled capitalism, and the public good must be increasingly resolved by a genuinely educated, rational, citizenry.\r\nIntroduction\r\nWhen we look upon learning in itself or productivity in itself or any other dimension of human life in itself, we look upon it with a partial view, as an abstraction from the real world in which all things exist in relationship. We then fail to see how it derives from relationship its true qualities. We view our object uncritically and narrowly. We fail to achieve the comprehensiveness genuine and deep understanding presupposes. In this paper, I emphasize the intimate reciprocal relation between learning and productivity, arguing that what we learn about the nature and problems of learning sheds light on the nature and problems of . . . \r\n<a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=220\" target=\"_blank\">Continue Reading</a><a href=\"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=220\" target=\"_blank\"> </a>\r\n ","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}

[FULL ENTRY] Don't Be Brainwashed by the News Media - Linda Elder

Jan 10, 2024

We are bombarded on every side by news. Some of it makes sense. Some of it is nonsense. To be a critical reviewer of news it is important to begin with some basic understandings.

First, every society and culture holds a unique worldview. This worldview shapes what people see and how they see it. It shapes perceptions and beliefs. In general terms, news media across the world reflect the worldview of their own cultures. This is true both because those who work in national news media share the same views as their readers and because they need to sell what people within the culture want to buy. They need to present the news in ways palatable and interesting to their audience (to increase their profits). In addition, there are cultures within cultures that create their own biased media within narrow, partial belief systems, and then feed on that media while validating one another in their biased beliefs.

Mainstream news coverage in any culture operates on the following (often unconscious) maxims:

• “This is how it appears to us from our point of view; therefore, this is the way it is.”

• “These are the facts that support our way of looking at this; therefore, these are the most important facts.”

• “These countries are friendly to us; therefore, these countries deserve praise.”

• “These countries are unfriendly to us; therefore, these countries deserve criticism.”

• “These are the stories most interesting or sensational to our readers; therefore, these are the most important stories in the news.”

Add to the general problem of national news bias the problem of advocacy journalism that advances narrow ideological interests on different points of the political spectrum, and you should perceive the negative implications of media bias, not only nationally, but politically as well.

The truth of what is happening in the world is far more complicated than what appears true to people in any culture - or within any culture within the culture. If you do not recognize bias in the news you expose yourself to; if you cannot detect ideology, slant, and spin; if you cannot recognize propaganda with news, you cannot reasonably determine what media messages must be supplemented, counterbalanced, or thrown out entirely. These insights are crucial to becoming a critical consumer of the news media and developing skills of media analysis.

Be on the lookout for…

…products of the news media throughout the day. Study the news carefully, noting how “friends” of one’s country are presented positively, whereas its “enemies” are presented negatively. Notice the not-so-important articles at the top of the page versus the important articles buried down lower. Notice significant world problems that are ignored or played down while the sensational is highlighted. Imagine how you would rewrite news stories to broaden their perspectives or to present issues more fairly. Make critical reading of the news a habit, not a rare event. Notice how news programs oversimplify the complex. Note how they target whatever they can sensationalize, and how they tend to dwell on stories that will be considered sensational by their viewers (rather than focusing on what is significant or deep). Note how they create and feed social hysteria (often around sexuality and what is considered criminal behavior). Note how news articles frequently feed into such trivialities as the superficial ways in which people like to adorn themselves and alter their appearance in order to be validated by others. Note the degree to which your chosen news outlets distort and mislead news consumers by feeding into their irrational fears and hysterias. Notice the important news that is not being covered or is only slightly mentioned.

Strategies for seeing through the news media:

• Study alternative perspectives and worldviews, learning how to interpret events from multiple perspectives.

• Seek understanding and insight through multiple sources of thought and information, not simply those of the mass media or of your chosen news outlets.

• Do not get your news from social media.

• Avoid political advocacy journalism news outlets.

• Learn how to identify the viewpoints embedded in news stories.

• Mentally rewrite (reconstruct) news stories through awareness of how they would be told from multiple perspectives.

• See news stories as one way of representing reality (as some blend of fact and interpretation).

• Assess news stories for their clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, and significance.

• Notice contradictions and inconsistencies in the news (often in the same story).

• Notice the fallacies that people in the news engage in, such as politicians (like falsely accusing other people of doing what they themselves are doing).

• Notice the agenda and interests a story serves.

• Notice the facts covered, the facts ignored, and the fact distorted.

• Notice what is represented as fact that should be presented as debatable.

• Notice assumptions implicit in stories.

• Notice what is implied but not openly stated.

• Notice what implications are ignored and what are highlighted.

• Notice which points of view are systematically presented favorably and which unfavorably.

• Mentally correct stories that reflect bias toward the unusual, the dramatic, and the sensational by putting them into perspective or discounting them.

• Notice when social conventions and taboos are used, inappropriately, to define issues and problems as unethical.

---

This blog piece slightly modified from 30 Days to Better Thinking and Better Living by Linda Elder and Richard Paul, 2013, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, pp. 127-129.

{"id":"5491","title":"[FULL ENTRY] Don't Be Brainwashed by the News Media - Linda Elder","author":"","content":"Jan 10, 2024\r\n<div class=\"maybeJSON ql-editor\" style=\"height: auto; overflow: hidden; padding-left: 5%; padding-right: 5%;\">\r\nWe are bombarded on every side by news. Some of it makes sense. Some of it is nonsense. To be a critical reviewer of news it is important to begin with some basic understandings.\r\nFirst, every society and culture holds a unique worldview. This worldview shapes what people see and how they see it. It shapes perceptions and beliefs. In general terms, news media across the world reflect the worldview of their own cultures. This is true both because those who work in national news media share the same views as their readers and because they need to sell what people within the culture want to buy. They need to present the news in ways palatable and interesting to their audience (to increase their profits). In addition, there are cultures within cultures that create their own biased media within narrow, partial belief systems, and then feed on that media while validating one another in their biased beliefs.\r\nMainstream news coverage in any culture operates on the following (often unconscious) maxims:\r\n• “This is how it appears to us from our point of view; therefore, this is the way it is.”\r\n• “These are the facts that support our way of looking at this; therefore, these are the most important facts.”\r\n• “These countries are friendly to us; therefore, these countries deserve praise.”\r\n• “These countries are unfriendly to us; therefore, these countries deserve criticism.”\r\n• “These are the stories most interesting or sensational to our readers; therefore, these are the most important stories in the news.”\r\nAdd to the general problem of national news bias the problem of advocacy journalism that advances narrow ideological interests on different points of the political spectrum, and you should perceive the negative implications of media bias, not only nationally, but politically as well.\r\nThe truth of what is happening in the world is far more complicated than what appears true to people in any culture - or within any culture within the culture. If you do not recognize bias in the news you expose yourself to; if you cannot detect ideology, slant, and spin; if you cannot recognize propaganda with news, you cannot reasonably determine what media messages must be supplemented, counterbalanced, or thrown out entirely. These insights are crucial to becoming a critical consumer of the news media and developing skills of media analysis.\r\nBe on the lookout for…\r\n…products of the news media throughout the day. Study the news carefully, noting how “friends” of one’s country are presented positively, whereas its “enemies” are presented negatively. Notice the not-so-important articles at the top of the page versus the important articles buried down lower. Notice significant world problems that are ignored or played down while the sensational is highlighted. Imagine how you would rewrite news stories to broaden their perspectives or to present issues more fairly. Make critical reading of the news a habit, not a rare event. Notice how news programs oversimplify the complex. Note how they target whatever they can sensationalize, and how they tend to dwell on stories that will be considered sensational by their viewers (rather than focusing on what is significant or deep). Note how they create and feed social hysteria (often around sexuality and what is considered criminal behavior). Note how news articles frequently feed into such trivialities as the superficial ways in which people like to adorn themselves and alter their appearance in order to be validated by others. Note the degree to which your chosen news outlets distort and mislead news consumers by feeding into their irrational fears and hysterias. Notice the important news that is not being covered or is only slightly mentioned.\r\nStrategies for seeing through the news media:\r\n• Study alternative perspectives and worldviews, learning how to interpret events from multiple perspectives.\r\n• Seek understanding and insight through multiple sources of thought and information, not simply those of the mass media or of your chosen news outlets.\r\n• Do not get your news from social media.\r\n• Avoid political advocacy journalism news outlets.\r\n• Learn how to identify the viewpoints embedded in news stories.\r\n• Mentally rewrite (reconstruct) news stories through awareness of how they would be told from multiple perspectives.\r\n• See news stories as one way of representing reality (as some blend of fact and interpretation).\r\n• Assess news stories for their clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, and significance.\r\n• Notice contradictions and inconsistencies in the news (often in the same story).\r\n• Notice the fallacies that people in the news engage in, such as politicians (like falsely accusing other people of doing what they themselves are doing).\r\n• Notice the agenda and interests a story serves.\r\n• Notice the facts covered, the facts ignored, and the fact distorted.\r\n• Notice what is represented as fact that should be presented as debatable.\r\n• Notice assumptions implicit in stories.\r\n• Notice what is implied but not openly stated.\r\n• Notice what implications are ignored and what are highlighted.\r\n• Notice which points of view are systematically presented favorably and which unfavorably.\r\n• Mentally correct stories that reflect bias toward the unusual, the dramatic, and the sensational by putting them into perspective or discounting them.\r\n• Notice when social conventions and taboos are used, inappropriately, to define issues and problems as unethical.\r\n---\r\nThis blog piece slightly modified from 30 Days to Better Thinking and Better Living by Linda Elder and Richard Paul, 2013, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, pp. 127-129.\r\n</div>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"0","sku":"","files":[],"images":[]}