Critical thinking what it is and why it counts

Critical Thinking:
What It Is and Why It Counts
Peter A. Facione

The late George Carlin worked weakness, public health problems, crime,
“critical thinking” into one of his comedic and avoidable poverty? Perhaps that
monologue rants on the perils of trusting our realization, along with its obvious
lives and fortunes to the decision-making of advantages for high level strategic decision
people who were gullible, uninformed, and making, is what lead the Chairman of the
unreflective. Had he lived to experience the Joint Chiefs of Staff to comment on critical
economic collapse of 2008 and 2009, he thinking in his commencement address to a
would have surely added more to his graduating class of military officers.
caustic but accurate assessments regarding
how failing to anticipate the consequences
of one’s decisions often leads to disastrous
results not only for the decision maker, but
for many other people as well.

After years of viewing higher
education as more of a private good which
benefits only the student, we are again
beginning to appreciate higher education as
being also a public good which benefits
society. Is it not a wiser social policy to
invest in the education of the future
workforce, rather than to suffer the financial
Teach people to make good
costs and endure the fiscal and social
decisions and you equip them to improve
burdens associated with economic
© 1992, 1998, 2004, 2006, 2011 Peter A. Facione, Measured Reasons and The California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Permission to Reprint for Non-Commercial Uses
This essay is published by Insight Assessment. The original appeared in 1992 and has been updated many times over the years.
Although the author and the publisher hold all copyrights, in the interests of advancing education and improving critical thinking,
permission is hereby granted for paper, electronic, or digital copies to be made in unlimited amounts, provided that their distribution
is free of charge provided that whenever material from this essay is cited or extracted in whole or in part that appropriate citation is
made by indicating this essay’s full title, author’s name, publisher’s name, year, and page or pages where it appears in this edition.
For permission for reprints intended for sale contact Insight Assessment by phone at 650-697-5628 or by email to
jmorante@insightassessment.com. ISBN 13: 978-1-891557-07-1.

To support the expenses of making this essay available free for non-commercial uses, the publisher has inserted information about
its critical thinking testing instruments. These tools assess the critical thinking skills and habits of mind described in this essay. To
build critical thinking skills and habits of mind use Dr. Facione’s newest book THINK_Critically, Pearson Education 2011.

their own futures and become contributing commonly used concept contains? Take
members of society, rather than burdens on care, though, we would not want to make
society. Becoming educated and practicing the definition so broad that all movie
good judgment does not absolutely violence would be automatically “offensive.”
guarantee a life of happiness, virtue, or And check to be sure your way of defining
economic success, but it surely offers a “offensive violence” fits with how the rest of
better chance at those things. And it is the people who know and use English
clearly better than enduring the would understand the term. Otherwise they
consequences of making bad decisions and will not be able to understand what you
better than burdening friends, family, and all mean when you use that expression.
the rest of us with the unwanted and
avoidable consequences of those poor Did you come up with a definition
choices. that works? How do you know?

Defining “Critical Thinking” What you just did with the
expression “offensive violence” is very much
Yes, surely we have all heard the same as what had to be done with the
business executives, policy makers, civic expression “critical thinking.” At one level
leaders, and educators talking about critical we all know what “critical thinking” means —
thinking. At times we found ourselves it means good thinking, almost the opposite
wondering exactly what critical thinking was of illogical, irrational, thinking. But when we
and why is it considered so useful and test our understanding further, we run into
important. This essay takes a deeper look at questions. For example, is critical thinking
these questions. the same as creative thinking, are they
different, or is one part of the other? How
But, rather than beginning with an do critical thinking and native intelligence or
abstract definition – as if critical thinking scholastic aptitude relate? Does critical
were about memorization, which is not the thinking focus on the subject matter or
case – give this thought experiment a try: content that you know or on the process you
Imagine you have been invited to a movie use when you reason about that content?
by a friend. But it’s not a movie you want to
see. So, your friend asks you why. You It might not hurt at all if you formed
give your honest reason. The movie some tentative preliminary ideas about the
offends your sense of decency. Your friend questions we just raised. We humans learn
asks you to clarify your reason by explaining better when we stop frequently to reflect,
what bothers you about the film. You reply rather than just plowing from the top of the
that it is not the language used or the page to the bottom without coming up for
sexuality portrayed, but you find the air.
violence in the film offensive. Fine. So how would you propose we
go about defining “critical thinking.” You do
Sure, that should be a good enough not really want a definition plopped on the
answer. But suppose your friend, perhaps page for you to memorize, do you? That
being a bit philosophically inclined or simply would be silly, almost counterproductive.
curious or argumentative, pursues the The goal here is to help you sharpen your
matter further by asking you to define what critical thinking skills and cultivate your
you mean by “offensive violence.” critical thinking spirit. While memorization
definitely has many valuable uses, fostering
Take a minute and give it a try. critical thinking is not among them. So, let’s
How would you define “offensive violence” look back at what you might have done to
as it applies to movies? Can you write a define “offensive violence” and see if we
characterization which captures what this can learn from you. Did you think of some

Facione, PA, “Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts” 2011 update Page 2

scenes in movies that were offensively when a person or a group of people decides
violent, and did you contrast them with other important matters without pausing first to
scenes that were either not violent or not think things through.
offensively violent? If you did, good. That is
one (but not the only) way to approach the
problem. Technically it is called finding
paradigm cases. Happily, like many things
in life, you do not have to know its name to
do it well.

Back to critical thinking – let’s ask
ourselves to come up with possible
examples of strong critical thinking? How Expert Opinion
about the adroit and clever questioning of
Socrates or a good attorney or interviewer? An international group of experts
Or, what about the clever investigative was asked to try to form a consensus about
approaches used by police detectives and the meaning of critical thinking.1 One of the
crime scene analysts? Would we not want first things they did was to ask themselves
to also include people working together to the question: Who are the best critical
solve a problem as they consider and thinkers we know and what is it about them
discuss their options? How about someone that leads us to consider them the best?
who is good at listening to all sides of a So, who are the best critical thinkers you
dispute, considering all the facts, and then know? Why do you think they are strong
deciding what is relevant and what is not, critical thinkers? Can you draw from those
and then rendering a thoughtful judgment? examples a description that is more
And maybe too, someone who is able to abstract? For example, consider effective
summarize complex ideas clearly with trial lawyers, apart from how they conduct
fairness to all sides, or a person who can their personal lives or whether their client is
come up with the most coherent and really guilty or innocent, just look at how the
justifiable explanation of what a passage of lawyers develop their cases in court. They
written material means? Or the person who use reasons to try to convince the judge and
can readily devise sensible alternatives to jury of their client’s claim to guilt or
explore, but who does not become innocence. They offer evidence and
defensive about abandoning them if they do evaluate the significance of the evidence
not work? And also the person who can presented by the opposition lawyers. They
explain exactly how a particular conclusion interpret testimony. They analyze and
was reached, or why certain criteria apply? evaluate the arguments advanced by the
other side.
Or, considering the concept of
critical thinking from the opposite direction,
we might ask what the consequences of 1
Many useful characterizations of critical thinking by noted
failing to use our critical thinking might be. theorists and teachers are captured in Conversations with
Critical Thinkers , John Esterle and Dan Clurman (Eds.).
Imagine for a moment what could happen Whitman Institute. San Francisco, CA. 1993


Now, consider the example of the Good. What can we learn about
team of people trying to solve a problem. critical thinking from such a case? Maybe
The team members, unlike the courtroom’s more than we can learn from just looking at
adversarial situation, try to collaborate. The the easy cases. For when a case is on the
members of an effective team do not borderline, it forces us to make important
compete against each other. They work in distinctions. It confronts us and demands a
concert, like colleagues, for the common decision: In or Out! And not just that, but
goal. Unless they solve the problem, none why? So, our friend who is fair-minded
of them has won. When they find the way about some things, but close-minded about
to solve the problem, they all have won. So, others, what to do? Let’s take the parts we
from analyzing just two examples we can approve of because they seem to us to
generalize something very important: critical contribute to acting rationally and logically
thinking is thinking that has a purpose and include those in the concept of critical
(proving a point, interpreting what thinking, and let’s take the parts that work
something means, solving a problem), but against reason, that close the mind to the
critical thinking can be a collaborative, possibility of new and relevant information,
noncompetitive endeavor. And, by the way, that blindly deny even the possibility that the
even lawyers collaborate. They can work other side might have merit, and call those
together on a common defense or a joint poor, counterproductive, or uncritical
prosecution, and they can also cooperate thinking.
with each other to get at the truth so that
justice is done.

We will come to a more precise
definition of critical thinking soon enough.
But first, there is something else we can
learn from paradigm examples. When you
were thinking about “offensive violence” did
you come up with any examples that were
tough to classify? Borderline cases, as it
were — an example that one person might
consider offensive but another might
reasonably regard as non-offensive. Yes,
well, so did we. This is going to happen
with all abstract concepts. It happens with
the concept of critical thinking as well. 2

There are people of whom we would say, on
certain occasions this person is a good Now, formulate a list of cases —
thinker, clear, logical, thoughtful, attentive to people that are clearly strong critical
the facts, open to alternatives, but, wow, at thinkers and clearly weak critical thinkers
other times, look out! When you get this and some who are on the borderline.
person on such-and-such a topic, well it is Considering all those cases, what is it about
all over then. You have pushed some kind them that led you to decide which were
of button and the person does not want to which? Suggestion: What can the strong
hear what anybody else has to say. The critical thinkers do (what mental abilities do
person’s mind is made up ahead of time. they have), that the weak critical thinkers
New facts are pushed aside. No other point have trouble doing? What skills or
of view is tolerated. approaches do the strong critical thinkers

Do you know any people that might 2
Spoken by the Vampire Marius in Ann Rice’s book The
fit that general description? Vampire Lestat Ballantine Books. New York, NY. 1985.


habitually seem to exhibit which the weak includes the sub-skills of categorization,
critical thinkers seem not to possess? decoding significance, and clarifying
meaning. Can you think of examples of
interpretation? How about recognizing a
problem and describing it without bias?
How about reading a person’s intentions in
the expression on her face; distinguishing a
main idea from subordinate ideas in a text;
constructing a tentative categorization or
way of organizing something you are
studying; paraphrasing someone’s ideas in
your own words; or, clarifying what a sign,
chart or graph means? What about
identifying an author’s purpose, theme, or
point of view? How about what you did
above when you clarified what “offensive
violence” meant?

Again from the experts: analysis is
Core Critical Thinking Skills “to identify the intended and actual
inferential relationships among statements,
Above we suggested you look for a questions, concepts, descriptions, or other
list of mental skills and habits of mind, the forms of representation intended to express
experts, when faced with the same problem belief, judgment, experiences, reasons,
you are working on, refer to their lists as information, or opinions.” The experts
including cognitive skills and dispositions. include examining ideas, detecting
arguments, and analyzing arguments as
As to the cognitive skills here is what sub-skills of analysis. Again, can you come
the experts include as being at the very core up with some examples of analysis? What
of critical thinking: interpretation, analysis, about identifying the similarities and
evaluation, inference, explanation, and self- differences between two approaches to the
regulation. (We will get to the dispositions solution of a given problem? What about
in just a second.) Did any of these words or picking out the main claim made in a
ideas come up when you tried to newspaper editorial and tracing back the
characterize the cognitive skills — mental various reasons the editor offers in support
abilities — involved in critical thinking? of that claim? Or, what about identifying
unstated assumptions; constructing a way
Quoting from the consensus to represent a main conclusion and the
statement of the national panel of experts: various reasons given to support or criticize
interpretation is “to comprehend and it; sketching the relationship of sentences or
express the meaning or significance of a paragraphs to each other and to the main
wide variety of experiences, situations, data,
events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, Education at The Pennsylvania State University
rules, procedures, or criteria.”3 Interpretation undertook a study of 200 policy-makers, employers,
and faculty members from two-year and four-year
colleges to determine what this group took to be the
3
The findings of expert consensus cited or reported core critical thinking skills and habits of mind. The
in this essay are published in Critical Thinking: A Pennsylvania State University Study, under the
Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of direction of Dr. Elizabeth Jones, was funded by the
Educational Assessment and Instruction. Peter A. US Department of Education Office of Educational
Facione, principle investigator, The California Research and Instruction. The Penn State study
Academic Press, Millbrae, CA, 1990. (ERIC ED 315 findings, published in 1994, confirmed the expert
423). In 1993/94 the Center for the Study of Higher consensus described in this paper.


purpose of the passage? What about statements, principles, evidence,
graphically organizing this essay, in your judgments, beliefs, opinions, concepts,
own way, knowing that its purpose is to give descriptions, questions, or other forms of
a preliminary idea about what critical representation.” As sub-skills of inference
thinking means? the experts list querying evidence,
conjecturing alternatives, and drawing
The experts define evaluation as conclusions. Can you think of some
meaning “to assess the credibility of examples of inference? You might suggest
statements or other representations which things like seeing the implications of the
are accounts or descriptions of a person’s position someone is advocating, or drawing
perception, experience, situation, judgment, out or constructing meaning from the
belief, or opinion; and to assess the logical elements in a reading. You may suggest
strength of the actual or intended inferential that predicting what will happen next based
relationships among statements, what is known about the forces at work in a
descriptions, questions or other forms of given situation, or formulating a synthesis of
representation.” Your examples? How related ideas into a coherent perspective.
about judging an author’s or speaker’s How about this: after judging that it would
credibility, comparing the strengths and be useful to you to resolve a given
weaknesses of alternative interpretations, uncertainty, developing a workable plan to
determining the credibility of a source of gather that information? Or, when faced
information, judging if two statements with a problem, developing a set of options
contradict each other, or judging if the for addressing it. What about, conducting a
evidence at hand supports the conclusion controlled experiment scientifically and
being drawn? Among the examples the applying the proper statistical methods to
experts propose are these: “recognizing the attempt to confirm or disconfirm an
factors which make a person a credible empirical hypothesis?
witness regarding a given event or a
credible authority with regard to a given Beyond being able to interpret,
topic,” “judging if an argument’s conclusion analyze, evaluate and infer, strong critical
follows either with certainty or with a high thinkers can do two more things. They can
level of confidence from its premises,” explain what they think and how they
“judging the logical strength of arguments arrived at that judgment. And, they can
based on hypothetical situations,” “judging if apply their powers of critical thinking to
a given argument is relevant or applicable themselves and improve on their previous
or has implications for the situation at hand.” opinions. These two skills are called
“explanation” and “self-regulation.”
Do the people you regard as strong
critical thinkers have the three cognitive The experts define explanation as
skills described so far? Are they good at being able to present in a cogent and
interpretation, analysis, and evaluation? coherent way the results of one’s reasoning.
What about the next three? And your This means to be able to give someone a
examples of weak critical thinkers, are they full look at the big picture: both “to state and
lacking in these cognitive skills? All, or just to justify that reasoning in terms of the
some? evidential, conceptual, methodological,
criteriological, and contextual considerations
To the experts inference means “to upon which one’s results were based; and
identify and secure elements needed to to present one’s reasoning in the form of
draw reasonable conclusions; to form cogent arguments.” The sub-skills under
conjectures and hypotheses; to consider explanation are describing methods and
relevant information and to educe the results, justifying procedures, proposing and
consequences flowing from data, defending with good reasons one’s causal


and conceptual explanations of events or The experts define self-regulation
points of view, and presenting full and well- to mean “self-consciously to monitor one’s
reasoned, arguments in the context of cognitive activities, the elements used in
seeking the best understandings possible. those activities, and the results educed,
Your examples first, please... Here are particularly by applying skills in analysis,
some more: to construct a chart which and evaluation to one’s own inferential
organizes one’s findings, to write down for judgments with a view toward questioning,
future reference your current thinking on confirming, validating, or correcting either
some important and complex matter, to cite one’s reasoning or one’s results.” The two
the standards and contextual factors used sub-skills here are self-examination and
to judge the quality of an interpretation of a self-correction. Examples? Easy — to
text, to state research results and describe examine your views on a controversial issue
the methods and criteria used to achieve with sensitivity to the possible influences of
those results, to appeal to established your personal biases or self-interest, to
criteria as a way of showing the check yourself when listening to a speaker
reasonableness of a given judgment, to in order to be sure you are understanding
design a graphic display which accurately what the person is really saying without
represents the subordinate and super- introducing your own ideas, to monitor how
ordinate relationship among concepts or well you seem to be understanding or
ideas, to cite the evidence that led you to comprehending what you are reading or
accept or reject an author’s position on an experiencing, to remind yourself to separate
issue, to list the factors that were your personal opinions and assumptions
considered in assigning a final course from those of the author of a passage or
grade. text, to double check yourself by
recalculating the figures, to vary your
Maybe the most remarkable reading speed and method mindful of the
cognitive skill of all, however, is this next type of material and your purpose for
one. This one is remarkable because it reading, to reconsider your interpretation or
allows strong critical thinkers to improve judgment in view of further analysis of the
their own thinking. In a sense this is critical facts of the case, to revise your answers in
thinking applied to itself. Because of that view of the errors you discovered in your
some people want to call this “meta- work, to change your conclusion in view of
cognition,” meaning it raises thinking to the realization that you had misjudged the
another level. But “another level” really importance of certain factors when coming
does not fully capture it, because at that to your earlier decision. 4
next level up what self-regulation does is
look back at all the dimensions of critical
thinking and double check itself. Self-
regulation is like a recursive function in
mathematical terms, which means it can
apply to everything, including itself. You
can monitor and correct an interpretation 4
The California Critical Thinking Skills Test, and the
you offered. You can examine and correct Test of Everyday Reasoning, the Health Science
an inference you have drawn. You can Reasoning Test, the Military and Defense Reasoning
review and reformulate one of your own Profile, The Business Critical Thinking Skills Test,
explanations. You can even examine and and the Legal Studies Reasoning Profile along with
correct your ability to examine and correct other testing instruments authored by Dr. Facione and
yourself! How? It is as simple as stepping his research team for people in K-12, college, and
graduate / professional work target the core critical
back and saying to yourself, “How am I thinking skills identified here. These instruments are
doing? Have I missed anything important? published in English and several authorized
Let me double check before I go further.” translations exclusively by Insight Assessment.


The Delphi Research Method published under the title Critical Thinking: A
Statement of Expert Consensus for
The panel of experts we keep Purposes of Educational Assessment and
referring to included forty-six men and Instruction. (The California Academic
women from throughout the United States Press, Millbrae, CA, 1990). You may
and Canada. They represented many download the executive summary of that
different scholarly disciplines in the report free. Visit
humanities, sciences, social sciences, and
education. They participated in a research http://www.insightassessment.com
project that lasted two years and was
conducted on behalf of the American You might be wondering how such a
Philosophical Association. Their work was large group of people could collaborate on


this project over that long a period of time Wait a minute! These are all well-
and at those distances and still come to known experts, so what do you do if people
consensus. Good question. Remember disagree? And what about the possible
we’re talking the days before e-mail. influence of a big name person? Good
points. First, the central investigator takes
Not only did the group have to rely precautions to remove names so that the
on snail mail during their two-year panelists are not told who said what. They
collaboration; they also relied on a method know who is on the panel, of course. But
of interaction, known as the Delphi Method, that is as far as it goes. After that each
which was developed precisely to enable experts’ argument has to stand on its own
experts to think effectively about something merits. Second, an expert is only as good
over large spans of distance and time. In as the arguments she or he gives. So, the
the Delphi Method a central investigator central investigator summarizes the
organizes the group and feeds them an arguments and lets the panelists decide if
initial question. [In this case it had to do they accept them or not. When consensus
with how college level critical thinking appears to be at hand, the central
should be defined so that people teaching at investigator proposes this and asks if
that level would know which skills and people agree. If not, then points of
dispositions to cultivate in their students.] disagreement among the experts are
The central investigator receives all registered. We want to share with you one
responses, summarizes them, and transmits important example of each of these. First
them back to all the panelists for reactions, we will describe the expert consensus view
replies, and additional questions. of the dispositions which are absolutely vital
to strong critical thinking. Then we will note
a point of separation among the experts.


The Disposition Toward Critical them grow weak with lack of practice. But
Thinking dancers get tired. And they surrender to the
stiffness of age or the fear of injury. In the
What kind of a person would be apt case of critical thinking skills, we might
to use their critical thinking skills? The argue that not using them once you have
experts poetically describe such a person them is hard to imagine. It’s hard to
as having “a critical spirit.” Having a critical imagine a person deciding not to think.
spirit does not mean that the person is
always negative and hypercritical of Considered as a form of thoughtful
everyone and everything. judgment or reflective decision-making, in a
very real sense critical thinking is
pervasive. There is hardly a time or a
The experts use the metaphorical place where it would not seem to be of
phrase critical spirit in a positive sense. By potential value. As long as people have
it they mean “a probing inquisitiveness, a purposes in mind and wish to judge how to
keenness of mind, a zealous dedication accomplish them, as long as people wonder
to reason, and a hunger or eagerness for what is true and what is not, what to believe
reliable information.” and what to reject, strong critical thinking is
going to be necessary.
Almost sounds like Supreme Court
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor or Sherlock And yet weird things happen, so it is
Holmes The kind of person being described probably true that some people might let
here is the kind that always wants to ask their thinking skills grow dull. It is easier to
“Why?” or “How?” or “What happens if?”. imagine times when people are just too
The one key difference, however, is that in tired, too lax, or too frightened. But imagine
fiction Sherlock always solves the mystery, it you can, Young Skywalker, so there has
while in the real world there is no guarantee.
Critical thinking is about how you approach
problems, questions, issues. It is the best
way we know of to get to the truth. But!
There still are no guarantees — no answers
in the back of the book of real life. Does
this characterization, that strong critical
thinkers possess a “critical spirit, a probing
inquisitiveness, a keenness of mind...” fit
with your examples of people you would call
strong critical thinkers?
to be more to critical thinking than just the
But, you might say, I know people list of cognitive skills. Human beings are
who have skills but do not use them. We more than thinking machines. And this
cannot call someone a strong critical thinker brings us back to those all-important
just because she or he has these cognitive attitudes which the experts called
skills, however important they might be, “dispositions.”
because what if they just do not bother to
apply them? The experts were persuaded that
critical thinking is a pervasive and
One response is to say that it is hard purposeful human phenomenon. The ideal
to imagine an accomplished dancer who critical thinker can be characterized not
never dances. After working to develop merely by her or his cognitive skills but also
those skills it seems such a shame to let by how she or he approaches life and living
in general. This is a bold claim. Critical


thinking goes way beyond the classroom. prudent people would want to ask to
In fact, many of the experts fear that some manage their investments!
of the things people experience in school
are actually harmful to the development and The experts went beyond
cultivation of strong critical thinking. Critical approaches to life and living in general to
thinking came before schooling was ever emphasize that strong critical thinkers can
invented, it lies at the very roots of also be described in terms of how they
civilization. It is a corner stone in the approach specific issues, questions, or
journey human kind is taking from beastly problems. The experts said you would find
savagery to global sensitivity. Consider these sorts of characteristics:
what life would be like without the things on
this list and we think you will understand. * clarity in stating the question or concern,
The approaches to life and living which * orderliness in working with complexity,
characterize critical thinking include: * diligence in seeking relevant information,
* reasonableness in selecting and applying criteria,
* inquisitiveness with regard to a wide range of * care in focusing attention on the concern at hand,
issues, * persistence though difficulties are encountered,
* concern to become and remain well-informed, * precision to the degree permitted by the subject and
* alertness to opportunities to use critical thinking, the circumstances.
* trust in the processes of reasoned inquiry,
* self-confidence in one’s own abilities to reason, So, how would a weak critical thinker
* open-mindedness regarding divergent world views, approach specific problems or issues?
* flexibility in considering alternatives and opinions Obviously, by being muddle-headed about
* understanding of the opinions of other people, what he or she is doing, disorganized and
* fair-mindedness in appraising reasoning, overly simplistic, spotty about getting the
* honesty in facing one’s own biases, prejudices, facts, apt to apply unreasonable criteria,
stereotypes, or egocentric tendencies, easily distracted, ready to give up at the
* prudence in suspending, making or altering least hint of difficulty, intent on a solution
judgments, that is more detailed than is possible, or
* willingness to reconsider and revise views where being satisfied with an overly generalized
honest reflection suggests that change is and uselessly vague response. Remind you
warranted. of anyone you know?

What would someone be like who Someone positively disposed toward
lacked those dispositions? using critical thinking would probably agree
with statements like these:
It might be someone who does not
care about much of anything, is not “I hate talk shows where people shout their
interested in the facts, prefers not to think, opinions but never give any reasons at all.”
mistrusts reasoning as a way of finding “Figuring out what people really mean by
what they say is important to me."
things out or solving problems, holds his or “I always do better in jobs where I'm
her own reasoning abilities in low esteem, is expected to think things out for myself.”
close-minded, inflexible, insensitive, cannot “I hold off making decisions until I have
understand what others think, is unfair when thought through my options.”
“Rather than relying on someone else's
it comes to judging the quality of arguments, notes, I prefer to read the material myself.”
denies his or her own biases, jumps to “I try to see the merit in another’s opinion,
conclusions or delays too long in making even if I reject it later.”
judgments, and never is willing to “Even if a problem is tougher than I
reconsider an opinion. Not someone expected, I will keep working on it.”
“Making intelligent decisions is more
important than winning arguments.”


place of “is a strong critical thinker” or “has
A person disposed to be averse or strong critical thinking skills.” This is not
hostile toward using critical thinking only a helpful conversational shortcut, it
would probably disagree with the suggests that to many people “critical
statements above but be likely to agree with thinker” has a laudatory sense. The word
these: can be used to praise someone at the same
time that it identifies the person, as in “Look
“I prefer jobs where the supervisor says at that play. That’s what I call a defender!”
exactly what to do and exactly how to do it."
“No matter how complex the problem, you
can bet there will be a simple solution.” “If we were compelled to make a
"I don't waste time looking things up." choice between these personal
“I hate when teachers discuss problems attributes and knowledge about
instead of just giving the answers.”
“If my belief is truly sincere, evidence to the the principles of logical
contrary is irrelevant." reasoning together with some
“Selling an idea is like selling cars, you say degree of technical skill in
whatever works."
manipulating special logical
processes, we should decide for
We used the expression “strong the former.”
critical thinker” to contrast with the
expression “weak critical thinker.” But you John Dewey, How We Think, 1909. Republished as
will find people who drop the adjective How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of
Reflective Thinking to the Educational Process. D. C.
“strong” (or “good”) and just say that Heath Publishing. Lexington, MA. 1933.
someone is a “critical thinker” or not. It is
like saying that a soccer (European
“football”) player is a “defender” or “not a We said the experts did not come to
defender”, instead of saying the player’s full agreement on something. That thing
skills at playing defense are strong or weak. has to do with the concept of a “strong
People use the word “defender” in place of critical thinker.” This time the emphasis is
the phrase “is good at playing defense.” on the word “good” because of a crucial
Similarly, people use “critical thinker” in


ambiguity it contains. A person can be would prefer to think that critical thinking, by
good at critical thinking, meaning that the its very nature, is inconsistent with the kinds
person can have the appropriate of unethical and deliberately
dispositions and be adept at the cognitive counterproductive examples given. They
processes, while still not being a good (in find it hard to imagine a person who was
the moral sense) critical thinker. For good at critical thinking not also being good
example, a person can be adept at in the broader personal and social sense.
developing arguments and then, unethically, In other words, if a person were “really” a
use this skill to mislead and exploit a gullible “strong critical thinker” in the procedural
person, perpetrate a fraud, or deliberately sense and if the person had all the
confuse and confound, and frustrate a appropriate dispositions, then the person
project. simply would not do those kinds of
exploitive and aggravating things.
The experts were faced with an
interesting problem. Some, a minority,

This self-rating form also appears in Chapter 3 of Think Critically, Pearson Education, 2011. For a fuller and more
robust measure of critical thinking dispositions see the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) by
Facione and Facione, published in 1992, by Insight Assessment.


The large majority, however, hold “Thinking” in Popular Culture
the opposite judgment. They are firm in the
view that strong critical thinking has nothing We have said so many good things
to do with any given set of cultural beliefs, about critical thinking that you might have
religious tenants, ethical values, social the impression that “critical thinking” and
mores, political orientations, or orthodoxies “good thinking” mean the same thing. But
of any kind. Rather, the commitment one that is not what the experts said. They see
makes as a strong critical thinker is to critical thinking as making up part of what
always seek the truth with objectivity, we mean by good thinking, but not as being
integrity, and fair-mindedness. The majority the only kind of good thinking. For example,
of experts maintain that critical thinking they would have included creative thinking
conceived of as we have described it above, as part of good thinking.
is, regrettably, not inconsistent with abusing
one’s knowledge, skills, or power. There Creative or innovative thinking is the
have been people with superior thinking kind of thinking that leads to new insights,
skills and strong habits of mind who, novel approaches, fresh perspectives,
unfortunately, have used their talents for whole new ways of understanding and
ruthless, horrific, and immoral purposes. conceiving of things. The products of
Would that it were not so! Would that creative thought include some obvious
experience, knowledge, mental horsepower, things like music, poetry, dance, dramatic
and ethical virtue were all one and the literature, inventions, and technical
same. But from the time of Socrates, if not innovations. But there are some not so
thousands of years before that, humans obvious examples as well, such as ways of
have known that many of us have one or putting a question that expand the horizons
more of these without having the full set. of possible solutions, or ways of conceiving
of relationships which challenge
Any tool, any approach to situations, presuppositions and lead one to see the
can go either way, ethically speaking, world in imaginative and different ways.
depending on the character, integrity, and
principles of the persons who possess The experts working on the concept
them. So, in the final analysis the majority of critical thinking wisely left open the entire
of experts maintained that we cannot say a question of what the other forms good
person is not thinking critically simply thinking might take. Creative thinking is
because we disapprove ethically of what the only one example. There is a kind of
person is doing. The majority concluded purposive, kinetic thinking that instantly
that, “what ‘critical thinking’ means, why it is coordinates movement and intention as, for
of value, and the ethics of its use are best example, when an athlete dribbles a soccer
regarded as three distinct concerns.” ball down the field during a match. There is
a kind of meditative thinking which may
Perhaps this realization forms part of lead to a sense of inner peace or to
the basis for why people these days are profound insights about human existence.
demanding a broader range of learning In contrast, there is a kind of hyper-alert,
outcomes from our schools and colleges. instinctive thinking needed by soldiers in
“Knowledge and skills,” the staples of the battle. In the context of popular culture one
educational philosophy of the mid-twentieth finds people proposing all kinds of thinking
century, are not sufficient. We must look to or this-kind of intelligence or that-kind of
a broader set of outcomes including habits intelligence. Some times it is hard to sort out
of mind and dispositions, such as civic the science from the pseudo-science – the
engagement, concern for the common kernel of enduring truth from the latest
good, and social responsibility. cocktail party banter.


“Thinking” in Cognitive Science precisely because drivers are able to see
and react to dangerous situations so
Theories emerging from more scientific quickly. Many good decisions which feel
studies of human thinking and decision- intuitive are really the fruit of expertise.
making in recent years propose that thinking Decisions good drivers make in those
is more integrated and less dualistic than moments of crisis, just like the decisions
the notions in popular culture suggest. We which practiced athletes make in the flow of
should be cautious about proposals a game or the decisions that a gifted
suggesting oversimplified ways of teacher makes as she or he interacts with
understanding how humans think. We students, are borne of expertise, training,
should avoid harsh, rigid dichotomies such and practice.
as “reason vs. emotion,” “intuitive vs. linear,”
“creativity vs. criticality,” “right brained vs. At the same time that we are
left brained,” “as on Mars vs. as on Venus.” immersed in the world around us and in our
daily lives, constantly making decisions
There is often a kernel of wisdom in unreflectively, we may also be thinking quite
popular beliefs, and perhaps that gem this reflectively about something. Perhaps we’re
time is the realization that some times we worried about a decision which we have to
decide things very quickly almost as make about an important project at work, or
spontaneous, intuitive, reactions to the about a personal relationship, or about a
situation at hand. Many accidents on the legal matter, whatever. We gather
freeways of this nation are avoided information, consider our options, explore


possibilities, formulate some thoughts about review and revise our work in the light of
what we propose to do and why this choice relevant guidelines or standards or rules of
is the right one. In other words, we make a procedure. While System 2 decisions are
purposeful, reflective judgment about what also influenced by the correct or incorrect
to believe or what to do – precisely the kind application of heuristic maneuvers, this is
of judgment which is the focus of critical the system which relies on well articulated
thinking. reasons and more fully developed evidence.
It is reasoning based on what we have
Recent integrative models of human learned through careful analysis, evaluation,
decision-making propose that the thinking explanation, and self-correction. This is the
processes of our species is not best system which values intellectual honesty,
described as a conflictive duality as in analytically anticipating what happens next,
“intuitive vs. reflective” but rather an maturity of judgment, fair-mindedness,
integrative functioning of two mutually elimination of biases, and truth-seeking.
supportive systems “intuitive and reflective.” This is the system which we rely on to think
These two systems of thinking are present carefully trough complex, novel, high-
in all of us and can act in parallel to process stakes, and highly integrative problems.5
cognitively the matters over which we are
deciding. Educators urge us to improve our
critical thinking skills and to reinforce our
One system is more intuitive, disposition to use those skills because that
reactive, quick and holistic. So as not to is perhaps the best way to develop and
confuse things with the notions of thinking in refine our System 2 reasoning.
popular culture, cognitive scientists often
name this system, “System 1.” The other System 1 and System 2 are both
(yes, you can guess its name) is more believed to be vital decision-making tools
deliberative, reflective, computational and when stakes are high and when uncertainty
rule governed. You are right, it is called is an issue. Each of these two cognitive
“System 2.” systems are believed to be capable of
functioning to monitor and potentially
In System 1 thinking, one relies override the other. This is one of the ways
heavily on a number of heuristics (cognitive our species reduces the chance of making
maneuvers), key situational characteristics, foolish, sub-optimal or even dangerous
readily associated ideas, and vivid errors in judgment. Human thinking is far
memories to arrive quickly and confidently from perfect. Even a good thinker makes
at a judgment. System 1 thinking is both System 1 and 2 errors. At times we
particularly helpful in familiar situations misinterpret things, or we get our facts
when time is short and immediate action is wrong, and we make mistakes as a result.
required.
5
Chapters 9 and 10 of Think Critically, Pearson
While System 1 is functioning,
Education, 2011, locate critical thinking within this
another powerful system is also at work, integrative model of thinking. The cognitive heuristics,
that is, unless we shut it down by abusing which will be described next, and the human capacity
alcohol or drugs, or with fear or indifference. to derive sustained confidence decisions (right or
Called “System 2,” this is our more wrong),-- known as “dominance structuring,” – are
presented there too. There are lots of useful exercises
reflective thinking system. It is useful for and examples in that book. You may also wish to
making judgments when you find yourself in consult the references listed at the end of this essay.
unfamiliar situations and have more time to The material presented in this section is derived from
figure things out. It allows us to process these books and related publications by many of
these same authors and others working to
abstract concepts, to deliberate, to plan
scientifically explain how humans actually make
ahead, to consider options carefully, to decisions.


But often our errors are directly related to negative reaction to some idea, proposal,
the influences and misapplications of person, object, whatever. Sometimes called
cognitive heuristics. Because we share the a “gut reaction” this affective response sets
propensity to use these heuristics as we up an initial orientation in us, positive or
make decisions, let’s examine how some of negative, toward the object. It takes a lot of
them influence us. System 2 reasoning to overcome a powerful
affective response to an idea, but it can be
done. And at times it should be, because
there is no guarantee that your gut reaction
is always right.

The Association heuristic is
operating when one word or idea reminds
us of something else. For example, some
people associate the word “cancer” with
“death.” Some associate “sunshine” with
“happiness.” These kinds of associational
reasoning responses can be helpful at
times, as for example if associating cancer
with death leads you not to smoke and to go
in for regular checkups. At other times the
same association may influence a person to
Cognitive heuristics are thinking make an unwise decision, as for example if
maneuvers which, at times, appear to be associating “cancer” with “death” were to
almost hardwired into our species. They lead you to be so fearful and pessimistic
influence both systems of thinking, the that you do not seek diagnosis and
intuitive thinking of System 1 and the treatment of a worrisome cancer symptom
reflective reasoning of System 2. Five until it was really too late to do anything.
heuristics often seem to be more frequently
operating in our System 1 reasoning are The Simulation heuristic is working
known as availability, affect, association, when you are imagining how various
simulation, and similarity. scenarios will unfold. People often imagine
how a conversation will go, or how they will
Availability, the coming to mind of a be treated by someone else when they
story or vivid memory of something that meet the person, or what their friends or
happened to you or to someone close to boss or lover will say and do when they
you, inclines a person make inaccurate have to address some difficult issue. These
estimates of the likelihood of that thing’s simulations, like movies in our heads, help
happening again. People tell stories of us prepare and do a better job when the
things that happened to themselves or their difficult moment arrives. But they can also
friends all the time as a way of explaining lead us to have mistaken expectations.
their own decisions. The stories may not be People may not respond as we imagined,
scientifically representative, the events may things may go much differently. Our
be mistaken, misunderstood, or preparations may fail us because the ease
misinterpreted. But all that aside, the power of our simulation misled us into thinking that
of the story is to guide, often in a good way, things would have to go as we had
the decision toward one choice rather than imagined them. And they did not.
another.
The Similarity heuristic operates
The Affect heuristic operates when when we notice some way in which we are
you have an immediate positive or an like someone else and infer that what


happened to that person is therefore more the time each of the decisions along the
likely to happen to us. The similarity way was “good enough for the time being.”
heuristic functions much like an analogical
argument or metaphorical model. The We are by nature a species that is
similarity we focus on might be fundamental averse to risk and loss. Often we make
and relevant, which would make the decisions on the basis of what we are too
inference more warranted. For example, the worried about losing, rather than on the
boss fired your coworker for missing sales basis of what we might gain. This works out
targets and you draw the reasonable to be a rather serviceable approach in many
conclusion that if you miss your sales circumstances. People do not want to lose
targets you’ll be fired too. Or the similarity control, they do not want to lose their
that comes to mind might be superficial or freedom, they do not want to lose their lives,
not connected with the outcome, which their families, their jobs, their possessions.
would make the inference unwarranted. For High stakes gambling is best left to those
example you see a TV commercial showing who can afford to lose the money. Las
trim-figured young people enjoying fattening Vegas didn’t build all those multi-million
fast foods and infer that because you’re dollar casino hotels because vacationers
young too you can indulge your cravings for are winning all the time! And so, in real life,
fast foods without gaining a lot of excess we take precautions. We avoid
unsightly poundage. unnecessary risks. The odds may not be
stacked against us, but the consequences
Heuristics and biases often of losing at times are so great that we would
appearing to be somewhat more associated prefer to forego the possibilities of gain in
with System 2 thinking include: satisficing, order not to lose what we have. And yet, on
risk/loss aversion, anchoring with occasion this can be a most unfortunate
adjustment, and the illusion of control. decision too. History has shown time and
time again that businesses which avoid
Satisficing occurs as we consider risks often are unable to compete
our alternatives. When we come to one successfully with those willing to move more
which is good enough to fulfill our objectives boldly into new markets or into new product
we often regard ourselves as having lines.
completed our deliberations. We have
satisficed. And why not? The choice is, Any heuristic is only a maneuver,
after all, good enough. It may not be perhaps a shortcut or impulse to think or act
perfect, it may not be optimal, it may not in one way rather than another, but certainly
even be the best among the options not a failsafe rule. It may work out well
available. But it is good enough. Time to much of the time to rely on the heuristic, but
decide and move forward. it will not work out for the best all of the
time.
The running mate of satisficing is
temporizing. Temporizing is deciding that For example, people with something
the option which we have come to is “good to lose tend toward conservative choices
enough for now.” We often move through politically as well as economically. Nothing
life satisficing and temporizing. At times we wrong with that necessarily. Just an
look back on our situations and wonder why observation about the influence of Loss
it is that we have settled for far less than we Aversion heuristic on actual decision
might have. If we had only studied harder, making. We are more apt to endure the
worked out a little more, taken better care of status quo, even as it slowly deteriorates,
ourselves and our relationships, perhaps we than we are to call for “radical” change.
would not be living as we are now. But, at Regrettably, however, when the call for
change comes, it often requires a far


greater upheaval to make the necessary future events may be quite negligible. At
transformations, or, on occasion, the times we do have some measure of control.
situation has deteriorated beyond the point For example we may exercise, not smoke,
of no return. In those situations we find and watch our diet in order to be more fit
ourselves wondering why we waited so long and healthy. We are careful not to drink if
before doing something. we are planning to drive so that we reduce
the risks of being involved in a traffic
The heuristic known as Anchoring accident. But at times we simply are
with Adjustment is operative when we find mistaken about our ability to actually
ourselves making evaluative judgments. exercise full control over a situation. Sadly
The natural thing for us to do is to locate or we might become ill even if we do work hard
anchor our evaluation at some point along to take good care of ourselves. Or we may
whatever scale we are using. For example, be involved in an accident even if we are
a professor says that the student’s paper is sober. Our business may fail even if we
a C+. Then, as other information comes our work very hard to make it a success. We
way, we may adjust that judgment. The may not do as well on an exam as we might
professor, for example, may decide that the hope even if we study hard.
paper is as good as some others that were
given a B-, and so adjust the grade upward. Related to the Illusion of Control
The interesting thing about this heuristic, is heuristic is the tendency to misconstrue our
that we do not normally start over with a personal influence or responsibility for past
fresh evaluation. We have dropped anchor events. This is called Hindsight Bias. We
and we may drag it upward or downward a may over-estimate the influence our actions
bit, but we do not pull it off the bottom of the have had on events when things go right, or
sea to relocate our evaluation. First we may underestimate our responsibility or
impressions, as the saying goes, cannot be culpability when things go wrong. We have
undone. The good thing about this heuristic all heard people bragging about how they
is that it permits us to move on. We have did this and how they did that and, as a
done the evaluation; there are other papers result, such and such wonderful things
to grade, other projects to do, other things in happened. We made these great plans and
life that need attention. We could not long look how well our business did financially.
endure if we had to constantly re-evaluate Which may be true when the economy is
every thing anew. The unfortunate thing strong; but not when the economy is failing.
about this heuristic is that we sometimes It is not clear how much of that success
drop anchor in the wrong place; we have a came from the planning and how much
hard time giving people a second chance at came from the general business
making a good first impression. environment. Or, we have all been in the
room when it was time to own up for some
The heuristic known as Illusion of thing that went wrong and thought to
Control is evident in many situations. Many ourselves, hey, I may have had some part in
of us over-estimate our abilities to control this, but it was not entirely my fault. “It
what will happen. We make plans for how wasn’t my fault the children were late for
we are going to do this or that, say this or school, hey I was dressed and ready to go
that, manipulate the situation this way or at the regular time.” As if seeing that the
that way, share or not share this information family was running late I had no
or that possibility, all the time thinking that responsibility to take some initiative and
some how our petty plans will enable us to help out.
control what happens. We act as if others
are dancing on the ends of the strings that
we are pulling, when in actuality the
influences our words or actions have on


“Insanity is doing the same not what happens.6 When seeking to
explain how people decide on an option with
thing over and over again while such conviction that they stick to their
expecting a different outcome.” decision over time and with such confidence
that they act on that decision, the concept
that what we do is build a Dominance
Albert Einstein Structure has been put forth. In a nutshell
this theory suggests that when we settle on
Research on our shared heuristic a particular option which is good enough we
patterns of decision-making does not aim to tend to elevate its merits and diminish its
evaluate these patterns as necessarily good flaws relative to the other options. We raise
or bad patterns of thinking. I fear that my it up in our minds until it becomes for us the
wording of them above may not have been dominant option. In this way, as our
as entirely neutral and descriptive as decision takes shape, we gain confidence in
perhaps it should have been. In truth, our choice and we feel justified in
reliance on heuristics can be an efficient dismissing the other options, even though
ways of deciding things, given how very the objective distance between any of them
complicated our lives are. We cannot and our dominant option may not be very
devote maximal cognitive resources to great at all. But we become invested in our
every single decision we make. dominant option to the extent that we are
Those of us who study these able to put the other possibilities aside and
heuristic thinking phenomena are simply act on the basis of our choice. In fact, it
trying to document how we humans do comes to dominate the other options in our
think. There are many useful purposes for minds so much that we are able to sustain
doing this. For example, if we find that our decision to act over a period of time,
people repeatedly make a given kind of rather than going back to re-evaluate or
mistake when thinking about a commonly reconsider constantly. Understanding the
experienced problem, then we might find natural phenomenon of dominance
ways to intervene and to help ourselves not structuring can help us appreciate why it
repeat that error over and over again. can be so difficult for us to get others to
change their minds, or why it seems that our
This research on the actual patterns reasons for our decisions are so much
of thinking used by individuals and by better than any of the objections which
groups might prove particularly valuable to others might make to our decisions. This is
those who seek interventions which could not to say that we are right or wrong.
improve how we make our own heath care Rather, this is only to observe that human
decisions, how we make business beings are capable of unconsciously
decisions, how we lead teams of people to building up defenses around their choices
work more effectively in collaborative which can result in the warranted or
settings, and the like. unwarranted confidence to act on the basis
of those choices.
Popular culture offers one other
myth about decision-making which is worth
questioning. And that is the belief that when
we make reflective decisions we carefully 6
Henry Montgomery, “From cognition to action: The
weigh each of our options, giving due
search for dominance in decision making.” In Process
consideration to all of them in turn, before and Structure in Human Decision-Making,
deciding which we will adopt. Although Montgomery H, Svenson O (Eds). John Wiley & Sons:
perhaps it should be, research on human Chichester, UK, 1989. For a more accessible
decision-making shows that this simply is description along with reflective exercises on how to
avoid becoming “locked in” to a poor decision
prematurely, see chapter 10 of Think Critically.


Realizing the power of dominance you have greater success in your work?
structuring, one can only be more Would you get better grades?
committed to the importance of education
and critical thinking. We should do all that Actually the answer to the grades
we can to inform ourselves fully and to question, scientifically speaking, is very
reflect carefully on our choices before we possibly, Yes! A study of over 1100 college
make them, because we are, after all, students shows that scores on a college
human and we are as likely as the next level critical thinking skills test significantly
person to believe that we are right and they correlated with college GPA.7 It has also
are wrong once the dominance structure been shown that critical thinking skills can
begins to be erected. Breaking through that be learned, which suggests that as one
to fix bad decisions, which is possible, can learns them one’s GPA might well improve.
be much harder than getting things right in In further support of this hypothesis is the
the first place. significant correlation between critical
thinking and reading comprehension.
There are more heuristics than only Improvements in the one are paralleled by
those mentioned above. There is more to improvements in the other. Now if you can
learn about dominance structuring as it read better and think better, might you not
occurs in groups as well as in individuals, do better in your classes, learn more, and
and how to mitigate the problems which get better grades. It is, to say the least,
may arise by prematurely settling on a very plausible.
“good enough” option, or about how to craft
educational programs or interventions which Learning, Critical Thinking, and Our
help people be more effective in their Nation’s Future
System 1 and System 2 thinking. There is
much to learn about human thinking and “The future now belongs to societies
how to optimize it in individuals of different that organize themselves for learning...
ages; how to optimize the thinking of groups nations that want high incomes and full
employment must develop policies that
of peers and groups where organizational
emphasize the acquisition of knowledge
hierarchies influence interpersonal and skills by everyone, not just a select
dynamics. And, happily, there is a lot we few.”
know today about human thinking and
decision-making that we did not know a few Ray Marshall & Marc Tucker, Thinking For A Living:
years ago. Education And The Wealth of Nations, Basic Books. New
York. 1992.

Why critical thinking? But what a limited benefit — better
grades. Who really cares in the long run?
Let us start with you first. Why Two years after college, five years out, what
would critical thinking be of value to you to does GPA really mean? Right now college
have the cognitive skills of interpretation,
analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation,
and self-regulation? 7
Findings regarding the effectiveness of critical
thinking instruction, and correlations with GPA and
Apart from, or maybe in light of, what reading ability are reported in “Technical Report #1,
Experimental Validation and Content Validity” (ERIC
we said at the beginning of this essay about
ED 327 549), “Technical Report #2, Factors
the utility of positive critical thinking and Predictive of CT Skills” (ERIC ED 327 550), and
about the problems that failures of critical “Gender, Ethnicity, Major, CT Self-Esteem, and the
thinking contribute to, why would it be of California Critical Thinking Skills Test” (ERIC ED 326
value to you to learn to approach life and to 584). These findings remain consistent in research
using the tools in the California Critical Thinking Skills
approach specific concerns with the critical Test family of instruments published by Insight
thinking dispositions listed above? Would Assessment.


level technical and professional programs challenge, question, and dissent. In fact,
have a half-life of about four years, which this is exactly what the professors want.
means that the technical content is They want their students to excel on their
expanding so fast and changing so much own, to go beyond what is currently known,
that in about four years after graduation to make their own contributions to
your professional training will be in serious knowledge and to society. [Being a
need of renewal. So, if the only thing a professor is a curious job — the more
college is good for is to get the entry level effective you are as a teacher, less your
training and the credential needed for some students require your aid in learning.]
job, then college would be a time-limited
value. Liberal education is about learning
to learn, which means learning to think for
yourself on your own and in collaboration
with others.

Liberal education leads us away
from naive acceptance of authority, above
self-defeating relativism, and beyond
ambiguous contextualism. It culminates in
principled reflective judgment. Learning
critical thinking, cultivating the critical spirit,
is not just a means to this end, it is part of
the goal itself. People who are weak critical
thinkers, who lack the dispositions and skills
described, cannot be said to be liberally
The APA Delphi Report, educated, regardless of the academic
Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert degrees they may hold.
Consensus for Purposes of Educational
Assessment and Instruction Yes, there is much more to a liberal
1990 ERIC Doc. NO.: ED 315 423
education, than critical thinking. There is an
understanding of the methods, principles,
Is that the whole story? A job is a theories and ways of achieving knowledge
good thing, but is that what a college which are proper to the different intellectual
education is all about, getting started in a realms. There is an encounter with the
good job? Maybe some cannot see its cultural, artistic and spiritual dimensions of
further value, but many do. A main life. There is the evolution of one’s decision
purpose, if not the main purpose, of the making to the level of principled integrity
collegiate experience, at either the two-year and concern for the common good and
or the four-year level, is to achieve what social justice. There is the realization of the
people have called a “liberal education.” ways all our lives are shaped by global as
Not liberal in the sense of a smattering of well as local political, social, psychological,
this and that for no particular purpose economic, environmental, and physical
except to fulfill the unit requirement. But forces. There is the growth that comes from
liberal in the sense of “liberating.” And who the interaction with cultures, languages,
is being liberated? You! Liberated from a ethnic groups, religions, nationalities, and
kind of slavery. But from whom? social classes other than one’s own. There
is the refinement of one’s humane
From professors. Actually from sensibilities through reflection on the
dependence on professors so that they no recurring questions of human existence,
longer stand as infallible authorities meaning, love, life and death. There is the
delivering opinions beyond our capacity to sensitivity, appreciation and critical


Critical thinking what it is and why it counts

Critical thinking what it is and why it counts

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Critical thinking what it is and why it counts

Similar to Critical thinking what it is and why it counts (18)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Critical thinking what it is and why it counts