Critical Thinking Philosophy - Essay Example

Critical thinking philosophy To be able to think clearly and rationally implies the presence of critical thinking in an individual. The ability to apply independent logic and rationale behind any idea is indicative of critical thinking. A person with critical thinking skills is able to solve problems in a systematic manner, recognize and construct arguments before evaluating them, see common mistakes and inconsistencies in reasoning, put forward the relevance and importance of thoughts and have the capacity for reflection on justifying one’s own beliefs and principles. Being able to think and rationalize clearly is the core of critical thinking. According to Dr. Peter A Facione, “we understand critical thinking to be purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. CT is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such, CT is a liberating force in education and a powerful resource in one’s personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good thinking, CT is a pervasive and self-rectifying human phenomenon…” (Facione). Clarity and rationality is the common element binding all critical thinking. Critical thinking is simply not a matter of storing information. Just a good memory and knowledge of facts does not make a good critical thinker. It is the ability to deduce the end results from information available, to have the skill to utilize that information to solve problems and to keep himself updated with relevant sources of information makes the critical thinker stand out from the mugger. Critical thinking is used to show bad reasoning and inconsistencies in arguments and ideas but this does not imply that it is solely used for this purpose only. Critical thinking is not about being argumentative for the sake of arguments or simply criticizing the thoughts and ideas of other people. It is more a question of logically searching for reason behind those ideas and pointing out any errors, if such. It helps us gain knowledge and improve our ideas and theories. It is also the basis of science and the cornerstone of a liberal, democratic society. Reason has to be used in experiments of science. Only then can the theories be confirmed. A democratic society to function properly requires that its citizens have the critical thinking power to analyze the social issues concerning society and the governance of that society without any bias or prejudices. Only if the citizens are aware objectively about issues concerning the society can they make it a dynamic place. If citizens lack the power of critical thinking, there will be stagnation as errors cannot be detected, results cannot be evaluated and ‘ennui’ will set in. As a result, society will become static and lose dynamism. Theorists have held that the conscious individual’s social actions were measured by the ethical standards of right or wrong. The standards of ‘truth’ and ‘error’ complemented the standards of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. Actions, which were ethically right, were justified by reasoning based on logic whereas actions, which were ethically, wrong implied logical errors. This ethical order and the logical order were deemed to be one. It was valid universally and applied to the actions of all the conscious citizens of society. The conscious individual discovered the fruits of his creative inputs and that of the others to be assessed by standards conforming to aesthetics of harmony, which was purposeful. The justification and legitimacy of social institutions and rules and the aesthetic values and principles all come under the scanner of reasoning. A crucial component of critical thinking is having the ability to explain reasons for either supporting or criticizing ideas. For this to happen, one must be able to know how to recognize, make an analysis and evaluate the arguments. Awareness and attention to the world around and not limited to one’s own narrow perception of the world are also key factors in honing critical thinking skills. Critical thinking because of its reasoning based on logic is applicable here. By organizing his experiences with the universally accepted aesthetic standards like that of goodness and truth, the individual became an objective participant in the order of beauty. Any deviations from this harmony were subjective errors and which encompassed the individual’s lack of ability to make or comprehend beauty. This universe of the conscious makers was both beautiful and good and rational. Such a universe however went beyond the power of any single individual, be it intellectual, moral or aesthetic. This started the notion of there being a universal order, which had existed before and beyond them. This implied the existence of a bearer of ‘truth’, goodness’, and ‘beauty’ who had organized the universe into this one perfect module. This universe had to be full of ethically perfect activities and beauty and reason. Critical thinking in this context makes us pause and wonder whether there was a personal God behind this or a spiritual being outside this universe which was actually his creation or was an inherent active reason in the universe behind the creation of this perfect world. (Znaniecki, 88-89) Critical thinking encompasses metaphysical thinking as well as scientific thinking. Parmenides is considered to be the father of metaphysics. (Marias,20) The aim of metaphysics is to determine the real nature of things, to put all assumptions to test and to determine the meaning, structure and values of things the way they are.(Wilshire, 1-26) It is a science which seeks to determine what is real compared to what is apparent. Metaphysics studies the world as a whole and not in parts. According to Plato, it sees things in a more holistic way to avoid the constrained dogmas of the specialist. Metaphysics deals with the thought that there are “ideas which transcend the world of facts, that which cannot be proved or disproved by ordinary scientific methods”. (Schumacher,77) But they have to be true to reality. Scientific reasoning means that the explanation, prediction and control of empirical data is done based on reason. Scientific thinking restricts itself to only what can be handled in quantitative terms which does not reflect the variety of everyday life. Humans have different experiences and the universe has to be understood in that light. Metaphysics handles experiences of human life beyond the empirical data while simultaneously trying to make sense of it. Descartes’ philosophy of “I think, therefore I am” marked the beginning of modern rationalism. The ‘positive’ philosophy of August Comte advocated that the laws of the universe could be unlocked because it was based on empirical evidence of nature. They saw metaphysics as the enemy of science and felt that the only way to understand the universe was in scientific terms. Metaphysics was not knowledge but only a vaunt for human feelings. Only those things, which could be verified by scientific evidence, had any meaning. Present culture is influenced by scientific thinking, which strongly advocates the principle of verification as the sole claim to truth. This has had the effect of limiting the knowledge of society to only those realities, which seem useful in quantitative terms. But, human experiences cannot be quantified all the time and to deny the existence of these experiences on the basis of quantification would be to rob life of enriching experiences. But Kant had philosophized that knowledge did not exist separately from human beings and the world could be understood only in terms of human experiences. Human experiences made the knowledge fuller and purposeful. So, both metaphysics and scientific thinking are involved here. (Relph, 193-201) The two basic types of arguments; inductive and deductive is often the basis to show the differences in metaphysical thinking and scientific thinking. Inductive reasoning generally moves from the specific to the general while deductive reasoning is the opposite, moving from the general realm to the specific area. Arguments, which have their basis in experiences or observations, are of the inductive type whereas arguments, which are dependent on laws, rules, are expressed through deductive reasoning. This gets reflected in the philosophies of metaphysical thinking and scientific thinking. The difference between scientific thinking and metaphysical thinking basically has its roots in the relative utilization of deductive and inductive reasoning. According to metaphysical thinking the total universe must be orderly being. This train of thought is rejected by scientific thinking which says that whatever order is there within the scope of human knowledge can only be gradually found from empirical data based on inductive reasoning. (Grimes and Nubiola) Deduction simply serves the purpose of a foil to formulate problems so that inductive research can be carried out and so that the results of this research can be systematized. In conclusion, one may say that critical thinking sharpens one’s ability to assess the truth and to form independent opinions based on evidence and also enhances self-reflection which has been the basis of societal changes throughout history. References 1. Facione, Peter A. Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction, American Philosophical Association. 1990 2. Grimes, Seamus and Jaime Nubiola, Reconsidering the exclusion of metaphysics in human geography, ACTA PHILOSOPHICA VI/2 (1997), 265-276 3. Marias, Julian, History of Philosophy, Dover, New York,1967 4. Relph, Edward, An Enquiry into the Relations Between Phenomology and Geography, “The Canadian Observer”, 14,1970 5. Schumacher, Ernst Friedrich, Small is Beautiful, Abacus, London, 1974 6. Wilshire, Bruce W. Metaphysics, in The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago 1994, vol.24 7. Znaniecki, Florian, Cultural Sciences: Their Origin and development , Transaction Publishers, 1980 Read More