Thinking critically is unique to the subject area and the individual. Although all content areas differ in difficulty, critical thinking is necessary for an abstract analysis of ideas. I've often wondered what is my own definition of thinking critically. We know that thinking involves thoughts, opinions, and the coordination of ideas, but we must somehow learn to do this in a "critical" manner.
Let's look at the word "critical". Using an online resource, I located a definition that defines "critical" as "Inclined to judge severely and find fault". This seems like an extremely appropriate choice when pairing it with critical thinking. When you are thinking critically, you are analyzing all possibilities and ideas, and you are most definitely looking for the positives, the faults, and even the gray areas. You are "judging" severely and going beyond the basic levels of thinking skills.
Yes, I agree that the traditional notion of critical thinking is all about judging severely and finding fault, though that particular definition may be more relevant to the popular conception of the word critical than to the academic conception. And I don't want to suggest that severe judgement is not appropriate or useful, especially when considering new ideas, but there is still something about the attitude belied by that approach to ideas that bothers me. To me, it suggests a separation between person and idea in a dualistic manner: an independent mind operating upon independent ideas, as if the mind and the ideas are two separate things and the mind can operate upon the idea in some detached manner, without getting its fingers dirty. I don't think this is the way it works. A mind must eat an idea, ingest it, pull it into itself before it can consider the idea. That process of ingestion changes both the idea and the mind. Severely judging that which is now a part of me is different than judging something that is apart from me. Hmm. I need to think about this some more. I need to chew on this idea a bit.
ReplyDelete