Difference between revisions of "Critical thinking"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "<hide> page type::article thing type::skill </hide> ==About== Critical thinking is the ability to use thought-processes to check information of a factual natur...")
 
(article origin)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 12: Line 12:
 
** Similar to [[open-mindedness]] but more active in that one is actively examining the information rather than just being willing to consider different conclusions that are offered.
 
** Similar to [[open-mindedness]] but more active in that one is actively examining the information rather than just being willing to consider different conclusions that are offered.
 
** Probably the most important question to ask, in nearly any situation, is "why?", but a good critical thinker has a repertoire of probably hundreds of questions to consider investigating.
 
** Probably the most important question to ask, in nearly any situation, is "why?", but a good critical thinker has a repertoire of probably hundreds of questions to consider investigating.
* '''Claim and support''': recognizing when a [[claim]] is being made (whether directly or by implication), and determining what (if any) [[evidence]] and [[reasoning]] is being offered to support it.
+
* '''Rhetorical awareness''': recognizing when a [[claim]] is being made (whether directly or by implication), and determining what (if any) [[evidence]] and [[reasoning]] is being offered to support it.
 
** It is important to be able to recognize when a claim is trivial (trivial claims presented as significant can be used as an [[emotional argument]] for further conclusions) or [[circular argument|circular]] (i.e. having no actual basis).
 
** It is important to be able to recognize when a claim is trivial (trivial claims presented as significant can be used as an [[emotional argument]] for further conclusions) or [[circular argument|circular]] (i.e. having no actual basis).
 
** A knowledge of [[logical fallacies]], and the ability to recognize invalid logic in general, is also an important tool.
 
** A knowledge of [[logical fallacies]], and the ability to recognize invalid logic in general, is also an important tool.
Line 21: Line 21:
 
* {{!in|dkosopedia}}: no page as of 2013-05-26
 
* {{!in|dkosopedia}}: no page as of 2013-05-26
 
* {{rationalwiki}}
 
* {{rationalwiki}}
 +
==Notes==
 +
This article is adapted from text posted in a comment [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/YgyNVwF4Nv8 here].

Latest revision as of 12:15, 26 May 2013

About

Critical thinking is the ability to use thought-processes to check information of a factual nature so that one does not have to accept it on faith. It is a key component of rationality and the scientific method.

Components

Critical thinking is essentially comprised of a set of cognitive tools, among the most important of which are:

  • Asking questions: having the ability to imagine alternatives, and to examine logic and evidence in support of each.
    • Similar to skepticism but without the hidden implication that there are no good answers; there are no perfect answers, but some answers are clearly better than others.
    • Similar to open-mindedness but more active in that one is actively examining the information rather than just being willing to consider different conclusions that are offered.
    • Probably the most important question to ask, in nearly any situation, is "why?", but a good critical thinker has a repertoire of probably hundreds of questions to consider investigating.
  • Rhetorical awareness: recognizing when a claim is being made (whether directly or by implication), and determining what (if any) evidence and reasoning is being offered to support it.
    • It is important to be able to recognize when a claim is trivial (trivial claims presented as significant can be used as an emotional argument for further conclusions) or circular (i.e. having no actual basis).
    • A knowledge of logical fallacies, and the ability to recognize invalid logic in general, is also an important tool.
    • Knowledge of what constitutes good evidence (relevant, unambiguous, sufficient, verifiable, objective/unbiased) is also crucial.

Links

Notes

This article is adapted from text posted in a comment here.