ARTICLE CRITIQUE 6
According to Allan, Carey & Foltz 1983, if we are to ascertainthe definition to critical thinking, we must understand that it isnot the people that describe thinking, but the thinking that explainsus (Diane, 2014). Critical thinking denotes the application ofcognitive strategies or skills that offer a probability of therequired outcome. The critical thinking notion is implemented todefine thinking as goal-directed, purposeful, and reasoned. If suchthinker is applying skills that are effective and thoughtful for thespecific type and context of a task of thinking, it is the sort ofthinking tangled in resolving problems, framing inferences, devisinglikelihoods, as well as creating decisions.
The want for one to critically think has not changed regardless oftechnology changes in the previous years. Most of the information isprejudiced in ways of detection due to the ease to advancedinformation than one can conceivably use, it is at for such reasonRussell offers an equation as to best define critical thinking. Hedefines it as the categorization or evaluation process in terms ofcertain previously accepted standards that appear to engage attitude,an understanding of the facts, and some skills of thinking (Diane,2014).
Summary of Critical Thinking Definition
Critical Thinking = Skills of Thinking + Knowledge + Attitude
It is important for critical thinking to accompany such advancesbecause cognitive abilities might be cultured from such instructionexplicitly planned to impart skills. The skills are then transferredto actual settings of the world if practiced in the multipleenvironments. The development of both skills of perilous thinking,disposition, and attitude are important but useful when appliedrespectively. Therefore, a critical philosopher’s attitude must bevalued and cultivated. This critical thinking disposition or attitudeentails the readiness to be flexible, plan, and persistence the willto accept their errors and adjust their mind where evidence backs amodification in consensus-pursuit, awareness, and position.Self-observation of own processes of thought is a way people canadvance the ways they think because they possess small consciouscognizance of the way they think (Diane, 2014). It is essential forpeople to reflect on thinking as possessing two tools.
It is important for critical thinking to accompany such advancesbecause people’s rationality has boundaries or limits. Individualsare satisfiers because they will never possess complete data or evenknow their decisions’ consequence with confidence. This denotesthat in a majority of circumstances, people make decisions that aredecent. People’s emotions interrelate with ways they think andmight lead them to reach decisions not morally rational. People arefeeling and thinking beings whose emotional thinking aspects cannever be overlooked. Multiple ecological cues influenced how and whatpeople think cues people are never aware of and find difficult totrust as affecting their judgments (Diane, 2014). Individuals oftenreport that their thinking occasionally relies on sentence schemesand graphic imagery, thus, the individual dissimilarities anddifferences in task especially in the application of thought modes.
Reasoning (Drawing Conclusions That Are Deductive and Valid)
The application of statements or premises that people accept as aright to develop valid inferences is termed as deductive thinking.People never approach problems of reasoning according to formalreasoning laws. Instead of ascertaining if the conclusion reasonablydevelops from premises as stated, there is an inclination to modifypremises in accordance with a person’s own philosophies and so thedecision on if such conclusion tails from the improved statements.
In such linear collations, people will use grounds to reachconclusions on ordered dealings. A noble strategy for resolvinglinear collations entails using a three-dimensional representationwhere the matters are organized in a systematic manner because it notcommon to never confuse validity with truth. Validity is theunconnected to the content type of a dispute. Therefore, a conclusionis valid if it essentially develops from premises (Diane, 2014).Individual beliefs regularly prejudice people’s ability to definevalidity that even the conclusions they believe as true are likely tobe referred more valid than the conclusion they never believe astrue.
Every argument is an endeavor to persuade the listener or reader thata certain conclusion is factually based on every reason offered.Every argument should possess at minimum a reason (premise),assumptions, counterarguments, qualifiers and a conclusion. Arguments need structures diagrammed and identifiable. Soundarguments always meet the three-set criteria: the reason isconsistent and acceptable the reason (by staying applicable to theconclusion) offers support to the conclusion and is adequatelyrobust, and the argument’s missing components are alwaysconsidered. So, in analyzing an argument’s strength, the sum ofsupport every reason offers to this conclusion is evaluated along thenegative counterarguments’ effects (Diane, 2014). Omittedcomponents are explicit and so considered alongside the componentsstated.
An extensive bias exists in assigning greater significance toexplanations that back a conclusion people favor than the premises(reason) that are counter to the conclusion people approve. Such biasis lessened by only listing counterarguments and reasons as well asconsciously determining how intensely people run or support thecounter to such conclusion (Diane, 2014). A serious part of theexamination the arguments is the deliberation of misleadingpronouncements and misplaced portions.
Development of skills of critical thinking needs specific training,rehearsal in a diversity of feedback, contexts, and the time toprogress. When deciding on the suitability of a reason (premise), itis customarily necessary to evaluate the reliability of information’ssource because important dissimilarities between specialists for factissues and value issues exist. People’s beliefs are easily alteredwith unsound and sound reasoning thus the need to be aware of anyefforts to influence your views with such technologies and carelessreasoning practices.
Diane, F. (2014), Thought and knowledge – an introduction tocritical thinking (5th edition),Psychology Press, 30(4),1-634,https://ia801306.us.archive.org/12/items/Thought_and_Knowledge_An_Introduction_to_Critical_Thinking_by_Diane_F._Halpern/Thought_and_Knowledge_An_Introduction_to_Critical_Thinking_by_Diane_F._Halpern.pdf