the art and science of critical thinking
Critical thinking is, really, thinking on purpose.
Or perhaps thinking with purpose.
It's thinking about the way we think, to make sure we're not
thinking nonsense.
Seems like a pretty sensible idea. Socrates invented it, around 400 BC. Ish.
Wiki has a useful summary:
Plato wrote that Socrates established the fact that one cannot depend
upon those in "authority" to have sound knowledge and insight.
(I'm a huge fan of this bloke already. Ed).
He demonstrated that persons may have power and high position
and yet be deeply confused and irrational. (Yerdon'tsay. Ed )
He established the importance of asking deep questions that probe profoundly into
thinking before we accept ideas as worthy of belief. ( I may love this man. Ed)
He also established the importance of seeking evidence, closely examining reasoning and
assumptions, analyzing basic concepts, and tracing out implications not only of what is said
but of what is done as well. His method of questioning is now known as "Socratic Questioning" and is the best
known critical thinking teaching strategy.
He:
highlighted the need for thinking for clarity and logical consistency.
asked people questions to reveal their irrational thinking or lack of reliable knowledge.
demonstrated that having authority does not ensure accurate knowledge.
established the method of questioning beliefs, closely inspecting assumptions and relying on
evidence and sound rationale.
Plato recorded Socrates' teachings and carried on the tradition of critical thinking. Aristotle and subsequent Greek skeptics refined Socrates' teachings, using systematic thinking and asking questions to ascertain the true nature of reality beyond the way things appear from a glance.
Socrates set the agenda for the tradition of critical thinking, namely, to reflectively question common beliefs and explanations, carefully distinguishing beliefs that are reasonable and logical from those that — however appealing to our native egocentrism, however much they serve our vested interests, however comfortable or comforting they may be—lack adequate evidence or rational foundation to warrant belief.
Socrates is the dude. Athough, clearly, we should question our own belief in him, too ... and be sure.
Or perhaps thinking with purpose.
It's thinking about the way we think, to make sure we're not
thinking nonsense.
Seems like a pretty sensible idea. Socrates invented it, around 400 BC. Ish.
Wiki has a useful summary:
Plato wrote that Socrates established the fact that one cannot depend
upon those in "authority" to have sound knowledge and insight.
(I'm a huge fan of this bloke already. Ed).
He demonstrated that persons may have power and high position
and yet be deeply confused and irrational. (Yerdon'tsay. Ed )
He established the importance of asking deep questions that probe profoundly into
thinking before we accept ideas as worthy of belief. ( I may love this man. Ed)
He also established the importance of seeking evidence, closely examining reasoning and
assumptions, analyzing basic concepts, and tracing out implications not only of what is said
but of what is done as well. His method of questioning is now known as "Socratic Questioning" and is the best
known critical thinking teaching strategy.
He:
highlighted the need for thinking for clarity and logical consistency.
asked people questions to reveal their irrational thinking or lack of reliable knowledge.
demonstrated that having authority does not ensure accurate knowledge.
established the method of questioning beliefs, closely inspecting assumptions and relying on
evidence and sound rationale.
Plato recorded Socrates' teachings and carried on the tradition of critical thinking. Aristotle and subsequent Greek skeptics refined Socrates' teachings, using systematic thinking and asking questions to ascertain the true nature of reality beyond the way things appear from a glance.
Socrates set the agenda for the tradition of critical thinking, namely, to reflectively question common beliefs and explanations, carefully distinguishing beliefs that are reasonable and logical from those that — however appealing to our native egocentrism, however much they serve our vested interests, however comfortable or comforting they may be—lack adequate evidence or rational foundation to warrant belief.
Socrates is the dude. Athough, clearly, we should question our own belief in him, too ... and be sure.
