Life Span Perspective Assumptions And Critical Thinking

With Implications for Instruction

Linda Elder with Richard Paul

Though most teachers aspire to make critical thinking a primary objective of their instruction, most also do not realize that, to develop as thinkers, students must pass through stages of development in critical thinking. That is, most teachers are unaware of the levels of intellectual development that people go through as they improve as thinkers. We believe that significant gains in the intellectual quality of student work will not be achieved except to the degree that teachers recognize that skilled critical thinking develops, only when properly cultivated, and only through predictable stages.

In this paper we shall set out a stage theory based on the nearly twenty years of research of the Center for Critical Thinking and explain some of the theory’s implications for instruction. We shall be brief, concise, and to the point in our explanation with minimal theoretical elaboration. Furthermore, we believe that the “practicality” of the theory we explain here is best tested in the classroom and in everyday life. The reader should be expressly aware that we are approaching the human mind exclusively from an intellectual standpoint — not from a psychological standpoint. Each stage of intellectual development will be explained in terms of the following variables:

  1. Defining Feature
  2. Principal Challenge
  3. Knowledge of Thinking
  4. Skill in Thinking
  5. Relevant Intellectual Traits
  6. Some Implications for Instruction

Due to space limitations, we have made no attempt to be exhaustive with respect to any stage, nor to answer the many questions that might be raised concerning the development, reliability or validity of the stages. The basic intention is to provide a practical organizer for teachers interested in using a conceptual map to guide student thinking through developmental stages in the process of becoming critical thinkers. Once the stages are explained, and stage-specific recommendations are given, we close with some global implications for instruction.

We make the following assumptions: (1) that there are predictable stages through which every person who develops as a critical thinker passes, (2) that passage from one stage to the next is dependent upon a necessary level of commitment on the part of an individual to develop as a critical thinker, is not automatic, and is unlikely to take place “subconsciously,” (3) that success in instruction is deeply connected to the intellectual quality of student learning, and (4) that regression is possible in development.

Before moving to the stages themselves, a brief overview of what we mean by critical thinking is in order. Our working definition is as follows: We define critical thinking as:

the ability and disposition to improve one’s thinking by systematically subjecting it to intellectual self-assessment.

It is important to recognize that on this view, persons are critical thinkers, in the fullest sense of the term, only if they display this ability and disposition in all, or most, of the dimensions of their lives (e.g. as a parent, citizen, consumer, lover, friend, learner, and professional). We exclude from our concept of the critical thinker those who think critically in only one dimension of their lives. We do so because the quality of one’s life is dependent upon high quality reasoning in all domains of one’s life, not simply in one dimension.

The stages we will lay out are as follows:

Stage One: The Unreflective Thinker
Stage Two: The Challenged Thinker
Stage Three: The Beginning Thinker
Stage Four: The Practicing Thinker
Stage Five: The Advanced Thinker
Stage Six: The Accomplished Thinker

Stage One: The Unreflective Thinker

Defining Feature: Unreflective thinkers are largely unaware of the determining role that thinking is playing in their lives and of the many ways that problems in thinking are causing problems in their lives. Unreflective thinkers lack the ability to explicitly assess their thinking and improve it thereby.

Knowledge of Thinking: Unreflective thinkers lack the knowledge that high quality thinking requires regular practice in taking thinking apart, accurately assessing it, and actively improving it. In fact, unreflective thinkers are largely unaware of thinking as such, hence fail to recognize thinking as involving concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc. Unreflective thinkers are largely unaware of the appropriate standards for the assessment of thinking: clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc.

Skill in Thinking: Unreflective thinkers may have developed a variety of skills in thinking without being aware of them. However, these skills are inconsistently applied because of the lack of self-monitoring of thought. Prejudices and misconceptions often undermine the quality of thought of the unreflective thinker.

Some Implications for Instruction: We must recognize that in the present mode of instruction it is perfectly possible for students to graduate from high school, or even college, and still be largely unreflective thinkers. Though all students think, most students are largely unaware of how their thinking is structured or how to assess or improve it. Thus when they experience problems in thinking, they lack the skills to identify and “fix” these problems. Most teachers do not seem to be aware of how unaware most students are of their thinking. Little is being done at present to help students "discover" their thinking. This emphasis needs shifting.

Stage Two: The Challenged Thinker

Defining Features: Thinkers move to the “challenged” stage when they become initially aware of the determining role that thinking is playing in their lives, and of the fact that problems in their thinking are causing them serious and significant problems.

Principal Challenge: To become initially aware of the determining role of thinking in one’s life and of basic problems that come from poor thinking.

Knowledge of Thinking: Challenged thinkers, unlike unreflective thinkers are becoming aware of thinking as such. They are becoming aware, at some level, that high quality thinking requires deliberate reflective thinking about thinking (in order to improve thinking). They recognize that their thinking is often flawed, although they are not able to identify many of these flaws. Challenged thinkers may develop an initial awareness of thinking as involving concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc., and as involving standards for the assessment of thinking: clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc., though they have only an initial grasp of these standards and what it would take to internalize them. Challenged thinkers also develop some understanding of the role of self-deception in thinking, though their understanding is limited. At this stage the thinker develops some reflective awareness of how thinking operates for good or ill.

Skill in Thinking: Most challenged thinkers have very limited skills in thinking. However like unreflective thinkers, they may have developed a variety of skills in thinking without being aware of them, and these skills may (ironically) serve as barriers to development. At this stage thinkers with some implicit critical thinking abilities may more easily deceive themselves into believing that their thinking is better than it actually is, making it more difficult to recognize the problems inherent in poor thinking. To accept the challenge at this level requires that thinkers gain insight into the fact that whatever intellectual skills they have are inconsistently applied across the domains of their lives.

Relevant Intellectual Trait: The fundamental intellectual trait at this stage is intellectual humility, in order to see that problems are inherent in one’s thinking.

Some Implications for Instruction: We must recognize the importance of challenging our students — in a supportive way — to recognize both that they are thinkers and that their thinking often goes awry. We must lead class discussions about thinking. We must explicitly model thinking (e.g., thinking aloud through a problem). We must design classroom activities that explicitly require students to think about their thinking. We must have students examine both poor and sound thinking, talking about the differences. We must introduce students to the parts of thinking and the intellectual standards necessary to assess thinking. We must introduce the idea of intellectual humility to students; that is, the idea of becoming aware of our own ignorance. Perhaps children can best understand the importance of this idea through their concept of the "know-it-all," which comes closest to their recognition of the need to be intellectually humble.

Stage Three: The Beginning Thinker

Defining Feature: Those who move to the beginning thinker stage are actively taking up the challenge to begin to take explicit command of their thinking across multiple domains of their lives. Thinkers at this stage recognize that they have basic problems in their thinking and make initial attempts to better understand how they can take charge of and improve it. Based on this initial understanding, beginning thinkers begin to modify some of their thinking, but have limited insight into deeper levels of the trouble inherent in their thinking. Most importantly, they lack a systematic plan for improving their thinking, hence their efforts are hit and miss.

Principal Challenge: To begin to see the importance of developing as a thinker. To begin to seek ways to develop as a thinker and to make an intellectual commitment to that end.

Knowledge of Thinking: Beginning thinkers, unlike challenged thinkers are becoming aware not only of thinking as such, but also of the role in thinking of concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc. Beginning thinkers are also at some beginning stage of recognizing not only that there are standards for the assessment of thinking: clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc., but also that one needs to internalize them and thus begin using them deliberately in thinking. They have a beginning understanding of the role of egocentric thinking in human life.

Skill in Thinking: Beginning thinkers are able to appreciate a critique of their powers of thought. Beginning thinkers have enough skill in thinking to begin to monitor their own thoughts, though as “beginners” they are sporadic in that monitoring. They are beginning to recognize egocentric thinking in themselves and others.

Relevant Intellectual Traits: The key intellectual trait required at this stage is some degree of intellectual humility in beginning to recognize the problems inherent in thinking. In addition, thinkers must have some degree of intellectual confidence in reason, a trait which provides the impetus to take up the challenge and begin the process of active development as critical thinkers, despite limited understanding of what it means to do high quality reasoning. In addition, beginning thinkers have enough intellectual perseverance to struggle with serious problems in thinking while yet lacking a clear solution to those problems (in other words, at this stage thinkers are recognizing more and more problems in their thinking but have not yet discovered how to systematize their efforts to solve them).

Some Implications for Instruction: Once we have persuaded most of our students that much of their thinking — left to itself — is flawed and that they, like all of us, are capable of improving as thinkers, we must teach in such a way as to help them to see that we all need to regularly practice good thinking to become good thinkers. Here we can use sporting analogies and analogies from other skill areas. Most students already know that you can get good in a sport only if you regularly practice. We must not only look for opportunities to encourage them to think well, we must help them to begin to understand what it is to develop good HABITS of thinking. What do we need to do regularly in order to read well? What must we do regularly and habitually if we are to listen well? What must we do regularly and habitually if we are to write well. What must we do regularly and habitually if we are to learn well? We must recognize that students are not only creatures of habit, but like the rest of us, they are largely unaware of the habits they are developing. They are largely unaware of what it is to develop good habits (in general), let alone good habits of thinking. If our students are truly “beginning” thinkers, they will be receptive to the importance of developing sound habits of thought. We must emphasize the importance of beginning to take charge of the parts of thinking and applying intellectual standards to thinking. We must teach students to begin to recognize their native egocentrism when it is operating in their thinking.

Stage Four: The Practicing Thinker

Defining Feature: Thinkers at this stage have a sense of the habits they need to develop to take charge of their thinking. They not only recognize that problems exist in their thinking, but they also recognize the need to attack these problems globally and systematically. Based on their sense of the need to practice regularly, they are actively analyzing their thinking in a number of domains. However, since practicing thinkers are only beginning to approach the improvement of their thinking in a systematic way, they still have limited insight into deeper levels of thought, and thus into deeper levels of the problems embedded in thinking.

Principal Challenge: To begin to develop awareness of the need for systematic practice in thinking.

Knowledge of Thinking: Practicing thinkers, unlike beginning thinkers are becoming knowledgeable of what it would take to systematically monitor the role in their thinking of concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc. Practicing thinkers are also becoming knowledgeable of what it would take to regularly assess their thinking for clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc. Practicing thinkers recognize the need for systematicity of critical thinking and deep internalization into habits. They clearly recognize the natural tendency of the human mind to engage in egocentric thinking and self-deception.

Skill in Thinking: Practicing thinkers have enough skill in thinking to critique their own plan for systematic practice, and to construct a realistic critique of their powers of thought. Furthermore, practicing thinkers have enough skill to begin to regularly monitor their own thoughts. Thus they can effectively articulate the strengths and weaknesses in their thinking. Practicing thinkers can often recognize their own egocentric thinking as well as egocentric thinking on the part of others. Furthermore practicing thinkers actively monitor their thinking to eliminate egocentric thinking, although they are often unsuccessful.

Relevant Intellectual Traits: The key intellectual trait required to move to this stage is intellectual perseverance. This characteristic provides the impetus for developing a realistic plan for systematic practice (with a view to taking greater command of one’s thinking). Furthermore, thinkers at this stage have the intellectual humility required to realize that thinking in all the domains of their lives must be subject to scrutiny, as they begin to approach the improvement of their thinking in a systematic way.

Some Implications for Instruction: What are the basic features of thinking that students must command to effectively become practicing thinkers? What do they need to do to take charge of their thinking intellectually, with respect to any content? We must teach in such a way that students come to understand the power in knowing that whenever humans reason, they have no choice but to use certain predictable structures of thought: that thinking is inevitably driven by the questions, that we seek answers to questions for some purpose, that to answer questions, we need information, that to use information we must interpret it (i.e., by making inferences), and that our inferences, in turn, are based on assumptions, and have implications, all of which involves ideas or concepts within some point of view. We must teach in such a way as to require students to regularly deal explicitly with these structures (more on these structure presently).

Students should now be developing the habit — whenever they are trying to figure something out — of focusing on: purpose, question, information, inferences, assumptions, concepts, point of view, and implications. The result of this emphasis in instruction is that students begin to see connections between all the subject matter they are learning. In studying history, they learn to focus on historical purposes and questions. When studying math, they clarify and analyze mathematical goals and problems. When studying literature, they reflect upon literary purposes and questions. They notice themselves making historical, mathematical, and literary assumptions. They notice themselves tracing historical, mathematical, and literary implications. Recognizing the "moves" one makes in thinking well is an essential part of becoming a practicing thinker.

Students should be encouraged to routinely catch themselves thinking both egocentrically and sociocentrically. They should understand, for example, that most of the problems they experience in learning result from a natural desire to avoid confusion and frustration, and that their inability to understand another person’s point of view is often caused by their tendency to see the world exclusively within their own egocentric point of view.

Stage Five: The Advanced Thinker

Defining Feature: Thinkers at this stage have now established good habits of thought which are “paying off.” Based on these habits, advanced thinkers not only actively analyze their thinking in all the significant domains of their lives, but also have significant insight into problems at deeper levels of thought. While advanced thinkers are able to think well across the important dimensions of their lives, they are not yet able to think at a consistently high level across all of these dimensions. Advanced thinkers have good general command over their egocentric nature. They continually strive to be fair-minded. Of course, they sometimes lapse into egocentrism and reason in a one-sided way.

Principal Challenge: To begin to develop depth of understanding not only of the need for systematic practice in thinking, but also insight into deep levels of problems in thought: consistent recognition, for example, of egocentric and sociocentric thought in one’s thinking, ability to identify areas of significant ignorance and prejudice, and ability to actually develop new fundamental habits of thought based on deep values to which one has committed oneself.

Knowledge of Thinking: Advanced thinkers are actively and successfully engaged in systematically monitoring the role in their thinking of concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc., and hence have excellent knowledge of that enterprise. Advanced thinkers are also knowledgeable of what it takes to regularly assess their thinking for clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc. Advanced thinkers value the deep and systematic internalization of critical thinking into their daily habits. Advanced thinkers have keen insight into the role of egocentrism and sociocentrism in thinking, as well as the relationship between thoughts, feelings and desires.

They have a deep understanding of the powerful role that thinking plays in the quality of their lives. They understand that egocentric thinking will always play a role in their thinking, but that they can control the power that egocentrism has over their thinking and their lives.

Skill in Thinking: Advanced thinkers regularly critique their own plan for systematic practice, and improve it thereby. Practicing thinkers regularly monitor their own thoughts. They insightfully articulate the strengths and weaknesses in their thinking. They possess outstanding knowledge of the qualities of their thinking. Advanced thinkers are consistently able to identify when their thinking is driven by their native egocentrism; and they effectively use a number of strategies to reduce the power of their egocentric thoughts.

Relevant Intellectual Traits: The key intellectual trait required at this stage is a high degree of intellectual humility in recognizing egocentric and sociocentric thought in one’s life as well as areas of significant ignorance and prejudice. In addition the thinker at this level needs: a) the intellectual insight and perseverance to actually develop new fundamental habits of thought based on deep values to which one has committed oneself, b) the intellectual integrity to recognize areas of inconsistency and contradiction in one’s life, c) the intellectual empathy necessary to put oneself in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them, d) the intellectual courage to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints toward which one has strong negative emotions, e) the fair-mindedness necessary to approach all viewpoints without prejudice, without reference to one’s own feelings or vested interests. In the advanced thinker these traits are emerging, but may not be manifested at the highest level or in the deepest dimensions of thought.

Some Implications for Instruction: For the foreseeable future most of our students will not become advanced thinkers — if at all — until college or beyond. Nevertheless, it is important that they learn what it would be to become an advanced thinker. It is important that they see it as an important goal. We can help students move in this direction by fostering their awareness of egocentrism and sociocentrism in their thinking, by leading discussions on intellectual perseverance, intellectual integrity, intellectual empathy, intellectual courage, and fair-mindedness. If we can graduate students who are practicing thinkers, we will have achieved a major break-through in schooling. However intelligent our graduates may be, most of them are largely unreflective as thinkers, and are unaware of the disciplined habits of thought they need to develop to grow intellectually as a thinker.

Stage Six: The Accomplished Thinker

Defining Feature: Accomplished thinkers not only have systematically taken charge of their thinking, but are also continually monitoring, revising, and re-thinking strategies for continual improvement of their thinking. They have deeply internalized the basic skills of thought, so that critical thinking is, for them, both conscious and highly intuitive. As Piaget would put it, they regularly raise their thinking to the level of conscious realization. Through extensive experience and practice in engaging in self-assessment, accomplished thinkers are not only actively analyzing their thinking in all the significant domains of their lives, but are also continually developing new insights into problems at deeper levels of thought. Accomplished thinkers are deeply committed to fair-minded thinking, and have a high level of, but not perfect, control over their egocentric nature.

Principal Challenge: To make the highest levels of critical thinking intuitive in every domain of one’s life. To internalize highly effective critical thinking in an interdisciplinary and practical way.

Knowledge of Thinking: Accomplished thinkers are not only actively and successfully engaged in systematically monitoring the role in their thinking of concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc., but are also regularly improving that practice. Accomplished thinkers have not only a high degree of knowledge of thinking, but a high degree of practical insight as well. Accomplished thinkers intuitively assess their thinking for clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc. Accomplished thinkers have deep insights into the systematic internalization of critical thinking into their habits. Accomplished thinkers deeply understand the role that egocentric and sociocentric thinking plays in the lives of human beings, as well as the complex relationship between thoughts, emotions, drives and behavior.

Skill in Thinking: Accomplished thinkers regularly, effectively, and insightfully critique their own use of thinking in their lives, and improve it thereby. Accomplished thinkers consistently monitor their own thoughts. They effectively and insightfully articulate the strengths and weaknesses inherent in their thinking. Their knowledge of the qualities of their thinking is outstanding. Although, as humans they know they will always be fallible (because they must always battle their egocentrism, to some extent), they consistently perform effectively in every domain of their lives. People of good sense seek out master thinkers, for they recognize and value the ability of master thinkers to think through complex issues with judgment and insight.

Relevant Intellectual Traits: Naturally inherent in master thinkers are all the essential intellectual characteristics, deeply integrated. Accomplished thinkers have a high degree of intellectual humility, intellectual integrity, intellectual perseverance, intellectual courage, intellectual empathy, intellectual autonomy, intellectual responsibility and fair-mindedness. Egocentric and sociocentric thought is quite uncommon in the accomplished thinker, especially with respect to matters of importance. There is a high degree of integration of basic values, beliefs, desires, emotions, and action.

Some implications for Instruction: For the foreseeable future the vast majority of our students will never become accomplished thinkers — any more than most high school basketball players will develop the skills or abilities of a professional basketball player or student writers the writing skills of a published novelist. Nevertheless, it is important that they learn what it would be to become an accomplished thinker. It is important that they see it as a real possibility, if practicing skills of thinking becomes a characteristic of how they use their minds day to day.

Will Joel Friedman, Ph.D. is a seasoned clinician with experience working with adults, couples, families, adolescents and older children since 1976. His aim...Read More

Anyone who has begun to think places some portion of the world in jeopardy.
—John Dewey

To think for oneself, to find out what is true and stand by it, without being influenced, whatever life may bring of misery or happiness—that is what builds character.
—Jiddu Krishnamurti, Think of These Things

There is rarely if ever all the information wanted, and decisions are made only upon what information is available anyway. Samuel Butler knew this in remarking, “Life is the art of drawing sufficient conclusions from insufficient premises.” The difference between information and the premises we derive from information is precisely what critical thinking aims to ferret out and this article addresses.

Further, we are immersed and awash in our ego mind’s perceptions, utterly filled to overflowing with assumptions, prejudices, beliefs and judgments. William James, philosopher and early writer in the field of psychology, recognized how pervasive such assumptions are in noting, “A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.” To accept this reality, that is, our ego’s perceptions and thinking that heavily influence our feelings, is the beginning of thinking for yourself and maturity. My father often said that maturity is acceptance without resignation. Isn’t maturity actually a profound acceptance of exactly what is in this moment, along with an ever-new joy of discovery and growth in revealing truth and inhabiting the sanity of what is real?

To think critically is not to negatively evaluate and critically judge anyone. In fact, critical thinking is actually a misnomer-it is anything but critical, meaning negative or judgmental. Critical thinking is aimed to tease out the credible “way it is” in reality within any given circumstance or situation under inquiry. Sherlock Holmes author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle hit a bulls-eye in stating, “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.” A great deal of the time people’s thoughts and verbalized arguments are merely aimed to reinforce what they already believe to be true, only reinforcing what they already think they know. Herein, of course, you learn nothing. Actually all critical thinking begins with Socrates’ declaration: “True knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing.” Calmly and forthrightly acknowledging that you don’t know is the door opener to truly know anything. Otherwise, the mind is fixated upon some idea that it then believes to be true by purely having thought of it!

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle recognized the incredible value of ruling out what cannot be to reveal what is, no matter how absurd and unreasonable it may appear. He observed, “When all has been investigated and rejected, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Socrates, the originator and father of the field of Philosophy, the Socratic dialogue and critical thinking, essentially followed this approach in his Dialogues built upon applying the Socratic dialogue. Mystery writers, scientists, philosophers, spiritual-oriented people, inventors and discovers along with gutsy people committed in action to growth, development and evolution appreciate and live Sir Arthurs’s view.

Critical thinking is the height of intelligence since all innovation on this planet grew out of asking different, provocative and oftentimes impertinent questions. These are the very questions that challenge the status quo and threaten the powers that be. Critical thinking is one outcropping of empowerment, that is, being your own authority in living, given you thinking for yourself and refusing to allow any propaganda, advertising, politics, pressure, group or person to define who you are, what you recognize to be true and real, what you are for or against and the views, distinctions and choices you hold.

One key to critical thinking is to explore and discover with an attitude of curiosity precisely what is an accurate understanding of another’s view, that is, their opinion or perspective. This entails seeing our own usually incorrect assumptions that then quickly turn into premature, foregone conclusions that are equally incorrect. To know you know nothing and keep an open mind and awareness allows the seeing of “what is.” To check out another’s intention, carefully watch their actions and actively reveal possible assumptions, all while refusing to make unwarranted assumptions or jump to any premature conclusions, is a hallmark of those who look and see for themselves.

Use of our critical faculties takes time, careful investigation, rational intelligence and intuition along with perseverance, patience, collaboration and practical application. Poet Rainer Marie Rilke in Letters to a Young Poet writes: “…try to love the questions themselves like locked rooms and books that are written in a very foreign tongue. Do not now seek the answers, which cannot be given you because you would not be able to live them. And the point is, to live everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps you will then gradually, without noticing it, live along some distant day into the answer.” Clarity of mind in learning to love the questions is a result of a well-tamed, well-trained mind purely used as a tool.

The following six levels of critical thinking questions can be remarkably useful resources:1

  • Applied to remembering facts and concepts in gaining knowledge, you ask: who, what, where, when, how and sometimes why. Asking what is particularly constructive given that it is shows up in the present, is usually answerable and the forthcoming answers are key signposts for not re-enacting what didn’t work and for duplicating what did work. Why questions may be used sparingly since they are heard as accusatory and blaming, triggering defeating reactivity in emotions, behavior and relationships.
  • Applied to demonstrating understanding and gaining comprehension, you ask: what’s the main idea or theme, compare and contrast, what supports that statement, what was your understanding of and how would you classify that, along with can you distinguish between, what differences exist between, provide a definition for and offer an example or illustration of what you mean.
  • Applied to using acquired knowledge to solve problems in new situations through application, you ask: what examples, what approach, how would you solve, how would you apply, what would result if, what questions would you best ask, what factors would you change if, can you develop a set of instructions about, and would this information be useful if you had.
  • Applied to breaking down information into its component parts, to identify causes and motives, make inferences and gather evidence to support generalizations and relationships through analysis, you ask: how would you categorize, what are the parts, how are the components related, can you make a distinction, what evidence is there, what is its function and what conclusions can be drawn.
  • Applied to the creative compiling of information in a new pattern or proposing different solutions through synthesis, you ask: how might you improve, suppose it worked differently than we thought, how would you adapt this to a new situation, what would happen if we combined this with that, what model or theory would accurately reflect these findings and what happens if you did this.
  • Applied to formulating opinions by making judgments about data, work quality and the validity of ideas based on specific criteria through evaluation, you ask: what’s your opinion, how did you come to that view, how did you determine that choice, how do you explain, what do you base your opinion on, what do you recommend, how do you prioritize, and what would you select.

Let us be crystal clear what critical thinking is not, since what anything indeed is can at least partially be delineated by what it is not. Illustrations abound with all polarities in the empirical world, such as night helps define day, up helps define down and wet helps define dry. Critical thinking is not default thinking; that is, lazily assuming what you believed to be so, must always be true. Stereotypes, like all men or all women are so-and-so, or statements that begin “We all know…”, “It’s obvious…”, “You people…” or “These people are like…” are examples. Default thinking is highly problematic, dogmatic and narrow-minded because the default thinker believes a false proposition to be true when it actually is false, and is unwilling to objectively and critically evaluate it.

Default thinking is very close to what Psychology professor Ellen J. Langer calls “premature cognitive commitments,” that is, taking a piece of information or an impression on its face value without even considering critical thinking – mindsets simply accepted unconditionally. What makes them “premature” is our not knowing ahead of time what mindsets formed early in life will have later in life.2

Magical thinking qualifies as one example of default thinking. If you think the president is like a fairy tale king and can do whatever he pleases and the tooth fairy will heal all wounds for a quarter placed under your pillow, then magic is afoot. It may be cute with children, yet embarrassing in adults given the complexities of practical life. The best-laid plans fall apart and have unintended consequences.

Another variation on premature cognitive commitments is either/or thinking, sometimes called black-and-white thinking. Such limited thinking restricts and distorts seeing the whole picture, severely curtails options and prematurely squashes all possibilities into two and only two options by not accepting, embracing and questioning the raw evidence itself to perceive innumerable possibilities. Critical thinking couldn’t be further from either/or thinking with its dichotomous way of addressing any subject matter. Only with building a tolerance for ambiguity and not easily and quickly finding “the answer” can the raw material of life reveal itself to be what it indeed already is. It is our perceptions, heavily colored by our mind’s conditioning, that need our clearly and fully seeing, releasing and healing.

Similarly, superstitious thinking is another illustration of default thinking. When you think that not being around animals will prevent alligators from eating you, lighting candles around your bed will protect you from monsters and snapping your fingers will ward off evil spirits, and SEE, none of those dreaded consequences ensue, then you are deep under the spell of superstitious thinking. In all forms of default thinking, like magical and superstitious thinking, the person is not thinking for himself, not open to pertinent new information and unable to see past illusions given the box his mind has put him in.

Spotting all forms of default thinking opens up the authentic possibility of clear-eyed productive thinking that clarifies “what is” and it functions. Couple the continued shaping of Bloom’s Taxonomy with clearing all default thinking, along with knowing and applying the major logical fallacies (22 and counting) that Ken Pope generously offers on his remarkable website3 , and critical thinking can be a stellar tool to help navigate the multitude of situations and the apparent choices available every moment.

We must dare to think ‘unthinkable’ thoughts.
We must learn to explore all the options and possibilities that confront us in a complex and rapidly changing world.
We must learn to welcome and not to fear the voices of dissent.
We must dare to think about ‘unthinkable things’ because, when things become unthinkable, thinking stops and action becomes mindless.
—J. William Fulbright

References

1. Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Harlow, England: Longman Group United Kingdom, 1969; Linda G. Barton, based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, “Critical Thinking Questions” adapted from “Quick Flip Questions for Critical Thinking.” View this taxonomy at: http://www.teachers.ash.org.au/researchskills/dalton.htm, http://www.nwlink.com/~Donclark/hrd/bloom.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Blooms_rose.svg

2. Ellen J. Langer, Mindfulness. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1990, pages 19-22.

3. Ken Pope, “Logical Fallacies in Psychology: 22 Types” http://www.kspope.com/fallacies/fallacies.php

Keep Reading By Author Will Joel Friedman, Ph.D.

Read In Order Of Posting

0 thoughts on “Life Span Perspective Assumptions And Critical Thinking”

    -->

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *