Is CT the Foreplay of Understanding?

coberst · 01-13-2009, 02:24 PM

Is CT the Foreplay of Understanding?

I consider CT (Critical Thinking) for all citizens as the only avenue for improving the judgment of our society in general. CT is, in my opinion, philosophy lite; it establishes the philosophical attitude but is less filling.

Everybody considers themselves to be a critical thinker. That is why we need to differentiate among different levels of critical thinking.

Most people fall in the category that I call Reagan thinkers—trust but verify. Then there are those who have taken the basic college course taught by the philosophy dept that I call Logic 101. This is a credit course that teaches the basic fundamentals of logic. Of course, a person need not take the college course and can learn the matter on their own effort, but I suspect few do that.

The third level I call CT (Critical Thinking). CT includes the knowledge of Logic 101 and also the knowledge that focuses upon the intellectual character and attitude of critical thinking. It includes knowledge regarding the ego and social centric forces that impede rational thinking.

I think that any normal human can easily comprehend the message of CT. Very few adults have been taught CT but it can easily be learned by anyone who recognizes its importance.

Anyone who can watch TV for a few hours a week certainly has the time to learn. The problem is lack of motivation and that is due to the fact that within our society few individuals recognize that thinking can be improved by study. Because our schools and colleges have only recently began to teach the subject few people have ever heard of the subject. Everyone thinks they are critical thinkers because they know nothing about it and that is the purpose of my sounding the horn.

Our first experience with ‘understanding’ may be our first friendship. I think that this first friendship may be an example of what Carl Sagan meant by “Understanding is a kind of ecstasy”.

I also think that the boy who falls in love with automobiles and learns everything he can about repairing the junk car he bought has discovered ‘understanding’.

I suspect many people go their complete life and never have an intellectual experience that culminates in the “ecstasy of understanding”. How can this be true? I think that our educational system is designed primarily for filling heads with knowledge and hasn’t time to waste on ‘understanding’.

Understanding must come in the adult years if it is to ever come to many of us. I think that it is very important for an adult to find something intellectual that will excite his or her curiosity and concern sufficiently so as to motivate the effort necessary to understand.

We have little comprehension of ‘understanding’ because our schooling has taught us only to know. Understanding is a step beyond knowing and our society which values production and consumption has little use for understanding. Those who make public policy do not want a population that cares about understanding. The bull that understands will hook at the Matador rather than the cape.

Understanding is generally not valuable in our society and so we have little comprehension of what it is. However there seems to be one application for understanding. I have on several occasions heard a professor say that “you never really understand a subject until you try to teach it”. Here is one occasion that people can begin to comprehend the meaning of the concept. I suspect we all have a sense of what the professor is saying. So here is a ‘use’ for understanding and in this example we who only value that which is ‘useful’ can begin to gain a comprehension of the concept.

We imply that reason can be depended upon as a guide but we do not help the individual understand what reason is. The problem is that our schools and colleges are only now beginning to teach CT (Critical Thinking), which is the art and science of how to think. We adults were never taught how to think we were only taught what to think. If we do not learn how to think and how to help others learn how to think then we are giving only empty words. We are as ignorant of what reason is as those we wish to give up dogma for reason. Until we learn the art and science of reason we cannot help others to learn how to think.

Search for meaning through self-actuated study can provide a purpose similar to the purpose believers find in religion. Understanding resulting from study, leading to meaning and purpose, is perhaps a legitimate foil to dogma.

I think that understanding happens in that rare conflation of emotion and intelligence when we create a meaning that happens like a tipping point, like when water becomes ice, it gives the person a jolt, a eureka moment. When we understand we are creating meaning that is subjective but is what we find we must believe is true.

Comprehension is a hierarchy, resembling a pyramid, with awareness at the base followed by consciousness, succeeded by knowing, with understanding at the pinnacle.

I have concocted a metaphor set that might relay my comprehension of the difference between knowing and understanding.

Awareness--faces in a crowd.

Consciousness—smile, a handshake, and curiosity.

Knowledge—long talks sharing desires and ambitions.

Understanding—a best friend bringing constant April.

I am a retired engineer and my experience in the natural sciences leads me to conclude that these natural sciences are far more concerned with knowing than with understanding.

Understanding is a long step beyond knowing and most often knowing provides the results that technology demands. Technology, I think, does not want understanding because understanding is inefficient and generally not required. The natural scientists, with their paradigms, are puzzle solvers. Puzzles require ingenuity but seldom understanding.

Paladin · 01-14-2009, 05:11 PM

"Understanding" is such a wide ranging experience it would be difficult to limit it to what happens in the brain after a connection to what might be described as "seeing" happens.
I really like the metaphor used above "a best friend bringing constant April" The sheer poetry expressed here points to an ineffable and expansive range of happening.

The idea that critical thinking, that universal tool of analysis and judgment can eventually fall away upon deeper understanding appeals to me as well. For anyone who has looked deeply into the heart of what is and has discovered what Hui Nieng (sp?) referred to as "not a thing is" must be hard pressed to confer upon another an accurate account of that seeing with the tools of reason thus superceded.
This I suspect is the reason for the inscrutableness of the zen koan.

So the question put before us is: Is CT the precurser of understanding or just that which is the best of our ability to put things into order while we wait upon the great understanding?

seattlegal · 01-14-2009, 06:14 PM

There are just some things that are too slippery for critical thinking to 'grasp.'

17th Angel · 01-15-2009, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coberst

Everybody considers themselves to be a critical thinker. That is why we need to differentiate among different levels of critical thinking.

*gingerly raises his hand from the back of the classroom...*

Uhmm, I don't.

---
Critical thinking: consists of mental processes of discernment, analysis and evaluation. It includes possible processes of reflecting upon a tangible or intangible item in order to form a solid judgment that reconciles scientific evidence with common sense.
---

Too much work/effort.... Far more comfortable and easier to go with just the first chain of thought that comes to my mind... Heh, Just wanted to counter act that blanket statement.... Most is always a better word/more accurate; than Every.....

juantoo3 · 01-15-2009, 12:53 AM

I can see so many places for semantical nitpicking...but in the end it would serve no edifying purpose.

I would interject this much: what is being called here "understanding" I think I would call "realization" or "realizing." And I agree, the sciences and common education forego realization for the educational dogma. I suppose if we actually realized how our every action and behavior impacts other life around us, we may freeze like deer in the headlights at the overwhelming awesomeness that we have the capacity to influence. It's not enough to think again before stepping on the ant in our path, we must also look our McD's hamburger in the eye and keep our sanity, just the same as it was in the caves ten thousand years ago.

How's that for CT, foreplay and understanding?

coberst · 01-15-2009, 10:22 AM

I have been posting on Internet forums for five years and often I have posted something relating to CT because I consider that CT forms the foundation for self-actualizing self-learning.

I must say that I have never before encountered so many individuals on a single forum who display an understanding of this important domain of knowledge as does this forum.

I think that since there are so few of us who have some idea of CT that it would be desirable that those who do would take their message of understanding to other Internet forums in an effort to spread the word as far and as fast as possible. I am not suggesting that you leave this forum but that you add another forum to your activities.

juantoo3 · 01-15-2009, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coberst

I think that since there are so few of us who have some idea of CT that it would be desirable that those who do would take their message of understanding to other Internet forums in an effort to spread the word as far and as fast as possible. I am not suggesting that you leave this forum but that you add another forum to your activities.

I can't speak for any others, but for my part I don't feel the call in my heart to evangelize for CT. To me it is an adjunct of logic, and as such in proper context and perspective it can be a powerful tool, and in context I do teach it in such manner to those open to learning.

However, as Seattlegal pointed out, CT is not the be all and end all...there are matters of knowing and realizing that are outside the remit of CT. There are portions of reality beyond our ability to comprehend. I am afraid that favoring CT to the exclusion of other means of realizing and appreciating reality is to close one's mind to a vast portion of the landscape that is reality.

Paladin · 01-16-2009, 01:59 AM

For the most part I agree Juan, there are places in the human experience that far exceed the capability of pure reason.
But like Coberst I lament that CT is so rarely used in most human discourse. The last eight years of the Bu$h administration seems to bear that out.

Paladin · 01-16-2009, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

*gingerly raises his hand from the back of the classroom...*

Uhmm, I don't.

---
Critical thinking: consists of mental processes of discernment, analysis and evaluation. It includes possible processes of reflecting upon a tangible or intangible item in order to form a solid judgment that reconciles scientific evidence with common sense.
---

Too much work/effort.... Far more comfortable and easier to go with just the first chain of thought that comes to my mind... Heh, Just wanted to counter act that blanket statement.... Most is always a better word/more accurate; than Every.....

Maybe you could just make us a nice picture about CT, since your strongest intelligence seems to be visual rather than auditory. :O)

juantoo3 · 01-16-2009, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paladin

But like Coberst I lament that CT is so rarely used in most human discourse.

No argument from me there...however, I still have the fresh memory of the CT professor teaching lunacy and calling it "Critical Thinking." Thankfully I have the intellectual wherewithal to see it for what it is, in that particular case. Of course, that was the final confirmation for me that that particular prof was a flake.

I remember when he got to a quote in the book by Lao Tzu. He laughed at the man's name, mocked him, and completely overlooked the quote (and lesson within). Yet he praised Lou Tice?

Whatcha gonna do? I just shook my head in disbelief...to think people get paid professor's salaries to spew such drivel, and call it truth. And most students don't know the difference, and sadly such narrow-minded "education" merely closes their minds further still. It's no wonder "the classics" are set aside in favor of modern tripe.

coberst · 01-16-2009, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I can't speak for any others, but for my part I don't feel the call in my heart to evangelize for CT. To me it is an adjunct of logic, and as such in proper context and perspective it can be a powerful tool, and in context I do teach it in such manner to those open to learning.

However, as Seattlegal pointed out, CT is not the be all and end all...there are matters of knowing and realizing that are outside the remit of CT. There are portions of reality beyond our ability to comprehend. I am afraid that favoring CT to the exclusion of other means of realizing and appreciating reality is to close one's mind to a vast portion of the landscape that is reality.

I am convinced that my conclusion that "CT is philosophy lite" is a useful and accurate statement. It is necessay but not sufficient as a foundation for self-actualizing self-learning.

Making good judgments is an important and complex matter. There are bad judgments, good judgments, and better judgments. To make better judgments requires many kinds of knowledge, skills, and character traits all working together.

Our schools and colleges are beginning to teach these things but it is an effort that is just beginning and it is a difficult one to accomplish.

Just to give you an idea of what CT is about I have copied the following info from the Internet:

This info was taken from workbooks for classes K-12. This list is found in the following handbooks: Critical Thinking Handbook: k-3, Critical Thinking Handbook: 4-6, Critical Thinking Handbook: 6-9, Critical Thinking Handbook: High School.

A. Affective Strategies
S-1 thinking independently
Thru
S-9 developing confidence in reason

B. Cognitive Strategies - Macro-Abilities
S-10 refining generalizations and avoiding oversimplifications
Thru
S-26 reasoning dialectically: evaluating perspectives, interpretations, or theories

C. Cognitive Strategies - Micro-Skills
S-27 comparing and contrasting ideals with actual practice
Thru
S-35 exploring implications and consequences

S-1 Thinking Independently

Principle: Critical thinking is independent thinking, thinking for oneself. Many of our beliefs are acquired at an early age, when we have a strong tendency to form beliefs for irrational reasons (because we want to believe, because we are praised or rewarded for believing). Critical thinkers use critical skills and insights to reveal and reject beliefs that are irrational.

S-2 Developing Insight Into Egocentricity or Sociocentricity

Principle: Egocentricity means confusing what we see and think with reality. When under the influence of egocentricity, we think that the way we see things is exactly the way things are. Egocentricity manifests itself as an inability or unwillingness to consider others' points of view, a refusal to accept ideas or facts which would prevent us from getting what we want (or think we want).

S-3 Exercising Fairmindedness

Principle: To think critically, we must be able to consider the strengths and weaknesses of opposing points of view; to imaginatively put ourselves in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them; to overcome our egocentric tendency to identify truth with our immediate perceptions or long-standing thought or belief.

S-4 Exploring Thoughts Underlying Feelings and Feelings Underlying Thoughts

Principle: Although it is common to separate thought and feeling as though they were independent, opposing forces in the human mind, the truth is that virtually all human feelings are based on some level of thought and virtually all thought generative of some level of feeling. To think with self-understanding and insight, we must come to terms with the intimate connections between thought and feeling, reason and emotion.

S-5 Developing Intellectual Humility and Suspending Judgment

Principle: Critical thinkers recognize the limits of their knowledge. They are sensitive to circumstances in which their native egocentricity is likely to function self-deceptively; they are sensitive to bias, prejudice, and limitations of their views. Intellectual humility is based on the recognition that one should not claim more than one actually knows. It does not imply spinelessness or submissiveness.

S-6 Developing Intellectual Courage

Principle: To think independently and fairly, one must feel the need to face and fairly deal with unpopular ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints. The courage to do so arises when we see that ideas considered dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part) and that conclusions or beliefs inculcated in us are sometimes false or misleading.

S-7 Developing Intellectual Good Faith or Integrity

Principle: Critical thinkers recognize the need to be true to their own thought, to be consistent in the intellectual standards they apply, to hold themselves to the same rigorous standards of evidence and proof to which they hold others, to practice what they advocate for others, and to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in their own thought and action. They believe most strongly what has been justified by their own thought and analyzed experience.

S-8 Developing Intellectual Perseverance

Principle: Becoming a more critical thinker is not easy. It takes time and effort. Critical thinking is reflective and recursive; that is, we often think back to previous problems to re-consider or re-analyze them. Critical thinkers are willing to pursue intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations.

S-9 Developing Confidence in Reason

Principle: The rational person recognizes the power of reason and the value of disciplining thinking in accordance with rational standards. Virtually all of the progress that has been made in science and human knowledge testifies to this power, and so to the reasonability of having confidence in reason.

S-10 Refining Generalizations and Avoiding Oversimplifications

Principle: It is natural to seek to simplify problems and experiences to make them easier to deal with. Everyone does this. However, the uncritical thinker often oversimplifies and as a result misrepresents problems and experiences.

S-11 Comparing Analogous Situations: Transferring Insights to New Contexts

Principle: An idea's power is limited by our ability to use it. Critical thinkers' ability to use ideas mindfully enhances their ability to transfer ideas critically. They practice using ideas and insights by appropriately applying them to new situations. This allows them to organize materials and experiences in different ways, to compare and contrast alternative labels, to integrate their understanding of different situations, and to find useful ways to think about new situations.

S-12 Developing One's Perspective: Creating or Exploring Beliefs, Arguments, or Theories

Principle: The world is not given to us sliced up into categories with pre-assigned labels on them. There are always many ways to "divide up" and so experience the world. How we do so is essential to our thinking and behavior. Uncritical thinkers assume that their perspective on things is the only correct one. Selfish critical thinkers manipulate the perspectives of others to gain advantage for themselves.

S-13 Clarifying Issues, Conclusions, or Beliefs

Principle: The more completely, clearly, and accurately an issue or statement is formulated, the easier and more helpful the discussion of its settlement or verification. Given a clear statement of an issue, and prior to evaluating conclusions or solutions, it is important to recognize what is required to settle it. And before we can agree or disagree with a claim, we must understand it clearly.

S-14 Clarifying and Analyzing the Meanings of Words or Phrases

Principle: Critical, independent thinking requires clarity of thought. A clear thinker understands concepts and knows what kind of evidence is required to justify applying a word or phrase to a situation. The ability to supply a definition is not proof of understanding. One must be able to supply clear, obvious examples and use the concept appropriately. In contrast, for an unclear thinker, words float through the mind unattached to clear, specific, concrete cases. Distinct concepts are confused.

And so on

================================================== ==========

S-33 Giving Reasons and Evaluating Evidence and Alleged Facts

Principle: Critical thinkers can take their reasoning apart in order to examine and evaluate its components. They know on what evidence they base their conclusions. They realize that un-stated, unknown reasons can be neither communicated nor critiqued. They are comfortable being asked to give reasons; they don't find requests for reasons intimidating, confusing, or insulting.

S-34 Recognizing Contradictions

Principle: Consistency is a fundamental-some would say the defining-ideal of critical thinkers. They strive to remove contradictions from their beliefs, and are wary of contradictions in others. As would-be fairminded thinkers they strive to judge like cases in a like manner.

S-35 Exploring Implications and Consequences

Principle: Critical thinkers can take statements, recognize their implications-what follows from them-and develop a fuller, more complete understanding of their meaning. They realize that to accept a statement one must also accept its implications. They can explore both implications and consequences at length. When considering beliefs that relate to actions or policies, critical thinkers assess the consequences of acting on those beliefs.

{This list is found in the following handbooks: Critical Thinking Handbook: k-3, Critical Thinking Handbook: 4-6, Critical Thinking Handbook: 6-9, Critical Thinking Handbook: High School.}

http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/drugfree/sa3crit.htm

/

seattlegal · 01-16-2009, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Critical thinkers are willing to pursue intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations.

Blinding flash of the obvious: intellectual insights, by definition, are often the resolution of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations. {Now, back to the frustrating koan training...}

Paladin · 01-16-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

S-2 Developing Insight Into Egocentricity or Sociocentricity

Principle: Egocentricity means confusing what we see and think with reality. When under the influence of egocentricity, we think that the way we see things is exactly the way things are. Egocentricity manifests itself as an inability or unwillingness to consider others' points of view, a refusal to accept ideas or facts which would prevent us from getting what we want (or think we want).

Unfortunately, this is the method of choice for most of the interaction between people, even here on the forum.
SG, I see your point, and agree for the most part, but education in critical thinking skills would take young people very far in their intellectual endeavors.
You and Juan are both intellectually honest and both of you have fine minds, pity so many others do not.

seattlegal · 01-16-2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paladin

Unfortunately, this is the method of choice for most of the interaction between people, even here on the forum.
SG, I see your point, and agree for the most part, but education in critical thinking skills would take young people very far in their intellectual endeavors.
You and Juan are both intellectually honest and both of you have fine minds, pity so many others do not.

I agree that teaching critical thinking skills is important. However, does such a heavily structured program such as as the one presented encourage thinking outside the box, or does the formula-type presentation lend itself towards herding minds into a box? Is critical thinking an art or a science? Both, perhaps?

Take a gander at this part of the presentation:

Principle: Critical thinkers can take statements, recognize their implications-what follows from them-and develop a fuller, more complete understanding of their meaning. They realize that to accept a statement one must also accept its implications. They can explore both implications and consequences at length. When considering beliefs that relate to actions or policies, critical thinkers assess the consequences of acting on those beliefs.

What would be the consequences of such a heavily structured program? Would it take the "art" out of critical thinking?

Paladin · 01-16-2009, 07:03 PM

I don't think so SG. Rather I tend to think that this kind of program would be no more harmful than teaching the fundamentals of music to a budding musician. Some of the best and brightest of our species received a standard education before going further with their ideas. Of course you can find exceptions, but in most cases in most disciplines those that have the basic tools go on to greater things by "standing on the shoulders of giants" as Newton opined.