Developing Critical Thinking Skills
The motif in this section primarily focuses on critical thinking and what it is, which is appropriate in conjunction to the title. The author raises the question, through the means of using an analogy, of what is critical thinking. One might give a simplistic an answer as "good thinking", but the author takes it a step further by asking the question a critical thinker would ask, why? In turn, causing the reader to ponder over the same question.
Instead of coming right out and telling the reader the answer, the author lets the reader play an active role in determining the definition of critical thinking. Pointing out indirectly concepts such as what qualifies as being labeled critical thinking and what are its limitations, to name a few. In other words, a paradigm case that distinguishes, in a generalized sense, the ability to set aside fact from fiction. From another perspective, a glass with water filled to the center. It can either be considered half empty or half full depending upon how one perceives the glass of water.
The attributes of a good critical thinker consists of, among other things, being able to reason, evaluate and or analyze information relevant to the case, and interpret that information clearly. The author uses the example of an effective trial lawyer. In transition to a critical thinker's attributes, critical thinking may also be a collective effort. By collective I mean a group of people coming together for the soul purpose of solving a problem without a winner take all attitude. Something the author states as "...collaborative, noncompetitive endeavor." Well put, if I do say so myself.
With abstract concepts, everyone will have different opinions due to the wide range of prior experiences. In light of this, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, whither it is consistent with others opinions or not. However, there are those who refuse to reason and be open-minded to the "possibility of new and relevant information." Thus, increasing the likelihood of passing on information that is obsolete and or not completely accurate.
What separates the good critical thinkers from the poor critical thinkers? According to the author, good critical thinkers have two strong attributes, which are cognitive skills and affective dispositions, were as the poor critical thinkers lack these attributes or is not as well developed with these traits. The cognitive skills branch off into six sub categories, which consists of interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation.
Interpretation is basically putting into words what one hears, feels, sees, tastes, or smells. Analysis is, to an extent, taking something apart and putting it back together. Fairly simplistic, then again, simplicity is beautiful. Evaluation is the process of filtering information regarding a specific subject matter with the end result of drawing a conclusion. Inference, on the other hand, is a form of premeditation that touches upon a specific subject matter. The outcome that is thought to occur is tested to either reinforce or reevaluate one's prior hypothesis. Explanation is the ability to clearly inform others of what was gathered from the combination of analysis and evaluation. On the same token, it may also be indirectly related to, but not limited to, interpretation. Self-regulation deals with the practice of covering one's own tracks, per say. Nothing a person says is written into stone, unless under unusual circumstances, and so he or she is able to fine-tune his or her ideas and or statements. Vital in critical thinking due to the fact that the person is not bounded by the words he or she says. There is always room for improvement and critical thinking is no exception.
The author brings up the argument that people with poor critical thinking skills may not lack these core critical thinking skill. They just choose not to use them. Then again, there is a thing, as mentioned by the author, called pervasive. Our minds are constantly trying to make sense of the world and the life that surrounds it. So as long as this concept is present, critical thinking is necessary.
Another attribute that good critical thinkers have, as mentioned earlier, is affective dispositions. That is, being analytical or, as the author puts it, having a "critical spirit". Having that drive to not only acquire knowledge, but to go beyond just the surface of what is there and question whither the information obtained is true in its claims. All leading back to the question a critical thinker would ask, why?
Critical thinkers are similar to a glass of water in many ways. Like critical thinkers, the glass of water, if poured into a new container, is able to adjust to it's new environment, much like a critical thinker obtaining new factual information that is not consistent with his or her own. Thus, adjusting to and integrating the new found information with one's prior knowledge. Being flexible and open-minded to new and different concepts and ideas. A good, effective critical thinker not only posses these traits but also cognitive skills and affective dispositions that, overall, makes critical thinkers what they are.
