TBers, 

Our last TB, which was on Oct. 2, was pretty sparsely attended so we are
going to try the Critical Thinking idea again at our next meeting ­ which is
Wednesday, Nov. 5 at 8 am in Morris Hall.  Dr. Koch of our Philosophy
Department, and long time teacher of courses on critical thinking provides
some of his thoughts on this topic below.  I hope to see many of you then.


Mr. James B. Greenberg
Director Teaching, Learning and Technology Center
Milne Library 
SUNY College at Oneonta
Oneonta, New York 13820

email: [log in to unmask]
phone: 607-436-2701

"Ignorance is curable, stupidity lasts forever"


------ Forwarded Message
From: "Michael P. Koch" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 16:51:13 -0400
To: Jim Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Critical Thinking

Jim,
Here are some thoughts on the issue of "Critical Thinking."  They are more
hasty and much more tardy than I hoped they would be, but they may lead to
some discussion.  Feel free to forward to any and all.

Any discussion of  critical thinking might well begin with an attempt to
define the subject.  Critical thinking in philosophy often study informal
logic, argumentation in ordinary language, belief and reasons for beliefs,
critical reading and writing, the appearance/reality distinction...the list
might well be extended, especially if one looks at critical thinking across
the disciplines.  In addition, I would argue that a thorough training in
critical thinking must include minimally all the topics included in the list
above.  As so conceived the subject matter  of critical thinking is
synonymous with the subject matter of philosophy, but that is a topic for
another day.  What I want to suggest right now is that in order to teach
critical thinking one must teach intellectual values.  To put it more
strongly, thinking critically depends upon certain normative assumptions
involving the value of having good reasons for one¹s beliefs.  These values
rest upon a certain view of the relation of ideas to reality.  Without such
intellectual values one may be able to ³think critically² within a narrow
domain where one has embraced a particular method or approach, but one will
not have acquired the general virtue of thinking critically.  It the
fragmented, discipline specific conception of critical thinking that
³teaching critical thinking across the disciplines² accomplishes.  This
approach will teach a student that in, for example, psychology, one does
such and such.  In chemistry one will do something else.  Some students come
to general conclusions about how to problem solve and think from this, but
many do not.  I see this in the juniors and seniors in my critical thinking
classes.  Many of them have not adopted the normative assumptions of
necessary for critical thinking.  Nor do they accept the appearance/reality
distinction that is the cornerstone of thinking critically.  Many students
come to college with vocational goals and learn what is need to function
well in their chosen discipline.  Outside of this discipline they are
³pragmatic know-nothings² with a subjectivist view of reality.  These
attitudes undermine the ability to think critically.

What, then, are the normative assumptions that undermine the ability to
think critically.  Most succinctly it can be said that it is the view that
knowledge is valuable.  For many students knowledge is a chore, it is
something that they must acquire in order to get the
degree/certification/job they want.  In discussing ³What are you in
college?² with my ethics classes some students say it is because they want
to learn, but it is a small portion of the classes.  This is difficult for
academics to understand because, so many of us view knowledge as
intrinsically valuable.  The search for the truth can be difficult.  As we
know and as our students know, it can be hard work.  Most of us work either
because we get something in exchange for the work or because there is an
intrinsic value in that work.  Students need to see knowledge as valuable if
they are to do the work needed to be knowledgeable.  In order to do the work
necessary, for example, to discover which candidate for is best suited to
the office.  The tendency is to operate on hunches, gut feelings, the odd
tantalizing position.  Beyond that it is work.  People need to be taught
that knowledge is valuable.  They need see that knowledge is power and that
ignorance is dangerous.  One way of doing this, the way I currently employ
in my critical thinking classes, is to confront students on their cognitive
home ground, but not by addressing their core beliefs, these must come
later.  Irrational core beliefs will not be questioned if the maintenance of
the belief is seen as more valuable than either the truth or rationality.
Thus I begin the semester by investigating their knee-jerk relativism and
superstitions.  For the most part this seems to work, especially if I can
communicate the deleterious effects of such beliefs and approaches to
beliefs.  In doing this I take a largely pragmatic approach by asking the
normative question:  What, in the long run, is the best belief or approach
to knowledge?  This may be a way to get them the ³knowledge is power² part.
The love of knowledge itself perhaps comes with communicating the passion
and joy of inquiry.

However the pragmatic approach is not enough.  One must teach students to
value the truth and to belief that there is such a thing as the truth.  One
needs to exorcise the ³true to me² demon.  ³True to me² translates into, ³I
do not need to think about this.²  It is difficult to convert one¹s
student¹s to the belief in truth.  Relativism is the medium of the popular
media.  However, as I have said, the relativism is a knee-jerk relativism.
It is best undermined by reflection, by focusing on what relativism is and
what its consequences are.  Even getting students to see that relativism is
self-refuting is a significant step.

I must admit that I had not expected that teaching higher would involve
teaching values.  Nor did I expect that teaching philosophy would involve
teaching students what to believe.  I believed that values where for home.
Intellectual values, however, lie at the foundation what we do.  A ³firm
sense of reality² is part of the intellectual background critical thinking.
In teaching critical thinking, we ought to convey both.

Michael Koch

------ End of Forwarded Message