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 one’s beliefs.  These values rest upon a certain view of the relation of ideas to reality.  Without such intellectual values one may be able to “think critically” 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 “teaching critical thinking across the disciplines” 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 “pragmatic know-nothings” 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 “What are you in college?” 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 “knowledge is power” 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 “true to me” demon.  “True to me” translates into, “I do not need to think about this.”  It is difficult to convert one’s student’s 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 “firm sense of reality” is part of the intellectual background critical thinking.  In teaching critical thinking, we ought to convey both.

Michael Koch

------ End of Forwarded Message