In: Economics
28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”
29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.[a]30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[b]31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[c]There is no commandment greater than these.”
Mark 12:28-31
Our Concept and Definition of Critical Thinking
The Problem
Everyone thinks. It is our nature to do so. But much of our
thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial,
uninformed, or downright prejudiced. Yet, the quality of our life
and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on
the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in
money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must
be systematically cultivated.
A Definition
Critical thinking is that mode of thinking — about any subject,
content, or problem — in which the thinker improves the quality of
his or her thinking by skillfully analyzing, assessing, and
reconstructing it. Critical thinking is self-directed,
self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It
presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful
command of their use. It entails effective communication and
problem-solving abilities, as well as a commitment to overcome our
native egocentrism and sociocentrism.
To Analyze
Thinking
Identify its purpose, and question at issue, as well as its
information, inferences(s), assumptions, implications, main
concept(s), and point of view.
To Assess
Thinking
Check it for clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth,
breadth, significance, logic, and fairness.
The Result
A well-cultivated critical thinker:
The Etymology & Dictionary Definition of "Critical Thinking"
The concept of critical thinking we adhere to reflects a concept embedded not only in a core body of research over the last 30 to 50 years but also derived from roots in ancient Greek. The word ’’critical’’ derives etymologically from two Greek roots: "kriticos" (meaning discerning judgment) and "kriterion" (meaning standards). Etymologically, then, the word implies the development of "discerning judgment based on standards."
In Webster’s New World Dictionary, the relevant entry reads "characterized by careful analysis and judgment" and is followed by the gloss, "critical — in its strictest sense — implies an attempt at objective judgment so as to determine both merits and faults." Applied to thinking, then, we might provisionally define critical thinking as thinking that explicitly aims at well-founded judgment and hence utilizes appropriate evaluative standards in the attempt to determine the true worth, merit, or value of something.
The tradition of research into critical thinking reflects the common perception that human thinking left to itself often gravitates toward prejudice, over-generalization, common fallacies, self-deception, rigidity, and narrowness.
The critical thinking tradition seeks ways of understanding the mind and then training the intellect so that such "errors", "blunders", and "distortions" of thought are minimized. It assumes that the capacity of humans for good reasoning can be nurtured and developed by an educational process aimed directly at that end.
The history of critical thinking documents the development of this insight in a variety of subject matter domains and in a variety of social situations. Each major dimension of critical thinking has been carved out in intellectual debate and dispute through 2400 years of intellectual history.
That history allows us to distinguish two contradictory intellectual tendencies: a tendency on the part of the large majority to uncritically accept whatever was presently believed as more or less eternal truth and a conflicting tendency on the part of a small minority — those who thought critically — to systematically question what was commonly accepted and seek, as a result, to establish sounder, more reflective criteria and standards for judging what it does and does not make sense to accept as true.