Critical Thinking And Education Philosophy Essay

unfavourable sentiment And Education Philosophy EssayAfter providing a conceptual entry of pragmatism, sensibleity, objectivity, and the goals of schooling, a discussion of deprecative cerebration is made to present a concept of deprecative intellection which is 1) normative 2) comprising of skill, tycoon, and habits of mind and 3) acquiring gifted resources. To address the vagueness of the concept itself, this review lends itself to the work of Israel Scheffler and Harvey Siegel, in align to yield a defensible proposal on how faultfinding persuasion lav be inf go ford inside the facts of lifeal broadcast. lively intellection as an educational aimThe current interest go forthd on lively thought in the education context is strong up-founded. Citing Scheffler, Combs (2009) stated that education should be centr every(prenominal)y concerned with underdeveloped keen-sightedity, groundsableness, and deprecative thought (p. 175). Moreover, Siegel (1988) provided the underlying principles on wherefore scathing thought essential(prenominal) be emphasized in young education. First, because the youth base up the crop of tomorrows leaders, the education system must(prenominal)(prenominal) enable them to develop detailed thinking as a dent towards a productive and rewarding life. Second, the increase of unfavorable thinking is viewed as a moral obligation of administrators and teachers to instill in students the ability to negotiate diverse views with respect and foster a climate of open-mindedness. Siegel thought that pr scourting students to critic anyy think was a form of oppression. Third, the thrust of vital thinking is lucid with the belief that rationality is key towards a productive life for all. Fourth, in line with Deweys thoughts on pragmatism, full of life thinking is a crucial particle of democratic citizenship.Scheffler further describes circumstantial thinking as an educational grand which would allow children to assess their beliefs, desires, actions, and their cognitive and non-cognitive emotions based on fascinate criteria or standards and estimable actor, and controld them in the captious dialogues that relate to every study of civilization (Scheffler, 1991, p. 64). Education should non only be aimed at the development of critical abilities, tho excessively at the development of the cognitive emotions and virtues, the critical attitude (Scheffler, 1991). Every educator must endeavor to ensure that all children blossom into critical intellects. sarcastic thinking is signifi bedt to the ethics, epistemology, content, and manner of education (Siegel, 1988). Its ramifications be broad in scope and pose serious implications to bon ton at large, non only to persons world educated. The key aspects of critical thinking include rational virtues (skills and dispositions to try in an impartial manner) and to deliberate with objectivity, even dis cyphering self-interest in the p assage. These elements argon indispensable to moral education (Scheffler, 1973). In science education, critical thinking ability helps students evaluate the faculty of reasons and the defensibility of arguments in order to evaluate which among competing paradigms or theories is best. Critical thinking is in like manner an indispensable aspect of the practical component of education. The skills and know-how of students which figure prominently into the curriculum wait critical thinking. Reading, spelling, and mathematics do non only require processual skills but the ability to apply criteria or good reasoning to precise domains of inquiry. While operative principles may be taught, students take critical thought to practice these skills effectively. Furthermore, in the context of teaching, critical thinking is rein thrustd by a teachers critical inwardness considered a principal obligation (Scheffler, 1973). In the context of teaching, good teaching requires educators to dev elop in students the skills and attitudes as describe in the two-component theory of critical thinking which volition be discussed afterwards (Siegel, 1988).Critical thinking a normative conceptThat critical thinking is a normative concept means that it is an educational ideal a goal that educators and administrators must strive to aim. It similarly means that critical thinking is considered generally pertinent in the educational realm. As an educational ideal, critical thinking is helpful in organizing the educational enterprise as well as set accusings of educational efforts. Mainly, critical thinking as a normative concept addresses the questions of 1) the purpose of education, and 2) the manner of education.Our basic concept of critical thinking is essentially a normative notion, i.e. that critical thinking is in some sense good thinking. It is the quality of the thinking, not the processes of thinking, which distinguishes critical from noncritical thinking. In addition to deciding how to describe critical thinking activities and standards, we need to decide the boundaries of critical thinking, i.e. what sorts of tasks we see critical thinking as encompassing. Critical thinking is sometimes contrasted with problem solving, decision fashioning, issue analysis and inquiry. toll such as problem solving and decision making set apart rather general kinds of thinking tasks. But, carrying out these tasks typically requires one to shuffle a number of judgments, and the thinking that leads to these judgments stomach either fulfill pertinent standards of good thinking. One may solve a problem in a critical or an uncritical manner. So, problem solving, decision making, etc., atomic number 18 best seen as argonnas in which critical thinking should take place rather than as early(a)(a) kinds of thinking to be contrasted with critical thinking.Critical thinking draws from rationality and reasonableness as fundamental concepts (Scheffler, 1982). However, c ritical thinking is considered not only an element of rationality but an aspect which co-exists with it (Siegel, 1997). As such, critical thinking may be considered an educational cognate of rationality since it emphasizes both on beliefs and actions (p. 2). By this comment alone, we gage consider the critical thinker as an individual who is do by reasons both in thought and action. Siegels reasons conception consists of two components reason legal opinion and critical spirit the former deals with the epistemic realm of reasons while the latter focuses on the motivational realm. This theory merits additional discussion.The two-component theory of critical thinking1. The reason sagacity componentSiegel considers the critical thinker as an individual possessing the skill and ability to evaluate reasons and arguments using logical or epistemic standards. Siegel ( evidence and Education, 1997) quoted Schefflers view that the critical thinker is not just being moved by reasons by by appropriate reasons (p. 20). What this means is that a critical thinker takes it within himself or herself the epistemic responsibility for this thoughts. To be appropriately moved by good reasons is to consciously accept and appreciate the sizeableness of having evidential force to justify thought and actions. In determine what standards are considered meritous, Scheffler (as cited in Siegel, Reason and Education, 1997) saidHowever, what reasons are appropriate is not fixed once and for ever. It depends on principles which themselves are the result of evolving traditions and may be different for various domains. there are no fixed foundations. The most fundamental presupposition underlying Schefflers epistemology and philosophy of education is the possibility of rational evaluation of principles of rationality. (p. 21)While the acceptability of reasons is not fixed, Schefflers (1973) epistemology of rationality warrant reasons to be consistent, impartial, and non-arbitrary. Cri tical thinking acknowledges that universal and objective principles give up a binding force, but subject to evaluation. The principle-based voice of critical thinking is what gives it its normative character. Critical thinking is not merely a cognitive mental process but a mental process that meets epistemic criteria, separated by good and bad reasons. An individual who thinks critically is one who is able to evaluate reasons and as accredited whether prospective reasons are good or bad based on their evidential force and in light of standards or criteria.Siegel (1988, 1997) and other theorists who support critical thinking categorize the principle of reasons of judging into 1) general (subject-neutral), 2) principles (context-bound) and 3) subject-specific. There are debates on whether reasons assessment should be based on the generalist or the specifist view and to what period reasons can be considered general or specific. As far as Siegel is concerned, the subject-specific c riteria overlook the blurring of boundaries between genres and must be debunked. Siegel proposes that while there may be different criteria, the epistemologies operating are more or slight similar. The more significant consideration for Siegel is how beliefs are justified based on good reasons and supported by universal but fallible standards. This could be interpreted as generalist or a form of contextualism because Siegel supports the assignment of good reasons across a range of contexts. Siegel (1997) elaboratesWe are entitled to regard these various criteria as appropriate criteria of reason assessment, and to appeal to them in order to establish or determine the goodness of putative reasons, only because they are sanctioned by a common epistemology a theoretical apprehensiveness of the nature of reasons, according to which putative criteria are recognizable as appropriate criteria of reason assessment. (p. 32)The point Siegel tries to make is that although various groups may have their avouch standards to judge whether reasons are good or bad, they are still governed by common epistemology for justification across different contexts.Furthermore, one question is if emotions are relevant to reasons assessment. Scheffler (2010) described the role of emotions in reasoning, showing how the rational passions establish to critical thinking. Inquiry is not a dispassionate activity, disassociated from emotion. Rather, people can be very emotionally committed to the search for truth and bursting charge passionately that the outcome of an inquiry be the best justified. much(prenominal) rational passions as love of truth, repugnance of distortion and evasion, and respect for the arguments of others as well as emotions such as curiosity, surprise and the joy of verification (Scheffler 1991) all play a significant role in inquiry, and educational efforts should be directed to their development.In addition, emotions play an primary(prenominal) role in rational a ssessment in several focuss. One way is by confining and directing attention and rendering salient certain aspects of our experience. This likely has to do with connections established in the past between certain emotions and rational assessments. Such emotions can provide useful cues for future assessments, but their adequacy must be assessed through rational criteria.2. The critical spirit componentBecause critical thinking is, in our view, thinking in such a way as to fulfill relevant standards, it is the standards of good thinking that provide the criteria for determining what attributes are important for critical thinkers. If an attribute is required by persons in order to fulfill a standard of good thinking, or if it will significantly increase the chances that their thinking will fulfill such standards, it can legitimately be regarded as an attribute that should be fostered in a critical thinker.Having the intellectual resources necessary for critical thinking does not, by itself, make one a critical thinker. One must likewise have certain commitments, attitudes or habits of mind that dispose himor her to use these resources to fulfill relevant standards and principles of good thinking. Moreover, as Siegel (1988 9) points out, the critical thinkers tendency to ful l the standards and principles of good thinking cannot be mindless or simply the result of habituation. Rather, it must be based on a recognition of the value of critical thinking, i.e. its magnificence in fostering true belief and responsible action.Siegel recognizes that while reason assessment is a necessary condition for critical thinking, it is not a sufficient one. For example, a critical thinker may be furnished with the skill to evaluate reasons but not be pre abandoned to use it. Moreover, it is not enough that a critical thinker is capable of assessing the probative force of reasons the critical thinker should also be inclined to look out good reasons and disposed to question w hether or not view reasons fit epistemological criteria. Hence, for a person to become a critical thinker, he or she must be able to habitually engage in reason assessment. In addition, a person must also have a complexity of attitudes, dispositions, character traits, and habits of mind or what Siegel refers to as the critical spirit.Siegels conception of the critical spirit means that critical thought is not a product merely of skill but also of character and motivation. The critical thinker then not only value the use of good reasons and evidentiary power in judgment or deliberation, he or she must also be willing and motivated to evaluate those reasons based on consistent, impartial and non-arbitrary criteria. In other words, the critical spirit is the life force of reasons. The critical spirit motivates and guides a critical thinker in action and belief-formation. Siegel (1997) considers that having reason assessment ability as well as the critical spirit are significant are in dividually and jointly sufficient requirements for a person to become a critical thinker.In defense of the critical spirit component, Siegel (1997) enumerates some of the traits that may figure into a complex of dispositions, attitudes, habits of mind, and character traits (p. 35) found in the critical thinkerdispositions to seek reasons and evidence in making judgments respect for the importance of reasoned judgment and for truth a rejection of partiality, arbitrariness, special pleading, wishful thinking, and other obstacles to the proper exercise of reason assessment and reason judgment habits of reason seeking and evaluating, engaging in the fairminded and non-self-interested consideration of such reasons.(pp. 35-36)On the other hand, Scheffler (2010) also describes the critical thinker as disposed to the following traits objectivity, consistency, penetrative aversion to contradiction, repugnance of error, disgust at evasion, love of reason, love of truth, and wonderment of th eoretical achievement.That character is indispensable in the formation of the critical thinker has been criticized (Missimer, 1990). The so-called character view espoused by Siegel is said to run in contradiction to the contributions of the worlds greatest thinkers. The intellectual greats such as Marx, Rousseau, Bacon, Freud, Russell, Newton, and Feynmann lacked many of the traits which the character view holds to be necessary for critical thinking. Marx was considered anti-Semitic Newton was loth(predicate) to criticism of his work Rousseau and Fenymann were venal and rude to people who espoused incorrect ideas Freud was a hothead and Russell lied about his support for the U.S. nuclear program (Missimer, 1990, pp. 146-147). Accordingly, Siegels definition would not make the greatest intellectuals history has ever known critical thinkers.Critical thinking as identity constitution and self-sufficiencyBecause critical thinking is fundamental educational ideal, Siegel (1997) conside rs it crucial in identity constitution. Critical thinking develops not only out of honing reasoning ability but also cultivating a motivational complex to create character disposed to the critical spirit. Character traits are fostered which constitute the critical spirit component, making up the traits of a particular type of person or identity. Thus, developing critical thinking entails no less than the formation of a certain identity. In the context of education, young people must be taught not only how to think critically, but more importantly, how to be critical thinkers. Therefore, making critical thinking a constitutive ideal is to propose for educational programs which focus on character-formation in support of critical thinking.Equally important to the concept of critical thinking is self-sufficiency. Aside from critical thinking being coexisting with rationality, autonomy also figures into the same educational ideal. Siegel (1988) considered the importance of autonomyIf we accept critical thinking as a fundamental educational ideal, we explicitly acknowledge the desirability of the attainment by students of self-sufficiency and autonomy . . . The critical thinker must be autonomous-that is, free to act and judge independently of external constraint, on the basis of her own reasoned estimate of the matter at hand. (p. 54)Autonomy is a state characterized by self-government. equal to critical thinking, autonomy is also identity-constitutive in the sense that it makes up a certain type of person. Educators should strive in order to develop students who are autonomous agents. Autonomy is necessarily aligned with rationalityThis aspect of the educational ideal of rationality aligns it with the complementary ideal of autonomy , since a rational person will also be an autonomous one, capable of judicial decision for herself the justifiedness of candidate beliefs and the legitimacy of candidate values. (p. 56)An autonomous person is one who makes his or h er own choices by evaluating them rationally and critically. Siegel (1988) expresses that choosing is not enough for autonomy to surface. A student must be a competent chooser and not subservient to conditions or standards he or she accepts uncritically. Also, a person can be a proto critical thinker because he or becomes slave to reason without having the necessary motivation to propel critical thought.Autonomy, then, requires not only independence in the execution of the action but also with respect to the motivation behind the action. For autonomy to be present, there must also be autonomy in the feelings, emotions, evaluation, or restructuring of principles. Autonomy must exist not only in relation to the reason assessment component of critical thinking but also on the critical spirit component.