Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts Peter A. Facione Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences Santa Clara University Have you heard business executives, definition so broad that all movie violence civic leaders, and educators talking about would be automatically “offensive.” And critical thinking and found yourself asking check to be sure your way of defining such reasonable questions as, “What is “offensive violence” fits with how the rest of critical thinking?” and “Why is it so the people who know and use English would important?” So have we. This essay looks understand the term. Otherwise they will not at these questions. be able to understand what you mean when you use that expression. Before we begin, though, give this little thought experiment a try. Imagine you Did you come up with a definition that have been invited to a movie by a friend. But works? How do you know? it*s not a movie you want to see. So, your friend asks you why. You give your honest What you just did with the expression reason — the movie offends your sense of “offensive violence” is very much the same decency, not because of the language used as what had to be done with the expression or the sexuality portrayed, but because of the “critical thinking.” At one level we all know violence it depicts so graphically. Sure, that what “critical thinking” means — it means should be a good enough answer. But good thinking, almost the opposite of suppose your friend pursues the matter by illogical, irrational, thinking. But when we asking you to define “offensive violence.” test our understanding further, we run into Well, take a minute and give it a try. How questions. For example, is critical thinking would you define “offensive violence” as it the same as creative thinking, are they applies to movies? Can you write a different, or is one part of the other? How do characterization which captures what this critical thinking and native intelligence or commonly used concept contains? Take scholastic aptitude relate? Does critical care, though, we would not want to make the thinking focus on the subject matter or Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts 1998 update Page 1 content that you know or on the process you use when you reason about that content? How Has CT Changed My Life? It might not hurt at all if you formed "Critical Thinking is my life, it's my some preliminary ideas about the questions philosophy of life. It's how I define we just raised. We humans learn better myself... I'm an educator because I when we stop frequently to reflect, rather think these ideas have meaning. than just plowing along from the top of the I'm convinced that what we believe page to the bottom without coming up for air. in has to be able to stand the test Fine. So how would you propose we of evaluation." go about defining “critical thinking.” You don*t really want a definition plopped on the John Chaffee, author of Critical page for you to memorize, do you? That Thinking would be silly, almost counterproductive. The goal here is to help you sharpen your critical thinking skills and cultivate your critical thinking spirit. While memorization definitely has many valuable uses, fostering critical Back to critical thinking. What might thinking is not among them. So, let*s look be some paradigm cases? How about the back at what you might have done to define patient questioning of Socrates? Or, what “offensive violence” and see if we can learn about trial lawyers, as portrayed in TV from you. Did you think of some examples of dramas and movies? What about people scenes in movies that were offensively working together to solve a problem? How violent, and did you contrast them with other about someone who is good at listening to all scenes that were either not violent or not sides of a dispute, considering all the facts, offensively violent? If you did, good. That is and then deciding what is relevant and what one (but not the only) way to approach the is not, and ten rendering a thoughtful problem. Technically it*s called finding judgment? And maybe too, someone who is paradigm cases. But, like many things in life, able to summarize complex ideas clearly with you do not have to know its name to do it fairness to all sides, or a person who can well. come up with the most coherent and justifiable explanation of what a passage of written material means? Or the person who can readily devise sensible alternatives to explore, but who does not become defensive about abandoning them if they don*t work? And also the person who can explain exactly how a particular conclusion was reached, or why certain criteria apply? A group of international experts was asked to try to form a consensus about the meaning of critical thinking. One of the first things they did was to ask themselves the question: Who are the best critical thinkers we know and what is it about them that leads us to consider them the best? So, who are Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts 1998 update Page 2 the best critical thinkers you know? Why do reasonably assess as non-offensive. Yes, you think they are good critical thinkers? well, so did we. This is going to happen with Can you draw from those examples a all abstract concepts. It happens with the description that is more abstract? For concept of critical thinking as well. There are example, consider effective trial lawyers, people of whom we would say, on certain apart from how they conduct their personal occasions this person is a good thinker, lives or whether their client is really guilty or clear, logical, thoughtful, attentive to the innocent, just look at how the lawyers facts, open to alternatives, but, wow, at other develop their cases in court. They use times, look out! When you get this person on reasons to try to convince the judge and jury such-and-such a topic, well it*s all over then. of their client*s claim to guilt or innocence. You*ve pushed some kind of button and the They offer evidence and evaluate the person does not want to hear what anybody significance of the evidence and presented else has to say. The person*s mind is made by the opposition lawyers. They interpret up ahead of time. New facts are pushed testimony. They analyze and evaluate the aside. No other point of view is tolerated. arguments advanced by the other side. Now, consider the example of the team of people Do you know any people that might fit trying to solve a problem. The team that general description? members, unlike the courtroom*s adversarial situation, try to collaborate. The members of Good. What can we learn about an effective team do not compete against critical thinking from such a case? Maybe each other, they work in concert, like more than we can learn from just looking at colleagues, for the common goal. Unless the easy cases. For when a case is on the they solve the problem, none of them has borderline, it forces us to make important won. When they find the way to solve the distinctions. It confronts us and demands a problem, they all have won. So, from decision: In or Out! And not just that, but analyzing just two examples we can why! So, our friend who is fair-minded about generalize something very important: critical some things, but close-minded about others, thinking is thinking that has a purpose what to do? Let*s take the parts we approve (proving a point, interpreting what something of because they seem to us to contribute to means, solving a problem), but critical acting rationally and logically and include thinking can be a collaborative, those in the concept of critical thinking, and noncompetitive endeavor. And, by the way, let*s take the parts that work against reason, even lawyers collaborate. They can work that close the mind to the possibility of new together on a common defense or a joint and relevant information, that blindly deny prosecution, and they can also cooperate even the possibility that the other side might with each other to get at the truth so that have merit, and call those poor, justice is done. counterproductive, or uncritical thinking. We will come to a more precise definition of critical thinking soon enough. But first, there is something else we can learn from paradigm examples. When you were thinking about “offensive violence” did you come up with any examples that were tough to classify? Borderline cases, as it were — an example that one person might consider offensive but another might Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts 1998 update Page 3 Quoting from the consensus “Very few really seek knowledge in statement of the national panel of experts: this world. Mortal or immortal, few interpretation is “to comprehend and really ask. On the contrary, they try to express the meaning or significance of a wring from the unknown the answers wide variety of experiences, situations, data, they have already shaped in their own events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, minds – justification, explanations, rules, procedures, or criteria.”1 Interpretation forms of consolation without which includes the sub-skills of categorization, they can’t go on. To really ask is to decoding significance, and clarifying open the door to the whirlwind.