Blog - by Linda Elder with Richard Paul Archives

{"ops":[{"insert":"Strive to understand the reasoning of others, what desires most likely drive this reasoning, and what emotions most likely accompany it. During disagreements, try to see things from the other person’s point of view – it is common for people to declare disagreement without actually understanding the thinking that they are positioning themselves against. When considering things from other people’s viewpoints, you will often find accuracies and inaccuracies on the part of every involved party (yourself included), as well as instances of better and worse reasoning. Being able and willing to reconstruct, as accurately as possible, how others think and feel is very important, both for functional interpersonal relationships and for your own development and wellbeing.\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Intellectual empathy "},{"insert":"is awareness of the need to actively entertain views that differ from your own, especially those you strongly disagree with. It is to accurately reconstruct the viewpoints and reasoning of your opponents and to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas other than your own. Questions that foster intellectual empathy include:\n\nTo what extent do I accurately represent viewpoints I disagree with?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Can I summarize the views of my opponents to their satisfaction? Can I see insights in the views of others and prejudices in my own?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Do I sympathize with the feelings of others in light of their thinking differently than me?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Internalize the Idea: Intellectual Empathy"},{"insert":"\n \nTry to reconstruct the last argument you had with someone (a supervisor, colleague, friend, romantic partner, etc.) Reconstruct the argument from your perspective and that of the other person. Complete the statements below. As you do, watch that you do not distort the other’s viewpoint; try to enter it in good faith, even if it means you must admit you were wrong. (Remember that healthy thinkers want to see the truth in the situation.) After you have completed this activity, show it to the person you argued with to see if you have accurately represented that person’s view.\n\nMy perspective was as follows (state and elaborate your view): "},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"The other person’s view was as follows (state and elaborate the other person’s view):"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \n--------------------------\nThis blog is adapted from pages 168 and 172 in Linda Elder’s "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness & Self-Actualization"},{"insert":" (2025), available through Foundation for Critical Thinking Press at "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://www.fctpress.org/"},"insert":"FCTPress.org"},{"insert":".\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"[Missed Part 14? "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=264"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"]"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nTeachers need to move progressively from a didactic to a critical model of teaching. In this process, many old assumptions will have to be abandoned and new ones taken to heart as the basis for teaching and learning. This shift can be spelled out systematically as follows.\n\n"},{"attributes":{"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/119/Chapter35-TheContributionofPhilosophytoThinking.pdf&page=25"},"insert":"Evolution of Assumptions from Didactic to Critical Theory, Page 1"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/119/Chapter35-TheContributionofPhilosophytoThinking.pdf&page=26"},"insert":"Evolution of Assumptions from Didactic to Critical Theory, Page 2"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/119/Chapter35-TheContributionofPhilosophytoThinking.pdf&page=27"},"insert":"Evolution of Assumptions from Didactic to Critical Theory, Page 3"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/119/Chapter35-TheContributionofPhilosophytoThinking.pdf&page=28"},"insert":"Evolution of Assumptions from Didactic to Critical Theory, Page 4"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Bringing a Philosophical Approach into the Classroom"},{"insert":"\n \nUnfortunately, a general case for the contribution of philosophy to thinking and to teaching for thinking, such as this one, must of necessity lack a good deal of the concrete detail regarding how one would, as a practical matter, translate the generalities discussed here into action in the classroom or in everyday thinking. There are two basic needs. The first is an ample supply of concrete models that bridge the gap between theory and practice. These models should come in a variety of forms: video tapes, curriculum materials, handbooks, etc. Second, most teachers need opportunities to work on their own philosophical thinking skills and insights. These two needs are best met in conjunction with each other. It is important for the reader to review particular philosophy-based strategies in detail.\n \nThe most extensive program available is "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Philosophy for Children"},{"insert":", developed by Matthew Lipman in association with the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children"},{"insert":". It is based on the notion that philosophy ought to be brought into schools as a separate subject, and philosophical reflection and ideas used directly as an occasion for teaching thinking skills. The program introduces philosophy in the form of children's novels. Extensive teachers' handbooks are provided and a thorough inservice required to ensure that teachers develop the necessary skills and insights to encourage classroom discussion of root ideas in such a way that students achieve philosophical insights and reasoning skills. In a year-long experiment conducted by the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Educational Testing Service"},{"insert":", significant improvements were recorded in reading, mathematics, and reasoning. "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Philosophy for Children"},{"insert":" achieves transfer of reasoning skills into the standard curriculum but is not designed to directly infuse philosophical reflection into it.\n \nIn contrast, the Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique at Sonoma State University in California is developing a philosophy-based approach focused on directly infusing philosophical thinking across the curriculum. Handbooks of lesson plans K-12 have been remodelled by the Center staff to demonstrate that, with redesign, philosophically-based critical thinking skills and processes can be integrated into the lessons presently in use, if teachers learn to remodel the lessons they presently use with critical thinking in mind.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Develop Intellectual Courage "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nWhen you have used your best reasoning to determine what is sensible and ethical, be willing to advocate for it, especially when it is unpopular among your peers or within your society. Of course, supporting what is right and rational can be dangerous, so consider carefully when it makes sense to speak up and when you should keep your thoughts to yourself. When you do speak up, show respect for others, but never be afraid to disagree in the privacy of your own mind. \n \nIntellectual courage also applies to examining one’s own reasoning. Don’t be afraid to question your beliefs to figure out what makes the best sense. Develop the courage to look inside your mind and figure out how it is truly functioning. Even if you have held a belief for a long time, be willing to question it, to use the tools of critical thinking to recheck it. \n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Intellectual courage "},{"insert":"is the disposition to question beliefs you or your peers feel strongly about. It includes questioning the beliefs of your culture and the groups to which you belong, and a willingness to express your views even when they are unpopular (assuming it is safe to do so).\n \nQuestions that foster intellectual courage include:\n \nHow do the beliefs I have uncritically accepted keep me from seeing things as they are?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"To what extent have I analyzed and assessed the beliefs I hold? With what level of thoroughness and skill did I do this? "},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"To what extent have I questioned my beliefs, many of which I learned in childhood? Have I since learned new tools of reasoning that I should now use to reexamine those beliefs?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"To what extent have I demonstrated a willingness to give up my beliefs when sufficient evidence is presented against them?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"To what extent am I willing to stand up against the majority, even though people might ridicule me?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Internalize the Idea: Intellectual Courage"},{"insert":"\n \n1. Recall a circumstance in which you defended a view that was unpopular in a group to which you belonged, such as your family or department at work. Describe the circumstances and especially how the group responded. "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"2. Recall a circumstance when you disagreed with those around you but chose not to speak out, even though dire consequences were highly unlikely. "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"What serious consequences, such as being fully expelled from the group, did you fear unreasonably and why? "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"What unserious consequences, such as transitory mockery, did you fear and why? Would these minor outcomes have been worse than hiding your reasoning from others, especially if you or someone else was affected as a result?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \n--------------------------\nThis blog is adapted from pages 169 and 172 in Linda Elder’s "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness & Self-Actualization"},{"insert":" (2025), available through Foundation for Critical Thinking Press at "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://www.fctpress.org/"},"insert":"FCTPress.org"},{"insert":".\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"[Missed Part 13? "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=262"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"]"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Philosophical and Critical Thinking"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nThose familiar with some of my other writings will recognize that what I am here calling "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"philosophical "},{"insert":"thinking is very close to what I have generally called "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"strong sense critical thinking. "},{"insert":"The connection is not arbitrary. The ideal of strong sense critical thinking is implicit in the Socratic philosophical ideal of living a reflective life (and thus achieving command over one's mind and behavior). Instead of absorbing their philosophy from others, people can, with suitable encouragement and instruction, develop a critical and reflective attitude toward ideas and behavior. Their outlook and interpretations of themselves and others can be subjected to serious examination. Through this process, our beliefs become more our own than the product of our unconscious absorption of others' beliefs. Basic ideas such as “history,” “science,” “drama,” “mind,” “imagination,” and “knowledge” become organized by the criss-crossing paths of one's reflection. They cease to be compartmentalized subjects. The philosophical questions one raises about history cut across those raised about the human mind, science, knowledge, and imagination. Only deep philosophical questioning and honest criticism can protect us from the pronounced human tendency to think in a self-serving way. It is common to question only within a fundamentally unquestioned point of view. We naturally use our intellectual skills to defend and buttress those concepts, aims, and assumptions already deeply rooted in our thought.\n \nThe roots of thinking determine the nature, direction, and quality of that thinking. If teaching for thinking does not help students understand the roots of their thinking, it will fail to give them real command over their minds. They will simply make the transition from uncritical thought to weak sense critical thought. They will make the transition from being unskilled in thinking to being narrowly, closedmindedly skilled.\n \nDavid Perkins (1986) has highlighted this problem from a somewhat different point of view."},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"In studying the relationship between people's scores on standard IQ tests and their openmindedness, as measured by their ability to construct arguments against their points of view on a public issue. Perkins found that,\n \nintelligence scores correlated substantially with the degree to which subjects developed arguments thoroughly on their own sides of the case. However, there was no correlation between intelligence and elaborateness of arguments on the other side of the case. In other words, the more intelligent participants invested their greater intellectual endowment in bolstering their own positions all the more, not in exploring even-handedly the complexities of the issue."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nHerein lies the danger of an approach to thinking that relies fundamentally, as cognitive psychology often does, on the goal of technical competence, without making central the deeper philosophical or normative dimensions of thinking. Student skill in thinking may increase, but whatever narrowness of mind or lack of insight, whatever intellectual closedmindedness, intellectual arrogance, or intellectual cowardice the students suffer, will be supported by that skill. It is crucial therefore that this deeper consideration of the problem of thinking be highlighted and addressed in a significant and global manner. Whether one labels it “philosophical” thinking or “strong sense critical thinking” or “thinking that embodies empathy and openmindedness” is insignificant.\n \nA similar point can be made about the thinking of teachers. If we merely provide teachers with exercises for their students that do no more than promote technical competence in thinking, if inservice is not long-term and designed to develop the critical thinking of teachers, they will probably be ineffective in fostering the thinking of their students.\n \n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Reference:"},{"insert":"\nPerkins, David. \"Reasoning as it Is and Could Be: An Empirical Perspective.\" Paper given at "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"American Educational Research Association "},{"insert":"Conference, San Francisco. April,"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"1986.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Develop Intellectual Humility"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nRecognize that there is much you don’t know. In fact, as compared with the sum of all human knowledge ever learned, you can come to know but extremely little in your lifetime. \n \nDo not say something is true when you don’t know for certain that it is. Many things you think are true may not in fact be true. Many things people claim are true are not true, and many things you read or see on the internet are not true. Always ask, “How do I know that? How do you know that?” Upon answering or receiving an answer, ask, “Is this answer accurate? How can I check? If it is accurate, does it "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"actually"},{"insert":" prove the claim, or does it only prove something related?” \n \nIntellectual humility entails knowledge of your own ignorance and therefore sensitivity to what you know and what you do not know. It means being aware of your biases, prejudices, self-deceptive tendencies, and the limitations of your viewpoint. Questions that foster intellectual humility include:\n \nWhat do I really know (about myself, about the situation, about another person, about my nation, about what is happening in the world)? "},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nTo what extent do my prejudices or biases influence my thinking?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nTo what extent have I been indoctrinated into beliefs that may be false? To what extent am I defending these beliefs to protect my ego?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nHow do the beliefs that I have uncritically accepted keep me from seeing things as they are?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nDoes my uncritical acceptance of ideas (based, for example, on wishful thinking) lead me to illogical behavior or cause me frustration?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Internalize the Idea: Intellectual Humility"},{"insert":"\n \nThink of a recent situation in which you stated something to be true which you were not sure of in fact. Analyze the situation using this format:\n \nThe situation was as follows…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"In this situation, I said…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"What I should have said, which would have been more accurate, is…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nHuman beings make or assume many dubious claims as truth, so repeat this exercise often, as you will likely find no shortage of examples from your own life.\n\n--------------------------\nThis blog post is adapted from pages 168 and 171 in Linda Elder’s "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness & Self-Actualization"},{"insert":" (2025), available through Foundation for Critical Thinking Press at "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://www.fctpress.org/"},"insert":"FCTPress.org"},{"insert":".\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"[Missed Part 12? "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=260"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"]"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"The Skills and Processes of Thinking"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nPhilosophers do not tend to approach the micro-skills and macro-processes of thinking from the same perspective as cognitive psychologists. Intellectual skills and processes are approached not from the perspective of the needs of empirical research but from the perspective of achieving personal, rational control. The philosophical is, as I have suggested, a "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"person-centered"},{"insert":" approach to thinking. Thinking is always the thinking of some actual person, with some egocentric and sociocentric tendencies, with some particular traits of mind, engaged in the problems of a particular life. The need to understand one's own mind, thought, and action cannot be satisfied with information from empirical studies about aspects or dimensions of thought. The question foremost in the mind of the philosopher is not \"How should I conceive of the various skills and processes of the human mind to be able to conduct empirical research on them?\" but \"How should I understand the elements of thinking to be able to analyze, assess, and rationally control my own thinking and accurately understand and assess the thinking of others?\" Philosophers view thinking from the perspective of the needs of the thinker trying to achieve or move toward an intellectual and moral ideal of rationality and fairmindedness. The tools of intellectual analysis result from philosophy's 2,500 years of thinking and thinking about thinking.\n \nSince thinking for one's self is a fundamental presupposed value for philosophy, the micro-skills philosophers use are intellectual moves that a reasoning person continually makes, independent of the subject matter of thought. Hence, "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"whenever one is reasoning"},{"insert":", one is reasoning about some issue or problem (and hence needs skills for analyzing and clarifying issues and problems). Likewise, "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"whenever one is reasoning"},{"insert":", one is reasoning from some point of view or within some conceptual framework (and hence needs skills for analyzing and clarifying interpretations or interpretive frameworks.) Finally, "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"whenever one is reasoning"},{"insert":", one is, in virtue of one's inferences, coming to some conclusions from some beliefs or premises which, in turn, are based on some assumptions. (The reasoner hence needs skills for analyzing, clarifying, and evaluating beliefs, judgments, inferences, implications, and assumptions.) For virtually any reasoning, one needs a variety of interrelated processes and skills.\n \nHence, from the philosophical point of view, the fundamental question is not whether one is solving problems or making decisions or engaging in scientific inquiry or forming concepts or comprehending or composing or arguing, precisely because one usually does most or all of them in "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"every"},{"insert":" case. Problem solving, decision-making, concept formation, comprehending, composing, and arguing are in some sense common to all reasoning. What we as reasoners need to do, from the philosophical point of view, is not to decide which of these things we are doing, but rather to orchestrate any or all of the following macro-processes:\n \n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"1) Socratic Questioning: "},{"insert":"questioning ourselves or others so as to make explicit the salient features of our thinking:"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"a) "},{"insert":"What precisely is at issue? Is this the fairest way to put the issue?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"b) "},{"insert":"From what point of view are we reasoning? Are there alternative points of view from which the problem or issue might be approached?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"c) "},{"insert":"What assumptions are we making? Are they justified? What alternative assumptions could we make instead?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"d) "},{"insert":"What concepts are we using? Do we grasp them? Their appropriateness? Their implications?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"e) "},{"insert":"What evidence have we found or do we need to find? How dependable is our source of information?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"f) "},{"insert":"What inferences are we making? Are those inferences well supported?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"g) "},{"insert":"What are the implications of our reasoning?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"h) "},{"insert":"How does our reasoning stand up to competing or alternative reasoning?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"i) "},{"insert":"Are there objections to our reasoning we should consider?"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"2) Conceptual Analysis: "},{"insert":"Any problematic concepts or uses of terms must be analyzed and their basic logic set out and assessed. Have we done so?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"3) Analysis of the Question-at-Issue: "},{"insert":"Whenever one is reasoning, one is attempting to settle some question at issue. But to settle a question, one must understand the kind of question it is. Different questions require different modes of settlement. Do we grasp the precise demands of the question-at-issue?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"4) Reconstructing Alternative Viewpoints in their Strongest Forms: "},{"insert":"Since whenever one is reasoning, one is reasoning from a point of view or within a conceptual framework, one must identify and reconstruct those views. Have we empathically reconstructed the relevant points of view?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"5) Reasoning Dialogically and Dialectically: "},{"insert":"Since there are almost always alternative lines of reasoning about a given issue or problem, and since a reasonable person sympathetically considers them, one must engage in dialectical reasoning. Have we reasoned from a variety of points of view (when relevant) and rationally identified and considered the strengths and weaknesses of these points of view as a result of this process?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nImplicit in the macro-processes, as suggested earlier, are identifiable micro-skills. These constitute moves of the mind while thinking in a philosophical, and hence in a rational, critically-creative way. The moves are marked in the critical-analytic vocabulary of everyday language. Hence in Socratically questioning someone we are engaging in a "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"process "},{"insert":"of thought. Within that process we make a variety of moves. We can make those moves explicit by using analytic terms such as these:\n \nclaims, assumes, implies, infers, concludes, is supported by, is consistent with, is relevant to, is irrelevant to, has the following implications, is credible, plausible, clear, in need of analysis, without evidence, in need of verification, is empirical, is conceptual, is a judgment of value, is settled, is at issue, is problematic, is analogous, is biased, is loaded, is well confirmed, is theoretical, hypothetical, a matter of opinion, a matter of fact, a point of view, a frame of reference, a conceptual framework, etc."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nTo put the point another way, to gain command of our thinking we must be able to take it apart and put it back together in light of its "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"logic, "},{"insert":"the patterns of reasoning that support it, oppose it, and shed light on its rational acceptability. We don't need a formal or technical language to do this, but we do need a command of the critical-analytic terms available in ordinary English. Their careful use helps discipline, organize, and render self-conscious our ordinary inferences and the concepts, values, and assumptions that underlie them.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"Do your own thinking; figure things out for yourself. It is useful to listen to others to find out what they think, but you must do your own reasoning to decide who and what to believe. This does not mean believing whatever you wish were true, whatever spurs positive emotions within you, or whatever otherwise conveniences you. Instead, use universal intellectual standards to decide—standards like accuracy, relevance, significance, depth, breadth, and fairmindedness.\n \nIntellectual autonomy is thinking for oneself while adhering to standards of rationality. It means thinking through issues using one’s own thinking reasoning than uncritically accepting the viewpoints of others.\n\nQuestions that foster intellectual autonomy include:\n\nTo what extent am I a conformist? Do I depend on others for my mental health? Must I be accepted by others to feel whole within myself?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nTo what extent do I uncritically accept what I am told by my government, the media, my peers, my spouse, etc.?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nDo I think through issues on my own, or do I merely accept the views of others?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nHaving thought through an issue from a rational perspective, am I willing to stand alone despite the irrational criticisms of others?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Internalize"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"the Idea: Intellectual Autonomy"},{"insert":"\n\nBriefly consider some of the variety of influences to which you have been exposed in your life (influences of culture, company, family, religion, peer groups, media, personal relationships, etc.). See if you can discriminate between those dimensions of your thought and behavior in which you have done the least thinking for yourself, and those in which you have done the most.\n \nWhat makes this activity difficult is that we often believe we are thinking for ourselves when we are actually conforming to others. What you should look for, therefore, are instances of your actively questioning beliefs, values, or practices to which others in your “group” were, or are, conforming. Use this format:\n\nIn the following areas of my life, I have done at least a fair job of figuring out the important influences on my thinking…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"I support this view with the following evidence…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"In the following areas of my life, however, I have not thought critically about the influences on my thought and action…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Some implications of my failure to think critically in these areas of my life are…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nFor more information and exercises on intellectual autonomy, visit the “"},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/virtuousVirtuesActivityIntellectualAutonomy?activity=none"},"insert":"Develop Intellectual Autonomy"},{"insert":"” page in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online.\n\n--------------------------\nThis blog post is adapted from pages 167 and 174 in Linda Elder’s "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness & Self-Actualization"},{"insert":" (2025), available through Foundation for Critical Thinking Press at "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://www.fctpress.org/"},"insert":"FCTPress.org"},{"insert":".\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"[Missed Part 11? "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=258"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"]"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Values and Intellectual Traits [2 of 2]"},{"insert":"\n \nGenuine intellectual development requires people to develop intellectual traits, traits acquired only by thinking one's way to basic philosophical insights. Philosophical thinking leads to insights which in turn shape basic skills of thought. Skills, values, insights, and intellectual traits are mutually and dynamically interrelated. It is the whole person who thinks, not some fragment of the person.\n \nFor example, intellectual empathy requires the ability to reconstruct accurately the viewpoints and reasoning of others and to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas other than one's own. But if one has not developed the philosophical insight that different people often think from divergent premises, assumptions, and ideas, one will never appreciate the need to entertain them. Reasoning from assumptions and ideas other than our own will seem absurd to us precisely to the degree that we are unable to step back philosophically and recognize that differences exist between people in their very frameworks for thinking.\n \nPhilosophical differences are common, even in the lives of small children. Children often reason from the assumption that their needs and desires are more important than anyone else's to the conclusion that they ought to get what they want in this or that circumstance. It often seems absurd to children that they are not given what they want. They are trapped in their egocentric viewpoints, see the world from within them, and unconsciously take their viewpoints (their philosophies, if you will) to define reality. To work out of this intellectual entrapment requires time and much reflection.\n \nTo develop consciousness of the limits of our understanding we must attain the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"courage "},{"insert":"to face our prejudices and ignorance. To discover our prejudices and ignorance in turn we often have to "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"empathize "},{"insert":"with and reason within points of view toward which we are hostile. To achieve this end, we must "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"persevere"},{"insert":" over an extended period of time, for it takes time and significant effort to learn how to empathically enter a point of view against which we are biased. That effort will not seem justified unless we have the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"faith in reason "},{"insert":"to believe we will not be tainted or taken in by whatever is false or misleading in this opposing viewpoint. Furthermore, the belief alone that we can survive serious consideration of alien points of view is not enough to motivate most of us to consider them seriously. We must also be motivated by an "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"intellectual"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"sense of justice. "},{"insert":"We must recognize an intellectual "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"responsibility "},{"insert":"to be fair to views we oppose. We must feel "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"obliged "},{"insert":"to hear them in their strongest form to ensure that we do not condemn them out of ignorance or bias.\n \nIf we approach thinking or teaching for thinking atomistically, we are unlikely to help students gain the kind of global perspective and global insight into their minds, thought, and behavior which a philosophical approach to thinking can foster. Cognitive psychology tends to present the mind and dimensions of its thinking in just this atomistic way. Most importantly, it tends to leave out of the picture what should be at its very center: the active, willing, judging agent. The character of our mind is one with our moral character. How we think determines how we behave and how we behave determines who we are and who we become. We have a moral as well as an intellectual responsibility to become fairminded and rational, but we will not become so unless we cultivate these traits through specific modes of thinking. From a philosophical point of view, one does not develop students' thinking skills without in some sense simultaneously developing their autonomy, their rationality, and their character. This is not fundamentally a matter of drilling the student in a battery of skills. Rather it is essentially a matter of orchestrating activities to continually stimulate students to express and to take seriously their own thinking: what it assumes, what it implies, what it includes, excludes, highlights, and foreshadows; and to help the student do this with intellectual humility, intellectual courage, intellectual empathy, intellectual perseverance, and fairmindedness.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Intellectual perseverance "},{"insert":"is the disposition to work your way through intellectual complexities despite frustrations inherent in the task. Questions that foster intellectual perseverance include:\n\nAm I willing to work my way through complexities in an issue, or do I tend to give up when I experience difficulties?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nCan I think of a complex problem in which I have demonstrated patience and determination in working through its difficulties?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nDo I have strategies for dealing with complex problems?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nDo I expect my mental well-being to be easy, or do I recognize the importance of persevering to change my bad habits of thought that cause me pain?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nDon’t give up on intellectual tasks on account of their difficulty. When you begin to think you can’t learn something, remind yourself that you can. If reading is hard for you, stick to it; reading important works is essential to deep learning, and is a powerful tool for mental wellness and self-actualization. These same benefits come from writing, so when writing is hard, keep trying. Don’t be afraid to work hard when you feel like giving up. Remember that no matter how good you are at thinking, you can always improve, and the failure to do so will undermine the quality of your life and the lives of others. In short, no matter how much you struggle with learning, keep working. Never give up. Be the captain of your own ship. Chart your own course in life.\n \n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Internalize the Idea: Intellectual Perseverance"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nMost people have more physical perseverance than intellectual perseverance. Many are ready to admit, “No pain, no gain!” when talking about the body. Most give up quickly, on the other hand, when faced with a frustrating mental problem that requires their best thinking. Thinking of your own responses, in your work or your personal life, how would you evaluate your intellectual perseverance on a scale of 0 to 10? Complete these statements:\n\nIn terms of intellectual perseverance, I would rate myself as follows…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"I say this because… [Support your position with evidence.]"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"I could develop intellectual perseverance by routinely doing the following…"},{"attributes":{"list":"ordered"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nFor more on close reading and substantive writing, visit the "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/readingAndWritingAlcove.php"},"insert":"Reading and Writing Alcove"},{"insert":".\n\n----\nThis blog is adapted from pages 167 and 173 of Linda Elder’s "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Therapy: For Happiness & Self-Actualization"},{"insert":" (2025), available through Treely Green Publishing at "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://www.treelygreenpublishing.com/"},"insert":"www.treelygreenpublishing.com"},{"insert":".\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"[Missed Part 10? "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=256"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"]"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Values and Intellectual Traits [1 of 2]"},{"insert":"\n \nPhilosophical thinking, like all human thinking, is infused with values. But those who think philosophically make it a point to understand and assent to the values that underlie their thought. One thinks philosophically because one "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"values "},{"insert":"coming to terms with the meaning and significance of one's life. If we do so sincerely and well, we recognize problems that challenge us to decide the kind of person we want to make ourselves, including deciding the kind of mind we want to have. We have to make a variety of value judgments about ourselves regarding, among other things, fears, conflicts, and prejudices. This requires us to come to terms with the traits of mind we are developing. For example, to be truly open to knowledge, one must become intellectually humble. But intellectual humility is connected with other traits, such as intellectual courage, intellectual integrity, intellectual perseverance, intellectual empathy, and fairmindedness. The intellectual traits characteristic of our thinking become for the philosophical thinker a matter of personal concern. Philosophical reflection heightens this concern.\n \nConsider this excerpt from a letter from a teacher with a master’s degree in physics and mathematics:\n \nAfter I started teaching, I realized that I had learned physics by rote and that I really did not understand all I knew about physics. My thinking students asked me questions for which I always had the standard textbook answers, but for the first time made me start thinking for myself, and I realized that these canned answers were not justified by my own thinking and only confused my students who were showing some ability to think for themselves. To achieve my academic goals I had memorized the thoughts of others, but I had never learned or been encouraged to learn to think for myself."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nThis is a good example of intellectual humility and, like all intellectual humility, is based on a philosophical insight into the nature of knowing. It is reminiscent of the ancient Greek insight that Socrates himself was the wisest of the Greeks because only he realized how little he really knew. Socrates developed this insight as a result of extensive, deep questioning of the knowledge claims of others. He, like all of us, had to think his way to this insight and did so by raising the same basic "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"what "},{"insert":"and "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"why "},{"insert":"questions that children often ask. We as teachers cannot hand this insight to children on a silver platter. All persons must do for themselves the thinking that leads to it.\n \nUnfortunately, though intellectual virtues cannot be conditioned into people, intellectual failings can. Because of the typically unphilosophical way most instruction is structured, intellectual arrogance rather than humility is typically fostered, especially in those who have retentive minds and can repeat like parrots what they have heard or read. Students are routinely rewarded for giving standard textbook answers and encouraged to believe that they understand what has never been justified by their own thinking. To move toward intellectual humility, most students (and teachers) need to think broadly, deeply, and foundationally about most of what they have \"learned\", as the teacher in the previous example did. Such questioning, in turn, requires intellectual courage, perseverance, and faith in one's ability to think one's way to understanding and insight.\n"}]}