Blog - by Linda Elder with Richard Paul Archives

{"ops":[{"insert":"[Missed Part 2?"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=214"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"insert":"]\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Knowledge as Achievement"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nThe critical thinking movement has its roots in the practice and vision of Socrates, who discovered by a probing method of questioning that few people could rationally justify their confident claims to knowledge. Confused meanings, inadequate evidence, or self-contradictory beliefs often lurked beneath smooth but largely empty rhetoric. This led to a basic insight into the problem of human irrationality and to a view of knowledge and learning which holds that to believe or assent without reason, judgment, or understanding is to be prejudiced. This belief is central to the critical thinking movement. This view also holds the corollary principle that critical reflection by each learner is an essential precondition of knowledge. Put another way, those who advocate critical thinking instruction hold that knowledge is not something that can be "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"given "},{"insert":"by one person to another. It cannot simply be memorized out of a book or taken whole cloth from the mind of another. Knowledge, rightly understood, is a distinctive construction by the learner, something that issues out of a "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"rational"},{"insert":" use of mental processes.\n \nTo expect students to assent before they have developed the capacity to do so rationally is to indoctrinate rather than to educate them and to foster habits of thought antithetical to the educative process. Peter Kneedler (1985) observed “an unfortunate tendency to teach facts is isolation from the thinking skills” – to "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"give"},{"insert":" students knowledge and some time later expect them to "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"think"},{"insert":" about it. Knowledge, in any defensible sense, is an "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"achievement"},{"insert":" requiring a mind slow rather than quick to believe – which waits for, expects, and weighs evidence before agreeing. The sooner a mind begins to develop rational scruples, in this view, the better.\n \nAs Quine and Ullian (1970) put it:\n "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":". . . knowledge is in some ways like a good golf score: each is substantially the fruit of something else, and there are no magic shortcuts to either one. To improve your golf score you work at perfecting the various strokes; for knowledge you work at garnering and sifting evidence and sharpening your reasoning skills . . . knowledge is no more guaranteed than is a lowered golf score, but there is no better way. (p. 12)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nWe don’t actually know whether students have achieved some knowledge until we have determined whether their beliefs represent something they actually know (have rationally assented to) or merely something they have memorized to repeat on a test. Dewey, as the authors of the Taxonomy recognize, illustrated this point with the following story in which he asked a class:\n \n“What would you find if you dug a hole in the earth?” Getting no response, he repeated the question: again he obtained nothing but silence. The teacher chided Dr. Dewey, “You’re asking the wrong question.” Turning to the class, she asked, “What is the state of the center of the earth?” The class replied in unison, “Igneous fusion.”"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nThe writers of the Taxonomy attempt to side-step this problem by defining “knowledge” as “what is currently known or accepted by the experts or specialists in a field, whether or not such knowledge, in a philosophical sense, corresponds to ‘reality’”. ("},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain"},{"insert":", p.32)\n \nThe writers of the Taxonomy erroneously assume that the only issue here is the relative "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"value"},{"insert":" of the knowledge, not whether statements merely memorized should be called knowledge at all:\n \nIn these latter conceptions [those which link knowledge to understanding and rational assent] it is implicitly assumed that knowledge is of little value if it cannot be utilized in new situations or in a form very different from that in which it was originally encountered. The denotations of these latter concepts would usually be close to what have been defined as “abilities and skills” in in the Taxonomy. ("},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain"},{"insert":", p.29)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nThis inadvertently begs the question whether blindly memorized true belief can properly be called knowledge at all – and hence whether inculcation and indoctrination into true belief can properly be called education. If knowledge of any kind is to some extent a skilled, rational achievement, then we should not confuse knowledge and education with belief inculcation and indoctrination, just as we should not confuse learning more with acquiring knowledge (we "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"learn"},{"insert":", are not born with bias, prejudices, and misconceptions, for example). This point, crucial for the critical thinking movement, was well formulated by John Henry Newman (1852):\n \n . . . Knowledge is not a mere extrinsic or accidental advantage . . . which may be got up from a book, and easily forgotten again, . . . . which we can borrow for the occasion, and carry about in our hand . . . [it is] something intellectual . . . which reasons upon what it sees . . . the action of a formative power . . . making the objects of our knowledge subjectively our own."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nThe reductio ad absurdum of the view that knowledge can be distinguished from comprehension and rational assent is suggested by William Graham Sumner (1906), one of the founding fathers of anthropology, commenting on the failure of the schools of his day:\n \nThe examination papers show the pet ideas of the examiners . . . An orthodoxy is produced in regard to all the great doctrines. It consists in the most worn and commonplace opinions . . . It is intensely provincial and philistine . . . [containing] broad fallacies, half-truths, and glib generalizations . . . children [are] taught just that one thing which is “right” in the view and interest of those in control and nothing else."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nClearly, Sumner maintained that provincial, fallacious, or misleading beliefs should not be viewed as knowledge at all, however widely they are treated as such, and that inculcating them is not education, however widely described as such.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"In recent blog posts I invited you to two webinars. If you were not able to attend, you can view these at the following links:\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"blue","link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=333"},"insert":"Why Ethical Reasoning Is So Important and Why We Tend to Misunderstand It (Linda Elder, 10-24-2023)"},{"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"blue","link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=335"},"insert":"Open Critical Thinking Q&A: November 2023 (Gerald Nosich, 11-15-2023)"},{"insert":"\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"[Missed Part 1?"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=212"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"insert":"]\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"A One-Way Hierarchy"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nThough not designed to further critical thinking instruction as such, "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain "},{"insert":"contains a wealth of information of use in such instruction. Reading it in its entirety is most rewarding, particularly the sections on analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. These sections disclose that most of the cognitive processes characterized as essential to higher-order questions in fact presuppose use of basic critical thinking concepts: assumption, fact, concept, value, conclusion, premise, evidence, relevant, irrelevant, consistent, inconsistent, compilation, fallacy, argument, inference, point of view, bias, prejudice, authority, hypothesis, and so forth. This is clear, for example, in the explanation of analysis:\n \nSkill in analysis may be found as an objective of any field of study. It is frequently expressed as one of their important objectives by teachers of science, social studies, philosophy, and the arts. They wish, for example, to develop in students the ability to distinguish fact from hypothesis in a communication, to identify conclusions and supporting statements, to distinguish relevant from extraneous material, to note how one idea relates to another, to see what unstated assumptions are involved in what is said, to distinguish dominant from subordinate ideas or themes in poetry or music, to find evidence of the author’s techniques and purposes . . . ("},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain"},{"insert":", p. 144)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nIn other words, if the ability to analyze usually requires students to do such things as distinguish facts from hypotheses, conclusions from evidence, relevant from irrelevant material, note relationships between concepts, and probe and detect unstated assumptions, then it seems essential that students become not only familiar with these words (by teachers introducing them frequently into classroom discussion) but also comfortable with using them as they think their way through analytic problems. This need becomes more evident if we recognize that by analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, the authors of the Taxonomy have in mind only their "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"explicit"},{"insert":" (not subconscious) uses. They rightly emphasize what has become a virtual platitude in cognitive psychology – that students (and experts) who do the best analyses, syntheses, and evaluations tend to do them mindfully with a clear sense of their component elements. So, if the concepts of critical thinking are presupposed in mindful analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, we can best heighten that mindfulness by raising those component concepts to a conscious level.\n \nAlthough "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Affective Domain"},{"insert":" implies that it is "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"value neutral"},{"insert":", many of the examples of higher-order valuing illustrate values intrinsic to education conceived on a critical thinking paradigm, wherein a student:\n \nDeliberately examines a variety of viewpoints on controversial issues with a view to forming opinions about them."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"[Develops] faith in the power of reason in methods of experimental discussion."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Weighs alternative social policies and practices against the standards of the public welfare rather than the advantage of specialized and narrow interest groups."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"[Achieves] readiness to revise judgments and to change behavior in the light of evidence."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Judges problems and issues in terms of situations, issues, purposes, and consequences involved rather than in terms of fixed, dogmatic precepts or emotionally wishful thinking."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Develops a consistent philosophy of life. (pp. 181-185)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nAlong with the usefulness of Bloom’s Cognitive and Affective Taxonomies, we must bear in mind their limitations for critical thinking curriculum construction. To some extent, the Taxonomies represent an attempt to achieve the impossible: a perfectly neutral classification of cognitive and affective processes that makes no educational value judgments and favors no educational philosophy over any other – one that could be used by any culture, nation, or system whatsoever, independent of its specific values or world view:\n \n . . . to avoid partiality to one view of education as opposed to another, we have attempted to make the taxonomy neutral by avoiding terms which implicitly convey value judgments and by making the taxonomy as conclusive as possible. This means that the kinds of behavioral changes emphasized by "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"any "},{"insert":"institution, educational unit, or educational philosophy can be represented in the classification. Another way of saying this is that any objective which describes an intended behavior should be classifiable in this system. ("},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain"},{"insert":", p. 14)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nThis approach to knowledge, cognition, and education is partly irreconcilable with a commitment to critical thinking skills, abilities, and dispositions:\n \nTo a large extent, knowledge as taught in American schools depends upon some external authority: some expert or group of experts is the arbitrator of knowledge. ("},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domains"},{"insert":", p. 31)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" . . . the scheme does provide levels for the extreme inculcation of a prescribed set of values if this is the philosophy of the culture. ("},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Affective Domain"},{"insert":", p. 43)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"It is possible to imagine a society or culture which is relatively fixed. Such a society represents a closed system in which it is possible to predict in advance both the kinds of problems individuals will encounter and the solutions which are appropriate to those problems. Where such predictions can be made in advance, it is possible to organize the educational experience so as to give each individual the particular knowledge and specific methods needed for solving the problems he will encounter. ("},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain"},{"insert":", p. 39-40)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nBut precisely because of this attempt at neutrality the category of “knowledge” is analyzed in such a restricted way and the relationship of the categories is assumed to be hierarchical in only one direction. For instance, according to Bloom’s Taxonomy, “comprehension” presupposes “knowledge”, but “knowledge” does not presuppose “comprehension”. The second of these conceptual decisions would be questioned by those who hold that the basic skills and dispositions of critical thinking must be brought into schooling from the start, and that for any learning to occur, they must be intrinsic to every element of it.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"The quality of your life is determined by the quality of our thinking. The quality of your thinking, in turn, is determined by the quality of your questions, for questions are the engine, the driving force behind thinking. Without questions, you have nothing to think about. Without essential questions, you may fail to focus your thinking on the significant and substantive.\n\nWhen you ask essential questions, you deal with what is necessary, relevant, and indispensable to a matter at hand. You recognize what is at the heart of the matter. Your thinking is grounded and disciplined. You are ready to learn. You are intellectually able to find your way about.\n\nTo be successful in life, you need to ask essential questions: essential questions when reading, writing, and speaking; when shopping, working, and parenting; when forming friendships, choosing life-partners, and when interacting with the mass media and the Internet.\n\nYet few people are masters of the art of asking essential questions. Most have never thought about why some questions are crucial and others peripheral. Essential questions are rarely studied in school. They are rarely modeled at home. Most people question according to their psychological associations. Their questions are haphazard and scattered.\n\nEssential questions fall into a range of categories. Some essential questions are principally analytic, some principally evaluative. Some apply predominantly to academic subjects, others to our innermost thoughts, feelings, and desires.\n\nThe categories and lists of essential questions you will find in "},{"attributes":{"underline":true,"italic":true,"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_educators/136/Thinker__sGuidetotheArtofAskingEssentialQuestions.pdf&page=1"},"insert":"The Thinker’s Guide to Asking Essential Questions"},{"insert":" will help you develop your understanding of how to ask essential questions. Recognize that the questions in this guide are illustrative, not exhaustive. Furthermore, the ideas provided in the guide are useful only to the extent that you employ them daily to formulate and pursue essential questions. Practice in asking essential questions eventually leads to the habit of asking essential questions. But you can never practice asking essential questions if you have no conception of them.\n\nTo understand the important role of questions in thinking, you must first realize that it is not possible to be a good thinker and a poor questioner. Questions define tasks, express problems, and delineate issues. They drive thinking forward. Answers, on the other hand, often signal a full stop in thought. Only when an answer generates further questions does thought continue as inquiry. A mind with no questions is a mind that is not intellectually alive. No questions (asked) equals no understanding (achieved). Superficial questions equal superficial understanding, unclear questions equal unclear understanding. In short, if your mind is not actively generating questions, you are not engaged in substantive learning or substantive thinking.\n\nThinking within disciplines is driven, not by answers, but by essential questions. Had no basic questions been asked by those who laid the foundation for a field — for example, physics or biology — the field would not have been developed in the first place. Every intellectual field is born out of a cluster of essential questions that drive the mind to pursue particular facts and understandings. Biology was born when some humans pursued answers to the questions:\n\n“What are the characteristics of living systems? What structures exist in them? What functions do these structures serve?” Biochemistry was born when biologists began to ask questions such as: “What chemical processes underlie living things? How and why do chemical processes within living things interact and change?”"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nEvery field stays alive only to the extent that fresh questions are generated and taken seriously as the driving force in thinking. When a field of study is no longer pursuing significant answers to essential questions, it dies as a field. To think through or rethink anything, one must ask the questions necessary to thinking through the logic of that thing, clearly and precisely.\n\nAgain, our "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Thinker’s Guide to Asking Essential Questions"},{"insert":" will help you develop your questioning abilities in all aspects of your life. In this guide, we introduce essential questions as indispensable intellectual tools. We focus on principles essential to formulating, analyzing, assessing, and settling primary questions. You will notice that our categories of question types are not exclusive. There is a great deal of overlap between them. Deciding what category of question to ask at any point in thinking is a matter of judgment. Having a range of powerful questions to choose from is a matter of knowledge.\n\nBecause you cannot be skilled at thinking unless you are skilled at questioning, you should strive for a state of mind in which fundamental questions become second nature. These questions are indispensable to productive thinking, deep learning, and effective living.\n\nI hope you will bring your questions to Dr. Gerald Nosich at our next open QA focused on questions from our community and the public, to be held November 15"},{"attributes":{"script":"super"},"insert":"th"},{"insert":", 2023, at 10:00 a.m. PST. In our regular question-and-answer webinars, we open the floor to your questions about critical thinking and its unlimited applications to human life and beyond. Join Dr. Nosich for this webinar - and ask your questions! "},{"attributes":{"underline":true,"bold":true,"link":"https://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/eventReg?oeidk=a07ek1tsoy5aa44bb7f&oseq=&c=&ch="},"insert":"Register here"},{"insert":".\n\n---\n\nPart of this blog was adapted from "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"The Thinker’s Guide to Asking Essential Questions"},{"insert":" by Linda Elder and Richard Paul, 2019, Rowman & Littlefield.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Abstract"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nIn this brief article, Richard Paul analyses and critiques Bloom’s Taxonomy from the perspective of the critical thinking movement. He points out Bloom’s achievements in "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domains"},{"insert":" and "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Affective Domains"},{"insert":": the analysis of cognitive processes of thought and their interrelationships; the emphasis on the need for these processes (including critical thinking skills and abilities) to be explicitly and mindfully taught and used; the emphasis on critical thinking values, such as openmindedness and faith in reason.\n \nDr. Paul then argues that Bloom’s approach suffers from the following two flaws: "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"1)"},{"insert":" the attempt to be “value neutral” is impossible and incompatible with the values presupposed in critical thinking education and "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"2)"},{"insert":" Bloom confuses recall with knowledge.\n \nAs a result of the way the taxonomy is explained, many teachers identify learning to think critically with merely learning how to ask and answer questions in all of Bloom’s categories: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Teachers typically take the categories to express objectives which they should teach to in strict order: first give the students “knowledge”, then show them how to comprehend it, then how to apply it, etc. Paul, while recognizing that Bloom’s distinctions themselves are important, argues that the common understanding of their link to critical thinking is largely misconceived. Teaching critical thinking is not a simple matter of asking questions from each of Bloom’s categories; moreover, the categories themselves are not independent but interdependent. Paul shows, for example, how knowledge is not something that can be given to a student before he or she comprehends it. He explains how the critical thinking movement has properly emphasized that getting knowledge is in fact a complex achievement involving "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"thought"},{"insert":", and so should be understood as the product of rational thought processes, rather than as recall. This insight needs to be brought into the heart of instruction.\n \n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Introduction"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\nIt would be difficult to find a more influential work in education today than "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives"},{"insert":" (Bloom, et al. 1979). Developed by a committee of college and university examiners from 1949 to 1954 and published as two handbooks – "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain"},{"insert":" and "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Affective Domain"},{"insert":" – its objectives were manifold. Handbook I, "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Cognitive Domain"},{"insert":", for instance, lists four encompassing objectives.\n \n1. To “provide for classification of the goals of our educational system . . . to be of general help to all teachers, administrators, professional specialists, and research workers who deal with curricular and evaluation problems . . . to help them discuss these problems with greater precision . . . “."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"2. To “be a source of constructive help . . . in building a curriculum . . . “."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"3. To “help one gain a perspective on the emphasis given to certain behaviors . . . “"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"4. To “specify objectives so that it becomes easier to plan learning experience and prepare evaluation devices . . . “. (pp. 1-2)"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nThe authors also note that the categories of the Taxonomy below can be used “as a framework for viewing the educational process and analyzing its workings” and even for “analyzing teachers’ success in classroom teaching.” (p. 3)\n \n-------------------------------\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Bloom’s Taxonomy"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.00 "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Knowledge"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.10 Knowledge of Specifics"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.11 Knowledge of Terminology"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.12 Knowledge of Specific Facts"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.20 Knowledge of Ways and Means of Dealing with Specifics"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.21 Knowledge of Conventions"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.22 Knowledge of Trends and Sequences"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.23 Knowledge of Classifications and Categories"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.24 Knowledge of Criteria"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.25 Knowledge of Methodology"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.30 Knowledge of the Universals and Abstractions in a Field"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.31 Knowledge of Principles and Generalizations"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"1.32 Knowledge of Theories and Structures"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"2.00 "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Comprehension"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"2.10 Translation"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"2.20 Interpretation"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"2.30 Extrapolation"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"3.00 "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Application"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"The use of abstractions in particular and concrete situations. The abstractions may be in the form of general ideas, rules of procedures, or generalized methods. The abstractions may also be technological principles, ideas, and theories which must be remembered and applied."},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"4.00 "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Analysis"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"4.10 Analysis of Elements"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"4.20 Analysis of Relationships"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"4.30 Analysis of Organizational Principles"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"5.00 "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Synthesis"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"5.10 Production of a Unique Communication"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"5.20 Production of a Plan, or Proposed Set of Operations"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"5.30 Derivation of a Set of Abstract Relations"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"6.00 "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Evaluation"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"6.10 Judgments in terms of Internal Evidence"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"6.20 Judgments in Terms of External Criteria"},{"attributes":{"indent":2},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"align":"right"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"(From the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Taxonomy of Educational Objectives"},{"insert":", Bloom et al. 1974 p. 201)"},{"attributes":{"align":"right"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"-------------------------------\n \nA generation of teachers have now come of age not only familiar with and acceptant of the general categories of the Taxonomy, but also persuaded that the Taxonomy’s identified higher-order skills of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation are essential to education at all levels. For these teachers, critical thinking is essential because higher-order skills are essential. To learn how to think critically, in this view, is to learn how to ask and answer questions of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. To help teachers incorporate critical thinking in the classroom is to help them ask questions that call for analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. In this view, then, learning to teach critical thinking is quite straightforward. The teacher’s thinking does not need to be significantly altered, and no fundamental shifts in educational philosophy are required. The Taxonomy and the ability to generate a full variety of question types are all that an intelligent teacher really needs to teach critical thinking skills.\n \nThis view is seriously misleading. According to most advocates of critical thinking, no neat set of recipes can foster critical thinking in students. The single most useful thing a teacher can do is to take at least one well-designed college course in critical thinking, in which the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"teacher’s own"},{"insert":" thinking skills are analyzed and nurtured in numerous ways. In other words, teachers need a solid foundation in critical thinking skills before they can teach them.\n \nWhat follows is a succinct analysis and critique of Bloom’s Taxonomy, from the perspective of the values and epistemological presuppositions of the critical thinking movement. I hope it will contribute to a deeper understanding of the nature and demands of critical thinking instruction.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"The development of ethical reasoning abilities is vitally important—both for living an ethical life and creating an ethical world. We all need the intellectual tools and understandings essential for reasoning through ethical issues and problems in an insightful manner.\n \nUnfortunately, most people confuse ethics with behaving in accordance with social conventions, religious beliefs, and the law. Most people do not see ethics as a domain unto itself, a set of concepts and principles that guide us in determining what behavior helps or harms sentient creatures. Most people do not recognize that ethical concepts and principles are universally defined, through such documents as the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"UN Declaration of Human Rights"},{"insert":", and that these concepts and principles are transcultural and trans religious.\n \nOne need not appeal to a religious belief or cultural convention to recognize that slavery, genocide, torture, sexism, racism, murder, assault, fraud, deceit, and intimidation are all ethically wrong. Whenever we base ethical conclusions on religious or cultural standards, we separate ourselves from those who hold contrary religious or cultural beliefs and we confuse ethics for other modes of thinking. It is essential, therefore, that we use shared ethical concepts and principles as guides in reasoning through common ethical issues.\n \nWe can find a wide array of important ethical concepts by reviewing the terms available for ethical discourse in virtually every natural language. All spoken languages contain synonyms for desirable ethical traits such as being kind, openminded, impartial, truthful, honest, compassionate, considerate, and honorable. All natural languages also contain hundreds of negative ethical traits such as being selfish, greedy, egotistical, callous, deceitful, hypocritical, disingenuous, prejudiced, bigoted, spiteful, vindictive, cruel, brutal, and oppressive. The essential meanings of these terms are not dependent on either theology or social convention. Living an ethical life emerges from the fact that people are capable of either helping or harming others, of contributing to or damaging the quality of other’s lives.\n \nIn addition to the ability to distinguish purely ethical terms from those that are theological or conventional, skilled ethical reasoning presupposes the same range of intellectual skills and traits required in other domains. One must be skilled in breaking reasoning down into its component parts. One must be proficient in assessing reasoning for its clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, logicalness and fairness. One must be intellectually humble, intellectually perseverant, and intellectually empathic. All of us need essential foundations in ethics, without which ethical discussion will often end in hopeless disputation or discouraging contradiction and misunderstanding. Developing as an insightful ethical reasoner and person takes time and much practice. No one can do this work for us. Each of us must internalize ethical concepts and principles for ourselves. And we must be committed to developing and living as fairminded critical thinkers.\n \nIn our upcoming webinar on ethical reasoning, I will discuss some of the foundations of ethical reasoning all of us need if we are to reason well through ethical issues and problems. Please join us for this webinar to be held October 24 at 10:00 am Pacific Daylight Time. Read more:"},{"attributes":{"color":"blue","link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/webinarsAndAnnouncements#w_68"},"insert":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/webinarsAndAnnouncements#w_68"},{"insert":" and register: "},{"attributes":{"color":"blue","link":"https://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/eventReg?oeidk=a07ek02zr270899b16f&oseq=&c=&ch="},"insert":"https://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/eventReg?oeidk=a07ek02zr270899b16f&oseq=&c=&ch="},{"insert":"\n \n----\nThis blog was modified from the letter introduction in "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"The Thinker’s Guide to Ethical Reasoning"},{"insert":" by Richard Paul and Linda Elder, 2019. NY: Rowman & Littlefield.\n\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"[Missed Part 11? "},{"attributes":{"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/blogPost.php?param=208"},"insert":"Read It Here"},{"insert":"]\n \n"},{"attributes":{"italic":true,"bold":true},"insert":"Concluding Remarks: The Critical Teacher"},{"insert":"\n \nTo be in the best position to encourage critical thinking in their students, teachers must first value it highly in their personal, social, and civic lives. A teacher of critical thinking must be a critical person, a person comfortable with and experienced in critical discussion, critical reflection, and critical inquiry; must be willing to make questions rather than assertions the heart of his or her contribution to student learning; must explicitly understand his or her own frame of reference and that fostered in the society at large; must be willing to treat no idea as intrinsically good or bad; must have confidence in reason, evidence, and open discussion; must deeply value clarity, accuracy, and fairmindedness; and must be willing to help students develop the various critical thinking micro-proficiencies in the context of these values and ideals. To do so, teachers must be students of human irrationality, egocentricity, and prejudice. Their interest must be both theoretical and practical. They must experience (and recognize) irrational drives and behavior in themselves as well as others. A teacher must be patient and capable of the long view, for people, schools, and society change only in the long run, never quickly, and always with some frustration, conflict, and misunderstanding.\n \nFew now realize that the critical teacher is rare and that most of the critical thinking cultivated in students today is, at best, monological and technical, and, at worst, sociocentric and sophistic. The concept of strong sense critical thinking – of what it is to live or teach critically – has as yet had little perceptible influence on schools as a whole. If, in our haste to bring critical thinking into the schools, we ignore the need to develop long-term strategies for nurturing the development of teachers’ own critical thinking powers and passions, then we shall truly make the new emphasis on critical thinking into nothing more than a passing fad, or worse, into a new, more sophisticated form of social indoctrination and scholastic closedmindedness.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"We have recently launched a new podcast series entitled "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Revealed"},{"insert":". In this series I will interview top level experts in various fields of study that have broad reaching implications for human life, the lives of other sentient creatures and for planet earth. My goal in this series is to uncover and illuminate the critical thinking these experts are doing and why their thinking is important. My first interview was held with Dr. Alex Hall, a"},{"attributes":{"color":"#333333"},"insert":" professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and an expert in climate change. Dr. Hall is a member of the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, who specializes in regional climates, global climate change and climate modeling. Dr. Hall uses observed data as well as numerical models to understand the dynamics of climate variability and climate change. His work also focuses on developing regional earth system models and studying the climate from a regional perspective, particularly in Los Angeles and California, to lay the groundwork for an understanding of climate change at scales most relevant to people and ecosystems."},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#333333"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#333333"},"insert":"In this interview we focused on the climate crisis, on the concepts of atmospheric and oceanic sciences, as well as numerical models designed to help us understand climate change. We also discussed what we can each do individually to reduce our individual impact on the earth"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#333333"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#333333"},"insert":"I hope you will view this podcast: "},{"attributes":{"color":"blue","link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=328"},"insert":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/watchEmbeddedVideo.php?id=328"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#333333"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#333333"},"insert":"It is also available on YouTube so feel free to share with your colleagues and friends:"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"blue","link":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJCdZbwW8dk&ab_channel=TheFoundationforCriticalThinking"},"insert":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJCdZbwW8dk&ab_channel=TheFoundationforCriticalThinking"},{"insert":"\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"One of the major ways in which sociocentric bias is introduced into social studies texts is through the fostered illusion of “scientific” objectivity. Nothing suggests that the authors are taking a position on issues about which reasonable people could disagree, or at least that they are taking such a position only when they explicitly admit to to.\n \nThe textbook "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"American Democracy In World Perspective"},{"insert":", written by four professors at the University of California for use in college political science courses, is an exemplary case in this regard. Virtually everything in its 700-plus pages is oriented toward persuading the reader that he United States has the best form of government, comes closest to “perfect” democracy, and that the fate of freedom in the world depends on the United States: “As democracy fares in the United States, so will it, in the long run, fare throughout the world.”\n \nThe text divides all governments into two basic types, democratic and non-democratic, the non-democratic ones are divided into authoritarian and totalitarian ones, in accord with the "},{"attributes":{"underline":true,"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/94/Chapter10-CriticalThinkingandtheCriticalPerson.pdf&page=20"},"insert":"figure 1"},{"insert":".\n\nNumerous features stand out in this chart. "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Democracy "},{"insert":"is a term that we apply to ourselves (a positive term with which virtually all people identify)."},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":" Authoritarian "},{"insert":"and"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":" totalitarian "},{"insert":"are negative terms with which virtually no one identifies. The United States is characterized by a term that expressed an ideal, whereas its enemies, the USSR and its allies, are characterized by terms that in effect condemn them. The chart, presented as purely descriptive, obscures its tendentious character. By the same token, the distinction between authoritarianism and totalitarianism provides, under the guise of pure description, a means whereby support of dictators by the United States can be justified as the “better” of two evils. It does not take too much imagination to reconstruct how an equally tendentious chart might be fabricated for a “neutral” Soviet social studies text (see "},{"attributes":{"underline":true,"bold":true,"link":"https://community.criticalthinking.org/viewDocument.php?doc=../content/library_for_everyone/94/Chapter10-CriticalThinkingandtheCriticalPerson.pdf&page=21"},"insert":"figure 2"},{"insert":").\n\nThe authors also imply that most Americans believe in"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":" reason"},{"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"and experience"},{"insert":", whereas Communists believe in "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"dogmatism"},{"insert":":\n \nBy using reasons and experience, man has scored impressive advances in the mastery of nature . . . Democrats believe that reason and experience can be fruitfully used in the understanding and harmonious adjustment of human relations . . . in contrast, dogmatists (such as Communists or Fascists) reject this belief in reason and experience."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nAt the same time, the text gives lip service to the need for free discussion of issues in social studies.\n \nIn trying to present a fair and balanced picture of American democracy, we have not sought to avoid controversial issues. The United States owes its existence to controversy and conflict, and throughout its history, as today, there has never been a dearth of highly controversial questions."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":" \nI know of no textbook presently used in a large public school system that focuses on the multilogical issues of social studies or highlights the importance of strong sense critical thinking skills. Monological thinking that presupposes a U.S. world view clearly dominates. At the same time, students do not recognize that they are learning, not to think, but to think like “Americans”, within one out of many possible points of view.\n"}]}

{"ops":[{"insert":"In my upcoming book: "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Therapy for Happiness and Self-Actualization"},{"insert":", I offer a brief critique of the still pervasive and problematic medical model as the primary guide for mental well-being. For anyone concerned with this issue, I recommend that you attend the "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"25th Annual Conference of the International Society for Ethical Psychology and Psychiatry"},{"insert":" (ISEPP) to be held both in person and online, October 27 - 29, 2023 in California. According to the "},{"attributes":{"background":"white"},"insert":"society’s announcement, “"},{"insert":"ISEPP's annual conference is a time for practitioners, academicians, educators, lawyers, and those who have been harmed by the conventional mental health system to gather together in solidarity. It is a time for strengthening our bonds, sharing our work, and reaching out to others who haven't yet heard our message. Our mission is to critique mainstream mental health professional practices that are based on a medical model, and explore alternative ways of helping people in distress without abandoning the cherished principles of informed consent and self-determination.” You can read more about the conference and register here: "},{"attributes":{"color":"#0563c1","link":"https://app.ce-go.com/25th-annual-isepp-conference/home"},"insert":"https://app.ce-go.com/25th-annual-isepp-conference/home"},{"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"The treatment of mental health issues through physiological treatments such as medications (Psychopharmacology) is still the primary line of defense for psychiatrists, who are first trained medical doctors and who then specialize in psychiatry. Psychiatrists typically prescribe medications, and some "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"may"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":" engage in talk therapy. They base their medical prescriptions on the notion that mental health issues are characteristically caused by diseases of the brain."},{"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"However, the medical model of mental health is fraught with conceptual and practical problems. Though there are clear connections between brain and mind, we are in the infancy stages in terms of understanding these connections in ways useful to mental health. And though drugs are typically given to people with all types of emotional issues, the long-term efficacy of these drugs, and their safety must frequently be called into question. As medical doctors, psychiatrists have an interest in advancing the medical model of the mind since they are medical doctors. This viewpoint seems to take precedence over the scientific studies that frequently show serious adverse consequences for people taking psychiatric drugs long-term."},{"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Here are a few primary questions you can ask of your psychiatrist:"},{"insert":"\n\t"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"1. Do you use a medical model for understanding the mind? In other words, do you see "},{"attributes":{"color":"black"},"insert":"pharmaceuticals and medical procedures as primary methods for helping clients?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\t"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"2. What studies can you point me to that show this medication you are prescribing is safe to use and under what conditions it is safe? How do I know it is safe to use all these medications together?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\t"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"3. Do you also offer therapy sessions? If so, what theories do you use in therapy to help clients?"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Thomas Szasz (1974; 2010), a long-term critic of traditional psychiatry, points out that psychiatrists tend to perceive and present psychiatry as scientific in nature, with their reliance on pharmaceuticals and other medical treatments, while also routinely engaging clients in any form of talk therapy (which is certainly not scientific). Szasz sees this mixture as a clear contradiction:"},{"insert":"\n\n\t"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"… there is no such thing has “mental illness.” … Alchemist and astrologers … spoke of mysterious substances and concealed their methods from public scrutiny. Psychiatrists have similarly persisted in speaking of mysterious mental maladies and have continued to refrain from disclosing fully and frankly what they do. Indeed, whether as theorists or therapists, they may do virtually anything and still claim to be, and be accepted as, psychiatrists (p. 1)."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"insert":"\t"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"There is… a serious discrepancy between what psychotherapists and psychoanalysts do and what they say they do. What they do, quite simply, is to communicate with other persons (often called “patients”) by means of language, nonverbal signs, and rules; they analyze—that is, discuss, and explain, and speculate about—the communicative interactions which they observe and in which they themselves engage; and they often recommend engaging in some types of conduct and avoiding others… But what do these experts tell themselves and others concerning their work? They talk as if they were physicians, physiologists, biologists, or even physicists. We hear about “sick patients” and “treatments,” “diagnoses” and “hospitals,” “instincts” and “endocrine functions” and of course “libido” and “psychic energies,” both “free” and “bound.” All this is fakery and pretense whose purpose is to medicalize certain aspects of the study and control of human behavior (pp. 3-4)."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"In his book "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"Smoke and Mirrors: How You Are Being Fooled About Mental Illness, An Insider’s Warning To Consumers"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":", Chuck Ruby, clinical psychologist and Executive Director of the "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"International Society for Ethical Psychology and Psychiatry "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"eschews the medical model and argues for rethinking how we label those considered mentally ill:"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Using different terms when talking about human suffering would make things clearer and more honest. We would be better served with terms that don’t give the impression of illness, disease, and medicine but more accurately described the very real and distressing problems people endure. It would be especially helpful if we could find good substitutes for the very terms “mental illness” and “mental health,” as they falsely imply medical problems and defective people (p. 7)."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":" "},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"This medical language is probably the single most deceptive, yet subtle, influence in perpetuating the myth [of mental illness]. You are being fooled about it by the very language used in talking and thinking about it (p. 8)."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nFor more on the problem of the medical model for mental well-being, attend the ISEPP’s upcoming annual event. I also recommend these books:\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Moncrieff, J. (2008). "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"The myth of the chemical cure: A critique of psychiatric drug treatment"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":". New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Ruby, C. (2020). "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"Smoke and mirrors: How you are being fooled about mental illness"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":". Welcome, MD: Clear Publishing."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Whitaker, R. (2015). "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"Anatomy of an epidemic: Magic bullets, psychiatric drugs, and the astounding rise of mental illness in America"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":". New York, New York: Broadway Books."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Whitaker, R. and Cosgrove, L. (2015). "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"Psychiatry Under the Influence: Institutional Corruption, Social Injury, and Prescriptions for Reform"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":". NY: Palgrave Macmillan."},{"attributes":{"indent":1},"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"---"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"References:"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Ruby, C. (2020). "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"Smoke and mirrors: How you are being fooled about mental illnes"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"s. Welcome, MD: Clear Publishing. "},{"insert":"\n\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Szasz, T. (1974:2010). "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"The Myth of Mental Illness"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":". NY: Harper Perineal."},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"---"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":" "},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":"Some of the content in this blog was taken or modified from my book: "},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e","italic":true},"insert":"Critical Thinking Therapy for Happiness and Self-Actualization"},{"attributes":{"color":"#211d1e"},"insert":", in press, to be published 2024, copyright Linda Elder."},{"insert":"\n"}]}