{"id":731,"date":"2013-09-07T04:16:05","date_gmt":"2013-09-07T04:16:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/beta.dminlgp.com\/?p=731"},"modified":"2014-10-28T17:36:00","modified_gmt":"2014-10-28T17:36:00","slug":"critically-engaging-the-miniature-guide-to-critical","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/critically-engaging-the-miniature-guide-to-critical\/","title":{"rendered":"Critically engaging “The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Paul and Elder\u2019s The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools<\/em> is a concise work that packs a considerable amount of material between its covers.\u00a0The insights are solid and accompanied by an engaging and helpful set of diagrams that further elucidate the authors\u2019 perspectives.<\/p>\n

Overall, the authors\u2019 goal in this text is rather straightforward and simple \u2013 they want people to think well; as they offer it, they want people to think critically<\/em>. They are not proposing that you should think about particular ideas, they are just offering that whatever particular ideas you do happen to be thinking about there are better and worse ways to do it. Considering the understanding that humans are definitionally thinking creatures (\u00e0 la Descartes), it seems odd that a primer is needed for something engaged in so ubiquitously and that is inherent to our very essence.\u00a0Yet, socio-politico-historical experience suggests there is great need for a short, substantive, persuasive read such as this book offers.\u00a0 To twist a metaphor, possession may be nine tenths of the law (we\u2019ve all got minds), but that last one-tenth when thought of as usage\/methodology makes an entire world of difference. Focus on that last one-tenth is the crux of Paul and Elder\u2019s text.<\/p>\n

What then exactly is critical thinking according to Paul and Elder? \u201cCritical thinking is the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it.\u201d (p.2)\u00a0 Throughout the whole of the text the authors generally suggest that critical thinking involves an open-minded approach to engaging topics that is willing to seek substantive material for its understanding and weigh such material reasonably\/fairly\/justly in light of alternative materials\/ideas.<\/p>\n

As well as proposing numerous positive practices for moving forward, the authors also warn against dangers such as egocentrism, sociocentrism, and eight forms of intellectual bearing that are harmful to self and others (intellectual cowardice, narrow-mindedness, arrogance, laziness, conformity, hypocrisy, unfairness, and intellectual distrust of reason & evidence).<\/p>\n

In the end, the authors call for the creation of \u201ccritical societies\u201d that are based on the principles of their relation of critical thinking. (p. 23) I hear in the authors\u2019 call an echo that reaches back to the idea of the Good City and its need for philosopher-kings as related in Plato\u2019s Republic<\/em>. In suggesting such a connection, I see both merit and some concern in their call. I appreciate their delineation of \u201cThe Good\u201d (Agathon, \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1f78\u03bd) as they see it and find myself in overall agreement with their ideas.\u00a0 However, I would like to utilize one of their own ideas and employ their method of critical engagement to think a moment about their own text. That is, I would like to with \u201cintellectual humility\u201d (one of their positive traits) (pp. 13-14) recognize the limitation of our thoughts and voice hesitation at points whenever there are calls for entire societies to live in certain ways, no matter how good such a siren call might seem. This is one of the ironies of the philosopher-kings in Plato\u2019s Republic<\/em>; the philosopher-kings (ie. critical thinkers [or somewhat more concerningly, \u201cmaster thinker(s)\u201d (p. 20)]) have reached a place where they are supposed to embody intellectual humility and yet, \u201cin all humility\u201d they decide that they should rule\u2026for everyone\u2019s good of course.<\/p>\n

One other piece that is over-emphasized in the text for my liking is that, \u201cCritical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking.\u201d While believing that I generally understand the authors\u2019 intention on this point and appreciate the call for responsibility on the part of persons, I still understand this to suggest an unfortunate and dangerous lack of encouragement for community collaboration.\u00a0 There seems to be an ideological individualism peering through in this statement that I thankfully don\u2019t find fully supported in other portions of the text, but that does seem to leave a lingering mark on the text as a whole.\u00a0 There is a fine line between healthy personal responsibility and integrity and the unhealthy old aphorism of thinking that we can \u201cpull ourselves up by our own bootstraps.\u201d<\/p>\n

Finally, while I again overall appreciate the approach and effort offered in Paul and Elder\u2019s The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools<\/em>, it is soundly (and somewhat painfully) one-dimensionally cognitive in positioning. A most helpful and more holistic orientation would be to also couple these ideas with emotive\/affective components of our being. The place of the heart and soul in our living is sorely lacking in the read.<\/p>\n

The Biblical scriptures call us to love God and others with all of our heart, soul and<\/em> mind. I\u2019m more comfortable with needing to grapple with all of these aspects of our being as we move forward into deep, authentic and faithful engagement with society.<\/p>\n

Of course, at this point I\u2019m asking more of a 23 page text than is really quite just \u2013 and I offer that critically<\/em> with all intellectual humility<\/em>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Paul and Elder\u2019s The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools is a concise work that packs a considerable amount of material between its covers.\u00a0The insights are solid and accompanied by an engaging and helpful set of diagrams that further elucidate the authors\u2019 perspectives. Overall, the authors\u2019 goal in this text is rather straightforward […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":21,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2,290,292,291],"class_list":["post-731","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-dminlgp","tag-elder","tag-paul","tag-paulandelder","cohort-lgp4"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/731","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/21"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=731"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/731\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2923,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/731\/revisions\/2923"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=731"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=731"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=731"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}