I saw this statement today. Do you agree with it? What is a good definition of critical thinking? Can it lead to prejudice?

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

Actually it is impossible. We can no more remove the effects of our upbring, socialisation and beliefs systems than we can hover bouyed up bu our good intentions. All human thinking is coloured by the above and no-one can escape from it.

If you could, you would have removed yourself completely from the normal terms of reference that we humans use to understand who, what, where, how and why. Let me say that some people do achieve removing themselves from the normal (whatever that is) human POV, we refer to such people as being 'mad.'

__________________
"True godliness doesn't turn men out of the world, but enables them to live better in it, and excites their endeavor to mend it: not hide their candle under a bushel, but set it upon a table in a candlestick." - William Penn, 1682

I'd say if it's gone about correctly, critical thinking can help a person ASSESS his/her beliefs- to decide whether they're valid, common sense, etc.

critical thinking can be looked at several ways:
Critical, meaning of utmost importance, then would spin it to be crucial thinking;
or, critical, as in to critique, or apply criticism to, would lead one to the next step on that path which would be: is the criticism constructive, or destructive?

As long as it is not hypo-critical thinking.

"The whole point of critical thinking is to get rid of beliefs, true or false."

My way of thinking about it is that critical thinking is about finding truths by being able to evaluate information and literally sort out the wheat from the chaff. It also includes the realising that you are human and its possible to get things wrong as learning is a process that continues through life.

__________________
Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood. Marie Curie

It is impossible to have critical thinking when we are so reluctant to accept the truth of what is said. Let us start with the assumption displayed in this thread that to get rid of beliefs means to get rid of belief systems. This is a false assumption but a contribution has been made based it. Second, do the words "true or false" refer to the proposition of the OP or to the beliefs being discussed. In many cases what is called critical thinking is not critical at all.

I think we often forget that we, i.e. the entire species, are human and are also entire self-taught. We have no independent basis for identifying our errors.

After all, would one not have to believe it was true? And, in that case and by its own defintion, one would not be capable of critical thought.

__________________
Grassaf, Eolas

I think the purpose of critical thinking is to come to a conclusion....this might be the change of a belief, the validation of an existing belief or the end of a belief. The action of critical thinking has no power in itself...therefore the result (conclusion) depends on the intent and reasoning of an individual person.

__________________
May your awareness be perfection

There is no question that we must believe a great many things rather continuously in order to even make life possible. I need to believe that most people will obey traffic laws and signals (although I do check!). I work because I believe the company will stay in business and I'll get a paycheck. I need to believe that the government and various others who hold my money, pension, investments, and so on, will cough up when the time comes.

I certainly need to believe that my partner cares about me, tells me the truth for the most part, and so on.

That list could go on ad-infinitum.

But it is also true throughout our lives that decisions will have to be made and action taken on the basis of belief, and in some cases, those decisions and actions can have consequences. The more important the consequences, the more important it is for me to examine the beliefs that my decisions will be based on.

For example, I have some money to invest, and it is important to me that the investment grows, because I'm going to need it (desperately) to retire. Therefore, whatever I believe about a given investment opportunity, I must also bring my critical thinking skills to the table. That would include, for example, discerning between feelings of loyalty for my own company and reasonable prospects for its success in the future. Loyalty may colour my beliefs, and lead me to make an investment that might not pay off. On the other hand, my investment might be just what it takes to make the growth and success happen. My beliefs should have much less to do with my decision-making than my considered research and analysis.

There will always be things that we take on "faith," or perhaps in my case accept as axioms. For some, this would be the existence of God, while for others it might be the inherent dignity and worth of every human person. I cannot prove that every human person -- all other things (like criminal behaviour) being equal -- has an equal measure of dignity and worth owing to them, but I accept it anyway. The believer cannot prove that God exists, but accepts it anyway.

But we will make decisions based upon our beliefs, and the more important those decisions, and the more far-reaching the impact of those decisions, the more necessary it is that we examine our beliefs.

If my humanism informs me that a woman (not just her life, but her emotional and mental well-being) is more important than a 10-week embryo, then I am liable to make decisions about abortion that are profoundly different from one who believes that a human "soul" is already present and that the embryo is of equal value with the mother. And my reasoning may lead me to conclude (even though I'm prepared to countenance abortion) that capital punishment is deeply wrong. I need to think very carefully about these things. My emotions play a large part, and my beliefs do too. But I think it is important that I bring as much reason and critical thinking to bear.

Around the world, for example, many people, religious and non-religious, are trying to come to grips with the issue of homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Where countries have decided to accept same-sex relationships (under one name or another), it is usually based on reason, and generally based on considerable thinking about the lives of the people directly concerned. Where countries still punish homosexuality, it is almost always because "God wouldn't like it."

That's a belief. Acting on it has a profound impact. Are they sure they are right, and by what critical thinking have they come to that conclusion?

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.