View source for Module:Critical thinking

{{Short description|Analysis of facts to form a judgment}}
{{About||the American drama film|Critical Thinking (film)}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2020}}

'''Critical thinking''' is the analysis of available [[fact]]s, [[evidence]], [[observation]]s, and [[argument]]s to form a judgment.<ref>{{cite web |url = https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766|title=Defining Critical Thinking|publisher=The International Center for the Assessment of Higher Order Thinking (ICAT, US)/Critical Thinking Community|access-date=2017-03-22|author=Edward M. Glaser}}</ref> The subject is complex; several different [[Critical thinking#Definitions|definitions]] exist, which generally include the [[rational]], [[skepticism|skeptical]], and [[unbiased]] analysis or evaluation of factual [[evidence]]. Critical thinking is [[Self-directedness|self-directed]], [[Discipline|self-disciplined]], self-[[Monitoring (medicine)|monitored]], and self-[[Corrective feedback|corrective]] thinking.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Clarke|first=John|title=Critical Dialogues: Thinking Together in Turbulent Times|date=2019|publisher=Policy Press|isbn=978-1-4473-5097-2|location=Bristol|pages=6}}</ref> It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem-solving abilities as well as a commitment to overcome native [[egocentrism]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.telacommunications.com/nutshell/stages.htm|title=Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development|website=www.telacommunications.com|access-date=2018-04-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190509060129/http://www.telacommunications.com/nutshell/stages.htm|archive-date=9 May 2019|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201204/it-s-fine-line-between-narcissism-and-egocentrism|title=It's a Fine Line Between Narcissism and Egocentrism|website=Psychology Today|access-date=2018-04-03}}</ref> and [[sociocentrism]].

==History==
[[File:Head of Socrates in Palazzo Massimo alle Terme (Rome).JPG|thumb|Sculpture of Socrates]]
The earliest records of critical thinking are the teachings of [[Socrates]], according to [[Plato]]. These included a part in Plato's early dialogues, where Socrates engages with one or more interlocutors on the issue of ethics such as question whether it was right for Socrates to escape from prison.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|last1=Visser|first1=Jan|title=Seeking Understanding: The Lifelong Pursuit to Build the Scientific Mind|last2=Visser|first2=Muriel|date=2019|publisher=Brill|isbn=978-90-04-41680-2|location=Leiden|page=233}}</ref> The philosopher considered and reflected on this question and came to the conclusion that escape violates all the things that he holds higher than himself: the laws of Athens and the guiding voice that Socrates claims to hear.<ref name=":0" />

Socrates established the fact that one cannot depend upon those in "authority" to have sound knowledge and insight. He demonstrated that persons may have power and high position and yet be deeply confused and irrational. Socrates maintained that for an individual to have a good life or to have one that is worth living, he must be a critical questioner and possess an interrogative soul.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Stanlick|first1=Nancy A.|title=Asking Good Questions: Case Studies in Ethics and Critical Thinking|last2=Strawser|first2=Michael J.|date=2015|publisher=Hackett Publishing|isbn=978-1-58510-755-1|location=Indianapolis|pages=6}}</ref> He established the importance of asking deep questions that probe profoundly into thinking before we accept ideas as worthy of belief.

Socrates established the importance of "seeking evidence, closely examining reasoning and assumptions, analyzing basic concepts, and tracing out implications not only of what is said but of what is done as well".<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Chiarini|first1=Andrea|title=Understanding the Lean Enterprise: Strategies, Methodologies, and Principles for a More Responsive Organization|last2=Found|first2=Pauline|last3=Rich|first3=Nicholas|date=2015|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-319-19994-8|location=Cham|pages=132}}</ref> His method of questioning is now known as "[[Socratic questioning]]" and is the best known critical thinking teaching strategy. In his mode of questioning, Socrates highlighted the need for thinking for clarity and logical consistency. He asked people questions to reveal their irrational thinking or lack of reliable knowledge. Socrates demonstrated that having authority does not ensure accurate knowledge. He established the method of questioning beliefs, closely inspecting assumptions and relying on evidence and sound rationale. Plato recorded Socrates' teachings and carried on the tradition of critical thinking. Aristotle and subsequent Greek skeptics refined Socrates' teachings, using systematic thinking and asking questions to ascertain the true nature of reality beyond the way things appear from a glance.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/a-brief-history-of-the-idea-of-critical-thinking/408|title=A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking|website=www.criticalthinking.org|access-date=2018-03-14}}</ref>

Socrates set the agenda for the tradition of critical thinking, namely, to reflectively question common beliefs and explanations, carefully distinguishing beliefs that are reasonable and logical from those that—however appealing to our native egocentrism, however much they serve our vested interests, however comfortable or comforting they may be—lack adequate evidence or rational foundation to warrant belief.

Critical thinking was described by Richard W. Paul as a movement in two waves (1994).<ref>{{Cite book|title=Re-Thinking Reason|last=Walters|first=Kerry|publisher=State University of New York Press|year=1994|location=Albany|pages=181–198}}</ref> The "first wave" of critical thinking is often referred to as
a 'critical analysis' that is clear, [[rationality|rational]] thinking involving [[critique]]. Its details vary amongst those who [[operational definition|define]] it. According to Barry K. Beyer (1995), critical thinking means making clear, reasoned judgments. During the process of critical thinking, ideas should be reasoned, well thought out, and judged.<ref>{{cite web|url = http://myweb.wvnet.edu/~jelkins/critproj/overview.html|title = The Critical Thinking Movement: Alternating Currents in One Teacher's Thinking|first = James R.|last = Elkins|access-date = 23 March 2014|website = myweb.wvnet.edu|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180613084853/http://myweb.wvnet.edu/~jelkins/critproj/overview.html|archive-date = 13 June 2018|url-status = dead}}</ref> The U.S. National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.criticalthinking.org//|title=Critical Thinking Index Page}}</ref> defines critical thinking as the "<nowiki>intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.</nowiki>"<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766|title=Defining Critical Thinking}}</ref>

==Etymology and origin of critical thinking==
In the term ''critical thinking'', the word ''[[wikt:critical|critical]]'', (Grk. κριτικός = ''kritikos'' = "critic") derives from the word ''critic'' and implies a [[critique]]; it identifies the intellectual capacity and the means "of judging", "of judgement", "for judging", and of being "able to discern".<ref>Brown, Lesley. (ed.) ''The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary'' (1993) p. 551.</ref> The intellectual roots of critical<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.dictionary.com/e/critical-thinking/|title=Lexical Investigations: Critical Thinking – Everything After Z by Dictionary.com|date=2013-06-25|work=Everything After Z by Dictionary.com|access-date=2018-04-03}}</ref> thinking are as ancient as its etymology, traceable, ultimately, to the [[Teachings and philosophy of Swami Vivekananda|teaching]] practice and vision of [[Socrates]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.biography.com/people/socrates-9488126|title=Socrates|website=Biography|access-date=2018-04-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190328012820/https://www.biography.com/people/socrates-9488126|archive-date=28 March 2019|url-status=dead}}</ref> 2,500 years ago who discovered by a method of probing questioning that people could not rationally justify their confident claims to [[knowledge]].

==Definitions==
Traditionally, critical thinking has been variously defined as follows:
* "The intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action."<ref name="Scriven Paul 1987">{{cite web |last1=Scriven |first1=Michael |last2=Paul |first2=Richard |title=Critical Thinking as Defined by the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking |url=http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766 |website=www.criticalthinking.org |publisher=The Foundation for Critical Thinking |access-date=21 January 2022 |date=1987}}</ref>
* "Disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence"<ref>{{Dictionary.com|critical thinking|accessdate=2022-01-21}}</ref>
* "Purposeful, [[Self-control|self-regulatory]] judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.insightassessment.com/CT-Resources/Teaching-For-and-About-Critical-Thinking/Critical-Thinking-What-It-Is-and-Why-It-Counts/Critical-Thinking-What-It-Is-and-Why-It-Counts-PDF|last=Facione|first=Peter A.|title=Critical Thinking: What It is and Why It Counts|publisher=insightassessment.com|year=2011|page=26|access-date=4 August 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130729185619/http://www.insightassessment.com/CT-Resources/Teaching-For-and-About-Critical-Thinking/Critical-Thinking-What-It-Is-and-Why-It-Counts/Critical-Thinking-What-It-Is-and-Why-It-Counts-PDF|archive-date=29 July 2013|url-status=dead}}</ref>
* "Includes a commitment to using reason in the formulation of our beliefs"<ref name=mulnix>{{cite journal | last1 = Mulnix | first1 = J. W. | year = 2010 | title = Thinking critically about critical thinking | journal = Educational Philosophy and Theory | volume = 44| issue = 5| page = 471 | doi = 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x | s2cid = 145168346 }}</ref>
* The skill and propensity to engage in an activity with reflective scepticism (McPeck, 1981)<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Nieto | first1=Ana M. | last2=Saiz | first2=Carlos | title=Critical Thinking: A Question of Aptitude and Attitude? | journal=Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines | publisher=Philosophy Documentation Center | volume=25 | issue=2 | year=2010 | issn=1093-1082 | doi=10.5840/inquiryctnews20102524 | pages=19–26}}</ref>
* Thinking about one's thinking in a manner designed to organize and clarify, raise the efficiency of, and recognize errors and biases in one's own thinking. Critical thinking is not 'hard' thinking nor is it directed at solving problems (other than 'improving' one's own thinking). Critical thinking is inward-directed with the intent of maximizing the [[rationality]] of the thinker. One does not use critical thinking to solve problems—one uses critical thinking to improve one's process of thinking.<ref>Carmichael, Kirby; letter to Olivetti, Laguna Salada Union School District, May 1997.</ref>
* "An appraisal based on careful analytical evaluation"<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.thefreedictionary.com/critical+analysis|title=critical analysis|newspaper=TheFreeDictionary.com|access-date=2016-11-30}}</ref>
* "Critical thinking is a type of thinking pattern that requires people to be reflective, and pay attention to decision-making which guides their beliefs and actions. Critical thinking allows people to deduct with more logic, to process sophisticated information and look at various sides of an issue so they can produce more solid conclusions."<ref>{{Cite journal|date=February 1988|title=Book Reviews and Notes : Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice. Joan Baron and Robert Sternberg. 1987. W.H. Freeman, & Co., New York. 275 pages. Index. ISBN 0-7167-1791-3. Paperback|journal=Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society|volume=8|issue=1|pages=101|doi=10.1177/0270467688008001113|s2cid=220913799|issn=0270-4676}}</ref>
* Critical thinking has seven critical features: being inquisitive and curious, being open-minded to different sides, being able to think systematically, being analytical, being persistent to truth, being confident about critical thinking itself, and lastly, being mature.<ref name="Facione 1–4">{{Cite journal|last1=Facione|first1=Peter A.|last2=Facione|first2=Noreen C.|date=March 1993|title=Profiling critical thinking dispositions|journal=Assessment Update|volume=5|issue=2|pages=1–4|doi=10.1002/au.3650050202|issn=1041-6099}}</ref>
* Although critical thinking could be defined in several different ways, there is a general agreement in its key component—the desire to reach for a satisfactory result, and this should be achieved by rational thinking and result-driven manner. Halpern thinks that critical thinking firstly involves learned abilities such as problem-solving, calculation and successful probability application. It also includes a tendency to engage the thinking process. In recent times, Stanovich believed that modern IQ testing could hardly measure the ability of critical thinking.<ref>{{Citation|last=Halpern|first=Diane F.|editor3-first=Diane F|editor3-last=Halpern|editor2-first=Henry L|editor2-last=Roediger Iii|editor1-first=Robert J|editor1-last=Sternberg|chapter=The Nature and Nurture of Critical Thinking|pages=1–14|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=9780511804632|doi=10.1017/cbo9780511804632.002|title=Critical Thinking in Psychology|year=2006}}</ref>
*"Critical thinking is essentially a questioning, challenging approach to knowledge and perceived wisdom. It involves ideas and information from an objective position and then questioning this information in the light of our own values, attitudes and personal philosophy."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Judge |first1=Brenda |last2=McCreery |first2=Elaine |last3=Jones |first3=Patrick |title=Critical Thinking Skills for Education Students |date=2009 |publisher=SAGE |isbn=978-1-84445-556-0 |page=9 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tGho4-SsPWEC&pg=PT8 |language=en}}</ref>
Contemporary critical thinking scholars have expanded these traditional definitions to include qualities, concepts, and processes such as creativity, imagination, discovery, reflection, empathy, connecting knowing, feminist theory, subjectivity, ambiguity, and inconclusiveness.  Some definitions of critical thinking exclude these subjective practices.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Re-Thinking Reason|last=Walters|first=Kerry|publisher=State University of New York Press|year=1994|location=Albany}}</ref><ref name="Scriven Paul 1987" />

# According to Ennis, "Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action."<ref>{{Citation|last=Ennis|first=Robert H.|chapter=Critical Thinking|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|isbn=9781137378057|doi=10.1057/9781137378057.0005|title=The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education|year=2015}}</ref> This definition Ennis provided is highly agreed by Harvey Siegel,<ref>{{Cite book|last=Siegel|first=Harvey|date=2013-09-27|title=Educating Reason|doi=10.4324/9781315001722|isbn=9781315001722}}</ref> Peter Facione,<ref name="Facione 1–4"/> and Deanna Kuhn.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kuhn|first=Deanna|date=January 2015|title=Thinking Together and Alone|journal=Educational Researcher|volume=44|issue=1|pages=46–53|doi=10.3102/0013189x15569530|s2cid=145335117|issn=0013-189X}}</ref>
# According to Ennis' definition, critical thinking requires a lot of attention and brain function. When a critical thinking approach is applied to education, it helps the student's brain function better and understand texts differently.
# Different fields of study may require different types of critical thinking. Critical thinking provides more angles and perspectives upon the same material.

==Logic and rationality==
{{main|Logic and rationality}}
{{more citations needed section|date=November 2016|reason=need to follow standard wikipedia reference style}}
The study of logical argumentation is relevant to the study of critical thinking. Logic is concerned with the analysis of arguments, including the appraisal of their correctness or incorrectness.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Salmon|first=Merrilee H.|title=Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, Sixth Edition|date=2013|publisher=Cengage Learning|isbn=978-1-133-04975-3|location=Boston, MA|pages=12}}</ref> In the field of [[epistemology]], critical thinking is considered to be logically correct thinking, which allows for differentiation between logically true and logically false statements.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Sherrie|first=Wisdom|title=Handbook of Research on Advancing Critical Thinking in Higher Education|date=2015|publisher=IGI Global|isbn=978-1-4666-8412-6|location=Hershey, PA|pages=294}}</ref>

In "First wave" logical thinking, the [[Thought|thinker]] is removed from the train of thought, and the analysis of connections between concepts or points in thought is ostensibly free of any bias. In his essay ''Beyond Logicism in Critical Thinking'' [[Kerry S. Walters]] describes this ideology thus: "A logistic approach to critical thinking conveys the message to students that thinking is legitimate only when it conforms to the procedures of informal (and, to a lesser extent, formal) logic and that the good thinker necessarily aims for styles of examination and appraisal that are analytical, abstract, universal, and objective. This model of thinking has become so entrenched in conventional academic wisdom that many educators accept it as canon".<ref name="Walters1994"/> Such principles are concomitant with the increasing dependence on a ''quantitative'' understanding of the world.{{citation needed|date=July 2020}}

In the 'second wave' of critical thinking, authors consciously moved away from the logocentric mode of critical thinking characteristic of the 'first wave'. Although many scholars began to take a less exclusive view of what constitutes critical thinking, rationality and logic remain widely accepted as essential bases for critical thinking. Walters argues that exclusive logicism in the first wave sense is based on "the unwarranted assumption that good thinking is reducible to logical thinking".<ref name="Walters1994"/>

===Deduction, abduction and induction===
[[File:Argument terminology used in logic (en).svg|thumb|500px|right|[[Argument]] terminology used in [[logic]]]]
{{main|logical reasoning}}
There are three types of [[logical reasoning]]. Informally, two kinds of logical reasoning can be distinguished in addition to formal [[Deductive reasoning|deduction]], which are [[inductive reasoning|induction]] and [[abductive reasoning|abduction]].

====Deduction====
* [[Deductive reasoning|Deduction]] is the conclusion drawn from the structure of an argument's [[premises]], by use of [[rules of inference]] formally those of [[Propositional calculus#Basic and derived argument forms|propositional calculus]]. For example: X is human and all humans have a face, so X has a face.

====Induction====
* [[Inductive reasoning|Induction]] is drawing a conclusion from a pattern that is guaranteed by the strictness of the structure to which it applies. For example: The sum of even integers is even. Let <math>x,y,z \in \mathbb{Z} </math> then <math>2x,2y,2z</math> are even by definition.  <math>2x+2y=2(x+y)=2z</math>, which is even; so summing two even numbers results in an even number.

====Abduction====
* [[Abductive reasoning|Abduction]] is drawing a conclusion using a [[heuristic]] that is likely, but not inevitable given some foreknowledge. For example: I observe sheep in a field, and they appear white from my viewing angle, so sheep are white. Contrast with the deductive statement: Some sheep are white on at least one side.

===Critical thinking and rationality===
[[Kerry S. Walters]], an emeritus philosophy professor from [[Gettysburg College]], argues that rationality demands more than just logical or traditional methods of problem solving and analysis or what he calls the "calculus of justification" but also considers "[[cognitive]] acts such as [[imagination]], conceptual creativity, [[intuition]] and insight" (p.&nbsp;63). These "functions" are focused on discovery, on more abstract processes instead of linear, rules-based approaches to problem-solving. The linear and non-sequential mind must both be engaged in the [[rational]] [[mind]].<ref name="Walters1994">{{cite book|author=Kerry S. Walters|title=Re-Thinking Reason: New Perspectives in Critical Thinking|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TfT32n2Hvd0C|year=1994|publisher=SUNY Press|isbn=978-0-7914-2095-9}}</ref>

The ability to critically analyze an argument—to dissect structure and components, thesis and reasons—is essential. But so is the ability to be flexible and consider non-traditional alternatives and perspectives. These complementary functions are what allow for critical thinking to be a practice encompassing imagination and intuition in cooperation with traditional modes of deductive inquiry.<ref name="Walters1994"/>

==Functions==
The list of core critical thinking skills includes observation, interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and [[metacognition]]. According to Reynolds (2011), an individual or group engaged in a strong way of critical thinking gives due consideration to establish for instance:<ref>Reynolds, Martin (2011). "Critical thinking and systems thinking: towards a critical literacy for systems thinking in practice". In: Horvath, Chrii. and Forte, James M. eds. ''Critical Thinking''. New York: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 37–68. {{ISBN?}}</ref>
* Evidence through reality
* Context skills to isolate the problem from context
* Relevant criteria for making the judgment well
* Applicable methods or techniques for forming the judgment
* Applicable theoretical constructs for [[Critical understanding|understanding]] the problem and the question at hand

In addition to possessing strong critical-thinking skills, one must be disposed to engage problems and decisions using those skills. Critical thinking employs not only [[logic]] but broad [[intellect]]ual criteria such as clarity, [[credibility]], [[accuracy]], precision, [[relevance]], depth, [[breadth]], significance, and fairness.<ref>{{cite book|last=Jones|first= Elizabeth A. |year=1995|title= National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identifying College Graduates' Essential Skills in Writing, Speech and Listening, and Critical Thinking. Final Project Report (NCES-95-001)|isbn=978-0-16-048051-5|publisher= National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, University Park, PA.; Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Washington, DC PUB TYPE – Reports Research/Technical (143)|pages= 14–15|url=http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED383255.pdf|access-date=2016-02-24}}</ref>

Critical thinking calls for the ability to:
* Recognize problems, to find workable means for meeting those problems
* Understand the importance of prioritization and order of precedence in problem-solving
* Gather and marshal pertinent (relevant) information
* Recognize [[unstated assumption]]s and values
* Comprehend and use [[language]] with accuracy, clarity, and [[wikt:discernment|discernment]]
* Interpret data, to appraise evidence and evaluate arguments
* Recognize the existence (or non-existence) of logical relationships between propositions
* Draw warranted conclusions and generalizations
* Put to test the conclusions and generalizations at which one arrives
* Reconstruct one's patterns of beliefs on the basis of wider experience
* Render accurate judgments about specific things and qualities in everyday life

In sum:

"A persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports or refutes it and the further conclusions to which it tends."<ref name=glaser>{{Cite book| title=An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking| author=Edward M. Glaser| year=1941| publisher=New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University| isbn=978-0-404-55843-7|page= }}{{page?|date=February 2022}}</ref>

==Habits or traits of the mind==
The habits of [[mind]] that characterize a person strongly disposed toward critical thinking include a desire to follow reason and evidence wherever they may lead, a systematic approach to problem solving, [[inquisitiveness]], even-handedness, and confidence in [[reasoning]].<ref>The National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identification of the Skills to be Taught, Learned, and Assessed, NCES 94–286, US Dept of Education, Addison Greenwood (Ed), Sal Carrallo (PI). See also, Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. ERIC Document No. ED 315–423</ref>

According to a definition analysis by Kompf & Bond (2001), critical thinking involves problem solving, decision making, [[metacognition]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/metacognition/teaching_metacognition.html|title=Teaching Metacognition|website=Metacognition|access-date=2018-04-03}}</ref> rationality, rational thinking, [[reasoning]], [[knowledge]], [[intelligence]] and also a moral component such as reflective thinking. Critical thinkers therefore need to have reached a level of maturity in their development, possess a certain attitude as well as a set of taught skills.

There is a postulation by some writers that the tendencies from habits of mind should be thought as virtues to demonstrate the characteristics of a critical thinker.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Facione|first1=Peter A.|last2=Sánchez|first2=Carol A.|last3=Facione|first3=Noreen C.|last4=Gainen|first4=Joanne|date=1995|journal=The Journal of General Education|volume=44|issue=1|pages=1–25|issn=0021-3667|jstor=27797240|title=The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking}}</ref> These [[intellectual virtue]]s are ethical qualities that encourage motivation to think in particular ways towards specific circumstances. However, these virtues have also been criticized by skeptics, who argue that there is lacking evidence for this specific mental basis that are causative to critical thinking.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Bailin|first1=Sharon|last2=Case|first2=Roland|last3=Coombs|first3=Jerrold R.|last4=Daniels|first4=Leroi B.|date=May 1999|title=Common misconceptions of critical thinking|journal=Journal of Curriculum Studies|language=en|volume=31|issue=3|pages=269–283|doi=10.1080/002202799183124|issn=0022-0272}}</ref>

==Research in critical thinking==
Edward M. Glaser proposed that the ability to think critically involves three elements:<ref name=glaser/>

# An attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one's experiences
# Knowledge of the methods of logical [[inquiry]] and reasoning
# Some skill in applying those methods.
Educational programs aimed at developing critical thinking in children and adult learners, individually or in group problem solving and decision making contexts, continue to address these same three central elements.

The Critical Thinking project at Human Science Lab, [[London]], is involved in the scientific study of all major [[educational system]]s in prevalence today to assess how the systems are working to promote or impede critical thinking.<ref>{{cite web | url= http://humansciencelab.org.uk/research/| title=Research at Human Science Lab |publisher=Human Science Lab | access-date=5 March 2017}}</ref>

Contemporary cognitive psychology regards human reasoning as a complex process that is both reactive and reflective.<ref>Solomon, S.A. (2002) "Two Systems of Reasoning", in ''Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment'', Govitch, Griffin, Kahneman (Eds), Cambridge University Press. {{ISBN|978-0-521-79679-8}}; ''Thinking and Reasoning in Human Decision Making: The Method of Argument and Heuristic Analysis'', Facione and Facione, 2007, California Academic Press.  {{ISBN|978-1-891557-58-3}}</ref> This presents a problem which is detailed as a division of a critical mind in juxtaposition to sensory data and memory.

The psychological theory disposes of the absolute nature of the rational mind, in reference to conditions, abstract problems and discursive limitations. Where the relationship between critical thinking skills and critical thinking dispositions is an empirical question, the ability to attain causal domination exists, for which Socrates was known to be largely disposed against as the practice of [[Sophist]]ry. Accounting for a measure of "critical thinking dispositions" is the California Measure of Mental Motivation<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=OT12dZ0binIC&pg=PA46 ''Research on Sociocultural Influences on Motivation and Learning''], p. 46</ref> and the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Walsh|first=Catherine, M.|year=2007|title=California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: Further Factor Analytic Examination|journal= Perceptual and Motor Skills|volume=104|issue=1|pages=141–151|doi=10.2466/pms.104.1.141-151|pmid=17450973|s2cid=44863676}}</ref> The Critical Thinking Toolkit is an alternative measure that examines student beliefs and attitudes about critical thinking<ref>Stupple, E. J. N., Maratos, F. A., Elander, J., Hunt, T. E., Cheung, K. Y., & Aubeeluck, A. V. (2017). "Development of the Critical Thinking Toolkit (CriTT): A measure of student attitudes and beliefs about critical thinking". ''Thinking Skills and Creativity'', 23, 91–100.</ref>

==Education==
[[John Dewey]] is one of many educational leaders who recognized that a curriculum aimed at building thinking skills would benefit the individual learner, the community, and the entire democracy.<ref>Dewey, John. (1910). ''How we think''. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath & Co.{{page?|date=February 2022}}</ref>

Critical thinking is significant in the learning process of [[internalization]], in the construction of basic ideas, principles, and theories inherent in content.  And critical thinking is significant in the learning process of application, whereby those ideas, principles, and theories are implemented effectively as they become relevant in learners' lives.{{Citation needed|date=November 2020}}

Each discipline adapts its use of critical thinking concepts and principles. The core concepts are always there, but they are embedded in subject-specific content.{{Citation needed|date=November 2020}} For students to learn content, intellectual engagement is crucial. All students must do their own thinking, their own construction of knowledge. Good teachers recognize this and therefore focus on the questions, readings, activities that stimulate the mind to take ownership of key concepts and principles underlying the subject.{{Citation needed|date=November 2020}}

Historically, the teaching of critical thinking focused only on logical procedures such as formal and informal logic.{{Citation needed|date=November 2020}} This emphasized to students that good thinking is equivalent to logical thinking. However, a second wave of critical thinking, urges educators to value conventional techniques, meanwhile expanding what it means to be a critical thinker. In 1994, Kerry Walters<ref>Walters, Kerry. (1994). ''Re-Thinking Reason''. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.{{ISBN?}}{{page?|date=February 2022}}</ref> compiled a conglomeration of sources surpassing this logical restriction to include many different authors' research regarding connected knowing, empathy, gender-sensitive ideals, collaboration, world views, intellectual autonomy, morality and enlightenment. These concepts invite students to incorporate their own perspectives and experiences into their thinking.

In the English and Welsh school systems, ''Critical Thinking'' is offered as a subject that 16- to 18-year-olds can take as an [[Advanced Level (UK)|A-Level]]. Under the [[OCR (exam board)|OCR]] [[exam board]], students can sit two exam papers for the AS: "Credibility of Evidence" and "Assessing and Developing Argument". The full Advanced [[General Certificate of Education|GCE]] is now available: in addition to the two AS units, candidates sit the two papers "Resolution of Dilemmas" and "Critical Reasoning". The A-level tests candidates on their ability to think critically about, and analyze, arguments on their deductive or inductive validity, as well as producing their own arguments. It also tests their ability to analyze certain related topics such as credibility and ethical decision-making. However, due to its comparative lack of subject content, many universities do not accept it as a main A-level for admissions.<ref>[http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/asa_levelgceforfirstteachingin2008/critical_thinking/faqs.html Critical Thinking FAQs from Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations] {{webarchive |url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080411150135/http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/asa_levelgceforfirstteachingin2008/critical_thinking/faqs.html |date=11 April 2008 }}</ref> Nevertheless, the AS is often useful in developing reasoning skills, and the full Advanced GCE is useful for degree courses in politics, philosophy, history or [[theology]], providing the skills required for critical analysis that are useful, for example, in biblical study.

There used to also be an [[Advanced Extension Award]] offered in Critical Thinking in the UK, open to any A-level student regardless of whether they have the Critical Thinking A-level. [[Cambridge International Examinations]] have an A-level in Thinking Skills.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cie.org.uk/qualifications/academic/uppersec/alevel/subject/aleveldetails?assdef_id=765_804|title=Cambridge International AS and A Level subjects}}</ref>

From 2008, [[Assessment and Qualifications Alliance]] has also been offering an A-level Critical Thinking specification.<ref>[http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/gce/critical_thinking_new.php "New GCEs for 2008"], Assessment and Qualifications Alliance {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080217221100/http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/gce/critical_thinking_new.php |date=17 February 2008 }}</ref>
[[OCR (exam board)|OCR]] [[exam board]] have also modified theirs for 2008. Many examinations for university entrance set by universities, on top of A-level examinations, also include a critical thinking component, such as the [[LNAT]], the [[UKCAT]], the [[BioMedical Admissions Test]] and the [[Thinking Skills Assessment]].

In [[Qatar]], critical thinking was offered by [[AL-Bairaq]]—an outreach, non-traditional educational program that targets high school students and focuses on a curriculum based on [[STEM fields]]. The idea behind [[AL-Bairaq]] is to offer high school students the opportunity to connect with the research environment in the Center for Advanced Materials (CAM) at Qatar University. Faculty members train and mentor the students and help develop and enhance their critical thinking, problem-solving, and teamwork skills.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.qu.edu.qa/offices/research/CAM/dmsprogram/index.php |access-date=5 July 2014 |url-status=dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20140419220638/http://www.qu.edu.qa/offices/research/CAM/dmsprogram/index.php |title = Welcome to Al-Bairaq World |archive-date=19 April 2014 }}</ref>{{failed verification |date=November 2016 }}

===Effectiveness===
In 1995, a meta-analysis of the literature on teaching effectiveness in higher [[education]] was undertaken.<ref>Lion Gardiner, Redesigning Higher Education: Producing Dramatic Gains in Student Learning, in conjunction with: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, 1995</ref>
The study noted concerns from higher [[education]], [[politician]]s, and [[business]] that higher education was failing to meet society's requirements for well-educated citizens.  It concluded that although faculty may aspire to develop students' [[thinking]] skills, in practice they have tended to aim at facts and concepts utilizing lowest levels of [[cognition]], rather than developing intellect or [[values]].

In a more recent meta-analysis, researchers reviewed 341 quasi- or true-experimental studies, all of which used some form of standardized critical thinking measure to assess the outcome variable.<ref name="Abrami, P. C. 2014">Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2014). "Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-Analysis". ''Review of Educational Research'', 1–40</ref> The authors describe the various methodological approaches and attempt to categorize the differing assessment tools, which include standardized tests (and second-source measures), tests developed by teachers, tests developed by researchers, and tests developed by teachers who also serve the role as the [[researcher]].  The results emphasized the need for exposing students to real-world problems and the importance of encouraging open dialogue within a supportive environment.  Effective strategies for teaching critical thinking are thought to be possible in a wide variety of [[educational]] settings.<ref name="Abrami, P. C. 2014"/> One attempt to assess the [[humanities]]' role in teaching critical thinking and reducing belief in [[Pseudoscience|pseudoscientific]] claims was made at [[North Carolina State University]]. Some success was noted and the researchers emphasized the value of the humanities in providing the skills to evaluate current events and qualitative data in context.<ref>{{cite journal |last = Frazier |first = Kendrick |author-link = Kendrick Frazier |title = Humanities, Too: In New Study, History Courses in Critical Thinking Reduce Pseudoscientific Beliefs |journal=[[Skeptical Inquirer]] |year = 2017 |volume=41 |issue=4 |page=11 }}</ref>

[[Scott Lilienfeld]] notes that there is some evidence to suggest that basic critical thinking skills might be successfully taught to children at a younger age than previously thought.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Lilienfeld |first=Scott |author-link = Scott Lilienfeld |title=Teaching Skepticism: How Early Can We Begin? |journal=[[Skeptical Inquirer]] |year=2017 |volume=41 |issue=5 |pages=30–31 |url = https://www.csicop.org/si/show/teaching_skepticism_how_early_can_we_begin |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180810182835/https://www.csicop.org/si/show/teaching_skepticism_how_early_can_we_begin |url-status=dead |archive-date=2018-08-10 }}</ref>

==Importance in academics==
Critical thinking is an important element of all professional fields and academic disciplines (by referencing their respective sets of permissible questions, evidence sources, criteria, etc.). Within the framework of [[scientific skepticism]], the process of critical thinking involves the careful acquisition and interpretation of information and use of it to reach a [[theory of justification|well-justified]] conclusion. The concepts and principles of critical thinking can be applied to any context or case but only by reflecting upon the nature of that application. Critical thinking forms, therefore, a system of related, and overlapping, modes of thought such as anthropological thinking, sociological thinking, historical thinking, political thinking, [[psychological]] thinking, philosophical thinking, mathematical thinking, chemical thinking, biological thinking, ecological thinking, legal thinking, ethical thinking, musical thinking, thinking like a painter, sculptor, engineer, business person, etc. In other words, though critical thinking principles are universal, their application to disciplines requires a process of reflective [[contextualism|contextualization]]. Psychology offerings, for example, have included courses such as Critical Thinking about the [[Paranormal]], in which students are subjected to a series of [[cold reading]]s and tested on their belief of the "psychic", who is eventually announced to be a fake.<ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Baugher |first1=Bob |last2=Haldeman |first2=Philip |date=July–August 2019 |title=Teaching College Students Critical Thinking Skills by Posing as a 'Registered Psychic' |magazine=[[Skeptical Inquirer]] |publisher=[[Center for Inquiry]] |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=50–52}}</ref>

Critical thinking is considered important in the academic fields for enabling one to analyze, evaluate, explain, and restructure thinking, thereby ensuring the act of thinking without false belief. However, even with knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning, mistakes occur, and due to a thinker's inability to apply the methodology consistently, and because of overruling character traits such as [[egocentrism]]. Critical thinking includes identification of [[prejudice]], [[bias]], propaganda, self-deception, distortion, [[misinformation]], etc.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/fallacy/biases.php |title=[F08] Cognitive biases |last1=Lau |first1=Joe |last2=Chan |first2=Jonathan |website=Critical thinking web |access-date=2016-02-01 }}</ref> Given research in [[cognitive psychology]], some [[education|educators]] believe that schools should focus on teaching their students critical thinking [[skill]]s and cultivation of intellectual traits.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinking-moral-integrity-and-citizenship-teaching-for-the-intellectual-virtues/487 |title=Critical Thinking, Moral Integrity and Citizenship |website=Criticalthinking.org |access-date=2016-02-01 }}</ref>

Critical thinking skills can be used to help nurses during the assessment process. Through the use of critical thinking, nurses can question, evaluate, and reconstruct the nursing care process by challenging the established theory and practice. Critical thinking skills can help nurses problem solve, reflect, and make a conclusive decision about the current situation they face. Critical thinking creates "new possibilities for the development of the nursing knowledge".<ref>{{cite journal | doi = 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.00925.x | volume=29 | title=Catching the wave: understanding the concept of critical thinking | year=1999 | journal=Journal of Advanced Nursing | pages=577–583 | last1 = Boychuk Duchscher | first1 = Judy E.| issue=3 | pmid=28796334 }}</ref> Due to the sociocultural, environmental, and political issues that are affecting healthcare delivery, it would be helpful to embody new techniques in nursing. Nurses can also engage their critical thinking skills through the Socratic method of dialogue and reflection. This practice standard is even part of some regulatory organizations such as the College of Nurses of Ontario's Professional Standards for Continuing Competencies (2006).<ref>College of Nurses of Ontario – Professional Standards for
[http://www.cno.org/Global/4-LearnAboutStandardsAndGuidelines/prac/learn/modules/profstands/slides/Competence.pdf Continuing Competencies (2006)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140912093242/http://www.cno.org/Global/4-LearnAboutStandardsAndGuidelines/prac/learn/modules/profstands/slides/Competence.pdf |date=12 September 2014 }}</ref>
It requires nurses to engage in [[Reflective Practice]] and keep records of this continued professional development for possible review by the college.

Critical thinking is also considered important for [[human rights education]] for [[toleration]]. The [[International Day for Tolerance|Declaration of Principles on Tolerance]] adopted by [[UNESCO]] in 1995 affirms that "education for tolerance could aim at countering factors that lead to fear and exclusion of others, and could help young people to develop capacities for independent judgement, ''critical thinking'' and ethical [[reasoning]]".<ref>{{cite web |website = UNESCO |title=International Day for Tolerance . Declaration of Principles on Tolerance, Article 4, 3 |url = http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13175&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html |access-date = 2016-02-24 }}</ref>

==Online communication==
The advent and rising popularity of online courses have prompted some to ask if computer-mediated communication (CMC) promotes, hinders, or has no effect on the amount and quality of critical thinking in a course (relative to face-to-face communication). There is some evidence to suggest a fourth, more nuanced possibility: that CMC may promote some aspects of critical thinking but hinder others. For example, Guiller et al. (2008)<ref name="Guiller2008">{{cite journal|last1=Guiller|first1=Jane|last2=Durndell|first2=Alan|last3=Ross|first3=Anne|title=Peer interaction and critical thinking: Face-to-face or online discussion?|journal=Learning and Instruction|year=2008|volume=18|issue=2|pages=187–200|doi=10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.001}}</ref> found that, relative to face-to-face discourse, online discourse featured more justifications, while face-to-face discourse featured more instances of students expanding on what others had said. The increase in justifications may be due to the asynchronous nature of online discussions, while the increase in expanding comments may be due to the spontaneity of 'real-time' discussion. Newman et al. (1995)<ref name="Newman1995">{{cite journal |last1=Newman |first1 = D. R. |last2=Webb|first2=Brian|last3=Cochrane|first3=Clive|title = A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer-supported group learning|journal=Interpersonal Computing and Technology|year=1995|volume=3|issue=September 1993|pages=56–77|doi=10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x|pmid=18352969|hdl = 10818/15120 |s2cid = 14308899 }}</ref> showed similar differential effects. They found that while CMC boasted more important statements and linking of ideas, it lacked novelty. The authors suggest that this may be due to difficulties participating in a brainstorming-style activity in an asynchronous environment. Rather, the asynchrony may promote users to put forth "considered, thought out contributions".

Researchers assessing critical thinking in online discussion forums often employ a technique called Content Analysis,<ref name="Newman1995" /><ref name="Guiller2008" /> where the text of online discourse (or the transcription of face-to-face discourse) is systematically coded for different kinds of statements relating to critical thinking. For example, a statement might be coded as "Discuss ambiguities to clear them up" or "Welcoming outside knowledge" as positive indicators of critical thinking. Conversely, statements reflecting poor critical thinking may be labeled as "Sticking to prejudice or assumptions" or "Squashing attempts to bring in outside knowledge". The frequency of these codes in CMC and face-to-face discourse can be compared to draw conclusions about the quality of critical thinking.

Searching for evidence of critical thinking in discourse has roots in a definition of critical thinking put forth by Kuhn (1991),<ref name="Kuhn1991">{{cite book|last1=Kuhn|first1=D|title=The skills of argument|date=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge, UK}}</ref> which emphasizes the social nature of discussion and knowledge construction. There is limited research on the role of social experience in critical thinking development, but there is some evidence to suggest it is an important factor. For example, research has shown that 3- to 4-year-old children can discern, to some extent, the differential creditability<ref name="Koenig2005">{{cite journal|last1=Koenig|first1=M A|last2=Harris|first2=P L|title=Preschoolers mistrust ignorant and inaccurate speakers|journal=Child Development|date=2005|volume=76|issue=6|pages=1261–1277|doi=10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00849.x|pmid=16274439|citeseerx=10.1.1.501.253}}</ref> and expertise<ref name="Lutz2002">{{cite journal|last1=Lutz|first1=D J|last2=Keil|first2=F C|title=Early understanding of the division of cognitive labor|journal=Child Development|date=2002|volume=73|issue=4|pages=1073–1084|doi=10.1111/1467-8624.00458|pmid=12146734}}</ref> of individuals. Further evidence for the impact of social experience on the development of critical thinking skills comes from work that found that 6- to 7-year-olds from China have similar levels of skepticism to 10- and 11-year-olds in the United States.<ref name="Heyman2007">{{cite journal|last1=Heyman|first1=G D|last2=Fu|first2=G|last3=Lee|first3=K|title=Evaluating claims peoplemake about themselves: The development of skepticism|journal=Child Development|year=2007|volume=78|issue=2|pages=367–375|doi=10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01003.x|pmid=17381778|pmc=2570105}}</ref> If the development of critical thinking skills was solely due to maturation, it is unlikely we would see such dramatic differences across cultures.

== See also ==
{{Portal|Philosophy|Psychology|Education}}
{{col-list|colwidth=25em|
* [[Age of Enlightenment]]
* [[Argument]]
* [[Argumentation theory]]
* [[Cognitive bias mitigation]]
* [[Critic]]
* ''[[Critical Thinking (film)|Critical Thinking]]''
* [[Demarcation problem]]
* [[Dialectic]]
* [[Disinformation]]
* [[Freedom of thought]]
* [[Freethought]]
* [[Indoctrination]]
* [[International Philosophy Olympiad]]
* [[Logic]]
* [[Logical reasoning]]
* [[Outline of human intelligence]] – topic tree presenting the traits, capacities, models, and research fields of human intelligence
* [[Outline of thought]] – topic tree that identifies many types of thoughts, types of thinking, aspects of thought, related fields
* [[Philosophy education]]
* ''[[Sapere aude]]''
* [[Source criticism]]
* [[World Philosophy Day]]
}}

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== Further reading ==
{{Library resources box |others = no }}

===Books===
* {{cite book |title=Critical Reasoning: Understanding and Criticizing Arguments and Theories |first1=J B. |last1=Cederblom |first2=David |last2=Paulsen |edition=7th |isbn=978-0495808787 |year=2012 |publisher=Cengage Learning |location=Andover, Hampshire, UK}}
* Damer, T. Edward. (2005) ''[[Attacking Faulty Reasoning]]'', 6th Edition, Wadsworth. {{ISBN|0-534-60516-8}}
* Dauer, Francis Watanabe. ''Critical Thinking: An Introduction to Reasoning'', 1989, {{ISBN|978-0-19-504884-1}}
* Fisher, Alec and Scriven, Michael. (1997) ''Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment'', Center for Research in Critical Thinking (UK) / Edgepress (US). {{ISBN|0-9531796-0-5}}
* Hamby, B.W. (2007) ''The Philosophy of Anything: Critical Thinking in Context.'' Kendall Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque Iowa. {{ISBN|978-0-7575-4724-9}}
* [[Vincent F. Hendricks]]. (2005) ''Thought 2 Talk: A Crash Course in Reflection and Expression'', New York: [[Automatic Press / VIP]]. {{ISBN|87-991013-7-8}}
* {{cite book |title=A Field Guide to Lies and Statistics |year=2017 |first=Daniel |last=Levitin |author-link=Daniel Levitin |publisher=Viking |isbn=978-0241239995}} (a.k.a. ''Weaponized Lies: How to Think Critically in the Post-Truth Era'')
* Moore, Brooke Noel and Parker, Richard. (2012) ''Critical Thinking''. 10th ed. Published by McGraw-Hill. {{ISBN|0-07-803828-6}}.
* Paul, Richard. (1995) ''Critical Thinking: How to Prepare Students for a Rapidly Changing World''. 4th ed. Foundation for Critical Thinking. {{ISBN|0-944583-09-1}}.
* Paul, Richard and Elder, Linda. (2006) ''Critical Thinking Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life'', New Jersey: Prentice Hall Publishing. {{ISBN|0-13-114962-8}}.
* Sagan, Carl. (1995) ''[[The Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark]]''. Ballantine Books. {{ISBN|0-345-40946-9}}
* [[Theodore Schick]] & Lewis Vaughn "How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age" (2010)  {{ISBN|0-7674-2048-9}}
* van den Brink-Budgen, R (2010) ''Critical Thinking for Students'', How To Books. {{ISBN|978-1-84528-386-5}}
* Whyte, J. (2003) ''Bad Thoughts – A Guide to Clear Thinking'', Corvo. {{ISBN|0-9543255-3-2}}.
*David Carl Wilson (2020) ''A Guide to Good Reasoning: Cultivating Intellectual Virtues'' (2nd edition) University of Minnesota Libraries  Ebook {{ISBN|978-1-946135-66-7}}  Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International License, at https://open.lib.umn.edu/goodreasoning/
* Zeigarnik, B.V. (1927). "On finished and unfinished tasks". In English translation Edited by Willis D. Ellis; with an introduction by Kurt Koffka. (1997). ''A source book of Gestalt psychology'', xiv, 403 p. : ill.; 22&nbsp;cmHighland, N.Y: Gestalt Journal Press. "This Gestalt Journal Press edition is a verbatim reprint of the book as originally published in 1938" – T.p. verso.  {{ISBN|9780939266302}}. {{OCLC|38755142}}

===Articles===
* {{cite journal|author=Butler, Heather|author2=Christopher Pentoney|author3=Mabelle P. Bong|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871187116300384|title=Predicting real-world outcomes: Critical thinking ability is a better predictor of life decisions than intelligence|journal=[[Thinking Skills and Creativity]]|volume=25|date=September 2017|pages=38–46|doi=10.1016/j.tsc.2017.06.005}} - [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318097450_Predicting_Real-World_Outcomes_Critical_Thinking_Ability_is_a_Better_Predictor_of_Life_Decisions_than_Intelligence See at] [[ResearchGate]]
* Facione, P. 2007. ''[https://web.archive.org/web/20071215112052/http://www.insightassessment.com/articles.html Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts – 2007 Update]''
* Kompf, M., & Bond, R. (2001). Critical reflection in adult education. In T. Barer-Stein & M. Kompf(Eds.), ''The craft of teaching adults'' (pp.&nbsp;21–38). Toronto, ON: Irwin.
* McPeck, J. (1992). Thoughts on subject specificity. In S. Norris (Ed.), ''The generalizability of critical thinking'' (pp.&nbsp;198–205). New York: Teachers College Press.
* {{cite journal | last1 = Mulnix | first1 = J. W. | year = 2010 | title = Thinking critically about critical thinking | journal = Educational Philosophy and Theory | volume = 44| issue = 5| pages = 464–479| doi = 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x | s2cid = 145168346 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Paul | first1 = R | year = 1982 | title = Teaching critical thinking in the strong sense: A focus on self-deception, world views and a dialectical mode of analysis | journal = Informal Logic Newsletter | volume = 4 | issue = 2| pages = 2–7 }}
* {{cite journal|last1=Pavlidis|first1=Periklis|year=2010|title=Critical Thinking as Dialectics: a Hegelian–Marxist Approach|url=http://www.jceps.com/archives/644|journal=Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies|volume=8|issue=2}}
* Twardy, Charles R. (2003) [http://cogprints.org/3008/ Argument Maps Improve Critical Thinking]. ''[[Teaching Philosophy]]'' 27:2 June 2004.

== External links ==
{{Commons category}}
{{Wikiquote}}
* {{iep|crit-thi|Critical Thinking|}}
* {{cite SEP |url-id=critical-thinking |title=Critical Thinking|author=David Hitchcock}}
* {{cite SEP |url-id=logic-informal |title=Informal logic|author=Leo Groarke}}
* {{PhilPapers|category|critical-thinking}}
* {{InPho|taxonomy|2410}}
* {{curlie|Science/Science_in_Society/Skeptical_Inquiry/Critical_Thinking}}
* [https://skepticalinquirer.org/2006/03/critical-thinking-what-is-it-good-for-in-fact-what-is-it/ Critical Thinking: What Is It Good for? (In Fact, What Is It?)] by Howard Gabennesch, ''Skeptical Inquirer'' magazine.
* [http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/glossary-of-critical-thinking-terms/496 Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms]
* [http://philosophy.hku.hk/think Critical Thinking Web]

{{-}}
{{Logic}}
{{Philosophical logic}}
{{Philosophy of education}}

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Critical Thinking}}
[[Category:Critical thinking| ]]
[[Category:Reasoning| ]]
[[Category:A priori]]
[[Category:Abstraction]]
[[Category:Accountability]]
[[Category:Analysis]]
[[Category:Arguments]]
[[Category:Autonomy]]
[[Category:Causal inference]]
[[Category:Cognition]]
[[Category:Critical theory]]
[[Category:Deductive reasoning]]
[[Category:Empiricism]]
[[Category:Epistemological theories]]
[[Category:Epistemology of science]]
[[Category:Evaluation]]
[[Category:Inductive reasoning]]
[[Category:Knowledge representation]]
[[Category:Learning]]
[[Category:Logical consequence]]
[[Category:Mental content]]
[[Category:Mental processes]]
[[Category:Metaphysical theories]]
[[Category:Metaphysics of mind]]
[[Category:Morality]]
[[Category:Observation]]
[[Category:Ontology]]
[[Category:Perception]]
[[Category:Rationalism]]
[[Category:Scientific method]]
[[Category:Skepticism]]
[[Category:Social concepts]]
[[Category:Thought]]
[[Category:Truth]]
[[Category:Virtue]]