Yahoo Answers is shutting down on 4 May 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

What is your own philosophy of critical thinking?

if you could express in your own words to form your own personal belief on this matter, what would it be? I don't care if your response is long, Have fun with this as i am interested in what you have to say. 

Update:

what are the most valuable lessons you've learned or know about Critical Thinking and the philosophy with it?

4 Answers

Relevance
  • ?
    Lv 6
    1 week ago

    My own philosophy of critical thinking should be well known here,

    I spent more than 10 years explaining it with dozens of examples or more.

    Thousands of words to... a few said in haste but the majority explaining

    the art and practise of modern critical thinking. It is nothing like the naive

    turgid pap that usually goes by the name "philosophy", for "critical thinking"

    is more than just a way to explain "philosophy"... and most if not all the

    problems people have of explaining it are because they actually DO

    Think that NOTHING NEW Hardly results from using the critical

    method as the prime method of doing or writing philosophy (of course

    explaining it too but as I said I spent nearly all of my time doing that

    so won't be it again here.

    How do I know how to do philosophy using the Critical method?

    Again I have explained that MORE than once in saying that I was and

    still am a student of the History of Ideas where we dissected this

    question and were free to criticise it as our personal knowledge and

    intuition allowed. And as I have said more that once it was a fabulous

    environment in which to learn and which I did just that... learning and

    honing my own meagre skills and of course learning just how POOR

    and environmental-unfriendly was the antithesis of the taught objective

    critical rational method of philosophy (the type of philosophy which

    probably started well before Socrates but was akin to his critical

    "mieutic method", that part of philosophy like I am doing now when

    "thinking on my feet" and NOT Writing Something Down Which I was

    Told or just Taught to write down.

    The antithesis method of NOT USING THE CRITICAL Method of

    philosophy is of course the much easier and lax method called The

    subjective method (of philosophy).

    I think people here even now in the much-vaunted & hope-filled 21st

    century write their own timid and frankly stunted versions of "the subjective

    method of philosophy" where they occasionally profess to be critical

    but in fact are just (being) writing from the standpoint of "me" knowing

    "what I know" in a world which carries on from there.. as if this

    specialist knowledge is some sort-of-secret-kept-between only

    "subjectives" and in reality has HARDLY ANY FORCE OR ACTION

    on anyone else - or hardly at all unless they did become some 

    wordy historicist idol-of-a-past, a past which indeed philosophy was 

    written but without the "critical bit".

    Don't believe me, or don't believe it?

    Again I have addressed this previously here but no one would think

    so (so) again I am certainly NOT about to "mince my words".

    Just to say for example that I have brought up quite a few times the

    outrageous (ly critical) emergency case of the Swedish schoolgirl

    Greta Thunberg whose simple (Emergency) philosophy was about

    "looking again AT THE SCIENCE because pupils were (I mean are)

    NOT BEING TAUGHT THE TRUTH IN SCHOOLS which of course

    as any dumball here (or there) should know means that students

    today are not-being-taught-the truth either.

    (Because if they did then significant numbers of them would realise 

    THAT CO2 is rising exponentially and THIS CO2 CANNOT JUST GO

    ANYWHERE. 

    It Stays in the bloody atmosphere and T.H,I.S. is the principle reason

    that we all here should understand that we all here are under a real

    and "existential threat").

    But you would think that all this COULD & SHOULD be discussed here,

    philosophically no?

    Lol... well I even had one legit commentator here say about that..

    (peter m..)... has A THING About Greta Thunberg (!)

    Too right I did, and I still do ABOUT HER BLOODY excellent-but-shocking

    CRITICAL methodic Philosophy ; however stark and underwhelming to 

    some here, versed-as-they-profess to be in "the critical method of philosophy".

    (And just in case you MIGHT think that the above is about environmental

    science not philosophy I think the likes of Jordan Peterson and Noam

    Chomsky would have some argument against that. And so I bloody

    would too).

    For it's true that If SCIENCE can pronounce on something... then Philosophy

    is sure to be able to do so to (and thus it would then be an "official

    part of philosophy" I suppose...)... yet again... even things like

    science FICTION is a proper part of any Critical Method of Philosophy 

    I hope that you can agree !?

    Have a nice day.

  • 1 week ago

    I think it includes curiosity, an understanding of bias, investigates opposing views, is aware of motivations such as greed, ego etc. understands how culture and counter culture create a tone or narrative.  It has a healthy level of skepticism, is responsible in taking a stand.  

     

     

  • j153e
    Lv 7
    1 week ago

    Being clear about three items (two sets of definitions and a dynamic) is useful:

    1.  "Critical" may mean censorious, bigoted; critical may indicate a key ingredient or factor.  From these two arise a) the failure of so-called "critical thinking" insofar as censoring, bigoted, close-minded, egotistical, and authoritarianism are incorrectly justified by the cliche "critical thinking," and b) epistemological clarity and continuing refinement of perceptions, upon which various logics may be developed and applied, towards the goals of parsing, solving, and re-solving various interests and concerns.

    2.  "Thinking" arises of PIE *tong-, to think, to feel; OE pencan (the "p" is pronounced as "th") retains this unity as "cause to appear to oneself," including processes of imagination, meditation, consideration (Aristotelian observation of natural processes, including human processes) re-membering, ideation (Kantian, Whiteheadian, and neurophysiological archetectonics of ontological and epistemological processes), and desiring (of which "giving 'thanks'" is the English cognate).  Whitehead's "Adventures of Ideas," Husserl's "Ideas," and Heidegger's "What Is Called Thinking" are basic primers which help to clarify errors of reductive "positivism" (ironic tell re fallacy of "no values save value of no values") in e.g. logical positivism, etc., as well as naive subjectivism.

    3.  The two multifold ingredients may be more or less diversified, and so it is well to be aware that a monotonic intoning of "use critical thinking" or "my critical thinking can beat up your less-critical thinking" typically becomes a caricatured catch-phrase, a parody of what e.g. Husserl, Heidegger, Whitehead, and Godel set forth. 

    p.s.  "Update" answer:  Some of the more basic lessons learned:  the dogmatism of a process is reflected proportionately with its tendency towards Capitalization; the vain repetition of a slogan becomes a magical spell in proportion to the lack of awareness of the user as to the real processes at work (in maths, such ignorance of genuine categories of function ~ = blithe bijecting qua assuming incident structure--commonly noted as "for the person with a hammer (as their single process/tool), every problem (per pencan :-) 'appears to self' to be a nail"); and, when such category fallacies become -isms, e.g. objectivism, positivism, existentialism, humanism, and subjectivism, then fallacies re basic ontology, epistemology, and sensibility have reduced the -ism and its practitioners to at best incomplete/partial truths, typically taken as the whole/best truth. 

  • 1 week ago

    Philosophy isn't about personal beliefs, it's an attempt to find universal principles through the use of logic.  Well, that's formal philosophy, in English words often mean more than one thing and the word "philosophy" can mean different things to different people.  Critical thinking, just means thinking clearly and well, critically.  One has to be able to question one's own thoughts and not be so dug into a position that one can't change.  Bigotry is the enemy of critical thinking.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.