what exactly IS "critical thinking"?

/

Critical thinking entails at least ten reasoning abilities and habits of thought:

1. Consciously raising the questions “What do we know. . . ?  How do we know . . . ?  Why do we accept or believe. . . ?  What is the evidence for. . . ?”  when studying some body of material or approaching a problem.   

2. Being clearly and explicitly aware of gaps in available information.  Recognizing when a conclusion is reached or a decision made in absence of complete information and being able to tolerate the ambiguity and uncertainty.  Recognizing when one is taking something on faith without having examined the “How do we know. . . ?  Why do we believe. . . ?” questions.

3. Discriminating between observation and inference, between established fact and subsequent conjecture.

4. Recognizing that words are symbols for ideas and not the ideas themselves.  Recognizing the necessity of using only words of prior definition, rooted in shared experience, in forming a new definition and in avoiding being misled by technical jargon

5. Probing for assumption (particularly the implicit, unarticulated assumptions) behind a line of reasoning.

6. Drawing inferences from data, observations, or other evidence and recognizing when firm inferences cannot be drawn.  This subsumes a number of processes such as elementary syllogistic reasoning (e.g., dealing with basic prepositional "if. . .then" statements), correlational reasoning, recognizing when relevant variables have or have not been controlled.

7. Performing hypothetico-deductive reasoning; that is, given a particular situation, applying relevant knowledge of principles and constraints and visualizing, in the abstract, the plausible outcomes that might result from various changes one can imagine to be imposed on the system.

8. Discriminating between inductive and deductive reasoning; that is, being aware when an argument is being made from the particular to the general or from the general to the particular

9. Testing one's own line of reasoning and conclusions for internal consistency and thus developing intellectual self-reliance.

10. Developing self-consciousness concerning one's own thinking and reasoning processes.  

Physicist Arnold Arons, Teaching Introductory Physics 

Goals & Progress

/

Many runners work hard for months, but as soon as they cross the finish line, they stop training. The race is no longer there to motivate them. When all of your hard work is focused on a particular goal, what is left to push you forward after you achieve it? This is why many people find themselves reverting to their old habits after accomplishing a goal.

The purpose of setting goals is to win the game. The purpose of building systems is to continue playing the game. True long-term thinking is goal-less thinking. It’s not about any single accomplishment. It is about the cycle of endless refinement and continuous improvement. Ultimately, it is your commitment to the process that will determine your progress. 

James Clear, Atomic Habits

89-year-old pizza delivery driver gets surprise $12K tip

/

#GOODNEWS

Conditional Acceptance

/

Too often we claim that we accept others for what they are when we truly mean that we accept them as long as they do what we want them to. When we truly accept others the way they are we no longer have to take unnecessary responsibility for others’ emotions an behaviors, we maintain emotional balance at a time when it is most needed, and we encourage the other person to be more responsible for his own emotions and behaviors.

Les Carter, Imperative People: Those Who Must Be in Control

Self-handicapping

/

The fear of being unmasked as the incompetent you “really” are is so common that it actually has a clinical name: impostor syndrome. A shocking number of successful people (particularly women), believe that they haven’t really earned their spots, and are at risk of being unmasked as frauds at any moment. Many people deliberately seek out easy tests where they can shine, rather than tackling harder material that isn’t as comfortable.

If they’re forced into a challenge they don’t feel prepared for, they may even engage in what psychologists call “self-handicapping”: deliberately doing things that will hamper their performance in order to give themselves an excuse for not doing well. Self-handicapping can be fairly spectacular: in one study, men deliberately chose performance-inhibiting drugs when facing a task they didn’t expect to do well on. “Instead of studying,” writes the psychologist Edward Hirt, “a student goes to a movie the night before an exam. If he performs poorly, he can attribute his failure to a lack of studying rather than to a lack of ability or intelligence. On the other hand, if he does well on the exam, he may conclude that he has exceptional ability, because he was able to perform well without studying.”

Megan Mcardle writing in the Atlantic

I just hate them

/

“I just hate them,” says one woman when asked why she refused to put one on. “I think I hate them because you have to wear them, and I think it’s more of a ‘you’ve got to wear it’, so I don’t want it.”

“I think, whether you’re male or female, it’s a dominance thing,” replies the man next to her. “I’m in charge, you don’t tell me what to do.”

The interviewees were British drivers who admitted to not wearing their seat belts while in cars in 2008, despite it being a legal requirement in the UK to wear one in the front seat of a vehicle since 1983 and in the back seat since 1991.

William Park writing in BBC Future

Virtual Leaders are Doers

/

New data shows that the confidence, intelligence and extroversion that have long propelled ambitious workers into the executive suite are not enough online, because they simply don’t translate into virtual leadership. Instead, workers who are organised, dependable and productive take the reins of virtual teams. Finally, doers lead the pack – at least remotely.

The study shows that, instead of those with the most dynamic voices in the room, virtual teams informally anoint leaders who actually do the work of getting projects done. “They are the individuals who help other team members with tasks, and keep the team on schedule and focused on goals,” says lead author Radostina Purvanova,

As expected, the face-to-face teams chose leaders with the same confident, magnetic, smart-seeming extroverted traits that we often see in organisational leaders. “The people who portray themselves as organised, dependable and reliable look to us like effective leaders,” says Purvanova. But those chosen as remote leaders were doers, who tended towards planning, connecting teammates with help and resources, keeping an eye on upcoming tasks and, most importantly, getting things done. These leaders were goal-focused, productive, dependable and helpful.

In other words, virtually, the emphasis shifts from saying to doing. 

Arianne Cohen writing for BBC WorkLife

Being a selfish jerk doesn’t get you ahead

/

“I was surprised by the consistency of the findings. No matter the individual or the context, disagreeableness did not give people an advantage in the competition for power — even in more cutthroat, ‘dog-eat-dog’ organizational cultures,” said Berkeley professor Cameron Anderson.

The researchers found those who scored high on disagreeable traits were not more likely to have attained power than those who were generous, trustworthy and generally nice.

That’s not to say that jerks don’t reach positions of power. It’s just that they don’t get ahead faster than others, and being a jerk simply doesn’t help, Anderson said. That’s because any power boost they get from being intimidating is offset by their poor interpersonal relationships.

Read more in Berkeley News