COMPLETE SCHOOL PROJECT TOPICS & MATERIALS :
CHAPTERS: Chapter 1-5
|
DOC FORMAT: MS WORD/PDF
|
PRICE: ₦5,000
Introduction
Critical thinking does not happen in a vacuum but in an “environment” that’s often hostile to it. it takes place in the real world in the minds of real people who almost always have thoughts and feelings and experiences that, given half a chance, would sabotage critical reasoning at every turn. The sparkling palace of our mind is grand— except for the demons chained in the basement.
Recall our definition of critical thinking: The systematic evaluation or formulation of beliefs, or statements, by rational standards. This means, of course, that several factors must be present for the process of critical thinking to be fully realized. If the process fails to be systematic, or falls short of being a true evaluation or formulation, or ignores rational standards, critical thinking can’t happen. Because we are fallible, there are a thousand ways that this failure of reason could come about. And there is no cure for our fallibility.
We should expect then that thinking critically will often be difficult and even unpleasant (as painful truths sometimes are), and indeed it is. But there are ways to (1) detect errors in our thinking (even subtle ones), (2) restrain the attitudes and feelings that can distort our reasoning, and (3) achieve a level of objectivity that makes critical thinking possible.
Doing all this— and doing it consistently— requires awareness, practice, and motivation. If we are to think critically, we must be aware of not only what good critical thinking involves but also what sloppy thinking entails. Then we must practice avoiding the pitfalls and using the skills and techniques that critical thinking requires. And we must be motivated to do all of this, for it is unlikely that we will use critical thinking very much if we can’t appreciate its value and therefore have little motivation to make the extra effort.
We can sort the most common impediments to critical thinking into two main categories: (1) those hindrances that arise because of how we think and (2) those that occur because of what we think. There is some overlap in these categories; how people think is often a result of what they think and vice versa. But in general, category 1 obstacles are those that come into play because of psychological factors (our fears, attitudes, motivations, and desires), and category 2 impediments are those that arise because of certain philosophical ideas we have (our beliefs about beliefs). For example, a category 1 hindrance is the tendency to conform our opinions to those of our peers. This conformism often grows out of some psychological need that is part of our personality. A common category 2 problem is the belief that objectivity in thinking is impossible or that we really don’t know anything or that we don’t know what we think we know.
Francis Bacon Idols on Critical Thinking
Francis Bacon (1561– 1626), the godfather of modern science, articulated basic principles and methods of science and advocated their use in the careful pursuit of reliable knowledge. He also warned about common mistakes in thinking that can doom the scientific enterprise and lead to biased perceptions and serious error. Bacon asserted that preventing these mistakes is possible through scientific, down-to-earth thinking — approximately what we would call critical thinking, a necessary and powerful tool in the search for truth. He termed the mistakes “the idols of the mind” because he thought that people not only commit the errors but revere them as one would revere a false god.
Bacon focused on four kinds of idols that he considered especially prevalent and destructive. The first type is “The Idols of the Tribe”— the problems in thinking that arise from human nature generally. This is the fallacy of presuming that our biased perceptions are automatically a true reflection of the objective world, that knowledge is to be found inside us without any reference to the real world.
The second group consists of “The Idols of the Cave”— the biases that are unique to each individual. These develop from each person’s personality, education, and experiences. Bacon claimed that we each live in our own cave, “which refracts and discolors the light of nature.”
Then there are “The Idols of the Marketplace”— the impediments to clear thinking that develop from our imprecise and careless use of language. As Bacon said “the ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the understanding.”1
Finally, are “The Idols of the Theater”— the ideologies or systems of thought that are “but so many stage-plays, representing worlds of their own creation after an unreal and scenic fashion.”2 These barriers to good critical thinking have little or nothing to do with the real world but are nevertheless thought to be accurate and profound.
According to Sir Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626) our understanding of, and interaction with, the world is affected by four mental filters which he calls idola mentis or idols of the mind to emphasize the problem of constructing false images and notions of the world.
1) Idols of the tribe or Idola tribus:
Bacon ranks this as the first idol or mental filter that humans’ experiences go through and which thereby obstruct their ability to reason clearly. This is due to the fact that human senses are fallible. Therefore, our perception of the world is very likely to be inadequate. This idea is consonant with Platonic and Kantian philosophy whereby they have distinguished between the world as it appears to the senses; hence, the phenomenon, and the world without the senses; otherwise referred to as the noumenon.
Bacon’s idols of the tribe can be seen in Pareidolia which is a psychological phenomenon where the mind perceives a random stimulus such as an image or sound as being significant and meaningful. This phenomenon is prevalent in religious circles as people report about the sight of Jesus, the Virgin Marry or the word Allah in ordinary objects. One of the famous examples is the sight of the Virgin Mary’s face in a grilled cheese sandwich.
2) Idols of the cave or Idola specus:
This the second type of Bacon’s idols, which is created by adulterating human nature with nurture. Thus, our perception of the world is distorted by books we read, education we receive and the company we keep. This results in individual tastes and preferences, individual personalities and prejudices. An example redolent of this idol is Plato’s Allegory of the Cave where people are being told and shown only what they are required to perceive as being true. Hence, the shadows that they see on the walls and which they surmise they are real are mere distortions and discolorations of true images. In real life situations, the effect of the idol of the cave on our thinking is evident in the process of indoctrination whereby ideas, attitudes and cognitive strategies are inculcated, which leaves no room to questioning or critical thinking. According to Bacon, idols of the cave emanate from education, habit and accident.
As regards to the effect of the idol of the cave on human understanding, Bacon argues that the outcomes are individual biases whereby individuals are either uncertainty avoidant or ambiguity tolerant, or biases by which individuals are inclined to focus on penetrating understanding at the expense of focusing on comprehensive perception or vice versa. Bacons recommends that individuals strike a balance between these two types of contemplation.
The life of organizations illustrates this point as employees are expected to internalize a set of values and assumptions in order to measure up to the status of a professional. As a result, individuals act accordingly to the detriment of their personal self. The personal challenge for a professional who assimilated a particular organizational culture is raised by Bacon who exhorts us to hold in suspicion whatever our mind seizes and dwells upon with peculiar satisfaction. The challenging part resides in the fact that we do not like to admit that what our authority figures have taught us might be unbeknownst to us, and that we do not like to admit that we are mistaken. Therefore, as Bacon, observed, everyone chooses to remain in a “cave or den of his own which refracts and discolors the light of nature” (New Organon, XLII section).
3) Idols of the marketplace or Idola fori:
Bacon’s third type of idol arises from our ambiguous use of language; hence the abuse of words, which is the byproduct of the interaction and association of between people. Bacon argues that words can cause philosophy and the sciences to become fallacious and inactive. It follows that “an ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs” understanding in social as well as in academic circles (New Organon, LVIII section).
As a matter of fact, in daily language, we still talk about sunrise and sunset which is obviously a misuse of language in light of the evidence suggesting that the sun does not rise and set. Such a misuse was also demonstrated by the Austrian-British philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951) in The Blue Book where he distinguished between the object use of the first subject pronoun “I” and its subject use. Thus, in the object use, there is recognition and identification of a particular person, as in “I have broken my arm”. Whereas in the subject use there is no such recognition or identification, as in “I see so and-so” and “I hear so-and-so”. Can we point here to the body that “sees” and “hears” the same as in the case of pointing to the body whose arm got broken? Wittgenstein maintains that philosophical problems arise from such a convoluted use of language. This is an example that demonstrates how limited language is to express different states of thinking, which lead us consequently to adopt wrong assumptions.