Hello from New York

[worldlogicleague]

Hello, my name is Elwood Long and I'm the owner of the soon to be live worldlogicleague.com (logic game website). I'm a big fan of Henry Veatch and specifically his groundbreaking work, Two Logics. I'm very interested in discussions with you all on the future and possibilities of a practical, classical type logic for the masses, inspired by a key insight found in Veatch's book. The hot topic in education today is "21st century skills", which includes amongst other things critical thinking. The US Department of Education and major corporations, including Microsoft, Apple, Ford, Dell, Oracle, etc. have formed a partnership 21stcenturyskills.org to advance a program of teaching critical thinking and the other 21st century skills in the schools. So the 2nd age of reason has arrived! They have determined that for our children's survival and success in the 21st century we must start teaching sound reasoning or critical thinking along with the standard core subjects. So the central, already agreed upon definition and purpose of this 2nd age of reason is that our survival and success in this complex, global, knowledge based, high tech 21st century depends on advancing our ability in sound reasoning. I'm also seeking discussion and input from you all on this newly dawning 2nd age of reason.

Edited September 7, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[kiaer.ts]

Welcome, Elwood.

Have you studied any Scholastic Philosophy beside Veatch? Have you read Mercier's Handbook?

from wikipedia:

Philosophy

Veatch was a major proponent of rationalism, an authority on Thomistic philosophy, and one of the leading neo-Aristotelian thinkers of his time. He opposed such modern and contemporary developments as the "transcendental turn" and the "linguistic turn." A staunch advocate of plain speaking and "Hoosier" common sense, in philosophy and elsewhere, he argued on behalf of realist metaphysics and practical ethics.[1]

Veatch's most widely read book was Rational Man: A Modern Interpretation of Aristotelian Ethics (1962) which explicitly offered a rationalist counterpoint to William Barrett's well-known study in existential philosophy, Irrational Man (1958).

[worldlogicleague]

Thanks Ted,

I haven't read it. My realm of expertise is classical logic, and Veatch makes a strong case for keeping it around as a practical logic for use at school, work, and in daily life. Also he had some insights that would solve some of its problems, and so allow for its modernization. My motivation is the recent 21stcenturyskills.org report where the major corporations and DOE concluded that 21st century jobs are often knowledge based, and require you to think on your feet, solve problems, communicate logically, analyze situations, and understand, collaborate, and innovate on complex systems. Thus to survive and succeed in this much more complex and high tech 21st century, we must teach and develop sound reasoning skills. The 21st century demands it, and has spontaneously and quite naturally spawned a 2nd age of reason. This 2nd age of reason completely revolves around these economic and complex problem solving reasons. And a Veatch based 'neo-classical logic' would solve this critical need to upgrade student's (and everyone's) reasoning skills.

Edited September 7, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Elwood,

Welcome to OL.

We have a thread on Veatch here. I am sure you are aware of it. Unfortunately, I personally have not yet read anything by him. This thread was a contribution by my good friend and critic, Roger Bissell.

However, I am fascinated by this idea of a 2nd Age of Reason. I definitely believe we are in the middle of the Information Revolution. One of the drawbacks is what I call Remote Control mentality. If people don't like something, they simply change the channel with a remote control or a click of a mouse. But that works only with information. In real life you cannot change a channel on a disease or war, so I often notice irritation where outrage or a "can-do attitude" should be, sort of like a person's irritation when he expects a new feature show on TV and gets a rerun instead.

In this respect, to the extent information approaches reality with sound, image, interactivity, etc., people are leaving reality and internalizing the virtual rules as a substitute. The big problem is that virtual rules don't work, say, on a farm.

Off the top of my head and without being familiar with what you have in mind other than your post, I see at least two main tiers for a 2nd Age of Reason: one for those who build and maintain all this cool stuff we now have around us, and another for users. The people in the first tier more or less have their act together and all they need is a more efficient way of handling information. But for the second tier, I believe it is critical for the connection between logic and reality to be heavily emphasized in any program.

Also, organization of informatics obeys certain structures you just don't find in other places, say on a farm again. At 56 years old, I have been hitting the books playing catch-up ball on understanding the Internet and how to use it for marketing. I feel my competence getting better with each passing day, but, to tell the truth, it is royally kicking my ass. I have had to make up some of my own new rules of thinking just to assimilate so much stuff. A thorough grounding in logical systems thinking when I was younger would have greatly lessened the effort I now expend.

I note that young children take to virtual rules like fish to to water and for heavy users of informatics, I have no doubt they will grow into very different kinds of adults than I am. I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad one, but education certainly needs to address it.

I will be following this discussion with great interest.

Michael

[worldlogicleague]

Hi Michael, Great website. I did see 'the Veatch Corner' and wasn't expecting that!

For me, critical thinking - better or worse - is the underlying, fundamental human ability that gives rise to our advances, including the Information Age, informatics, and even advances / better methods down on the farm. So to improve critical thinking is to improve all human activities, and this is why the US government and major corporations are now supporting and promoting it as a vital need for this complex, knowledge based 21st century. They have seen the light: the 2nd age of reason has arrived.

Microsoft, Apple and Dell are a part of the 21stcenturyskills.org partnership because they realize even the coders use this fundamental skill to do what they do. Plus they must be objective, analyze customer situations, present ideas, and communicate logically in collaboration and innovation, and this requires critical thinking skills. Their wizardry in PHP and HTML won't help them with that!

From the Partnership for 21st Century Skills website (21stcenturyskills.org) --

Every child in American needs 21st century knowledge and skills to succeed as effective citizens, workers and leaders in the 21st century. There is a profound gap between the knowledge and skills most students learn in school and the knowledge and skills they need in typical 21st century communities and workplaces. To successfully face rigorous higher education coursework, career challenges and a globally competitive workforce, U.S. schools must align classroom environments with real world environments by infusing 21st century skills into their teaching and learning.

Twenty first century skills are key to improving our nation's competitiveness in a knowledge driven economy. Twenty first century skills are the lifeblood of a productive workforce in today's global, knowledge-based economy. As more of our economic competitors move to foster 21st century skills development within their educational systems, the United States faces a critical challenge to keep pace in preparing our students to meet the demands of global community and tomorrow's workforce.

The Partnership's framework for learning in the 21st century is based on the essential skills that our children need to succeed as citizens and workers in the 21st century. The Partnership has identified six key elements of a 21st century education ...

3. Learning and Thinking Skills. As much as students need to learn academic content, they also need to know how to keep learning — and make effective and innovative use of what they know — throughout their lives. Learning and Thinking Skills are comprised of:

Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Skills

Communication Skills

Creativity and Innovation Skills

Collaboration Skills

Information and Media Literacy Skills

Contextual Learning Skills

In a seminal study on critical thinking and education in 1941, Edward Glaser defines critical thinking as follows

The ability to think critically, as conceived in this volume, involves three things: ( 1 ) an attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one's experiences, (2) knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning, and (3) some skill in applying those methods.

Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine things in the light of the evidence that supports it and the further conclusions to which it tends. It also generally requires ability to recognize problems, to find workable means for meeting those problems, to gather and marshal pertinent information, to recognize unstated assumptions and values, to comprehend and use language with accuracy, clarity, and discrimination, to interpret data, to appraise evidence and evaluate arguments, to recognize the existence (or non-existence) of logical relationships between propositions, to draw warranted conclusions and generalizations, to put to test the conclusions and generalizations at which one arrives, to reconstruct one's patterns of beliefs on the basis of wider experience, and to render accurate judgments about specific things and qualities in everyday life."

(Edward M. Glaser, An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking, Teacher's College, Columbia University, 1941).

So this is the fundamental skill that has been identified as necessary for everyone in this complex 21st century. And this is the basis for identifying these times as the dawning of the 2nd Age of Reason. To put it poetically we are transitioning from basing education on the "3R's" to basing it on the 4R's: reading, writing, arithmetic, and reasoning.

Elwood

Edited September 8, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[Mindy Newton]

Hello, my name is Elwood Long and I'm the owner of the soon to be live worldlogicleague.com (logic game website). I'm a big fan of Henry Veatch and specifically his groundbreaking work, Two Logics. I'm very interested in discussions with you all on the future and possibilities of a practical, classical type logic for the masses, inspired by a key insight found in Veatch's book. The hot topic in education today is "21st century skills", which includes amongst other things critical thinking. The US Department of Education and major corporations, including Microsoft, Apple, Ford, Dell, Oracle, etc. have formed a partnership 21stcenturyskills.org to advance a program of teaching critical thinking and the other 21st century skills in the schools. So the 2nd age of reason has arrived! They have determined that for our children's survival and success in the 21st century we must start teaching sound reasoning or critical thinking along with the standard core subjects. So the central, already agreed upon definition and purpose of this 2nd age of reason is that our survival and success in this complex, global, knowledge based, high tech 21st century depends on advancing our ability in sound reasoning. I'm also seeking discussion and input from you all on this newly dawning 2nd age of reason.

Hello, very glad to learn about you and your organization. Your project is a crucial one.

My first thought is, what distinctions are you making? Are you distinguishing concept-acquisition, thought proper, and reason? Is your aim to invent something new or would you be happy to rediscover lost disciplines that provide the "skills" needed? Are you analyzing how our schools fail to educate, or just looking to build a program that succeeds where they fail?

Also, could you better describe what's new about the "2nd age of reason" that is dawning?

Looking forward to your posts,

=Mindy

Note: Your last post went up while I was composing this. I think I understand better what you want. I'm still interested in knowing how you are set up to go about developing your program.

Edited September 8, 2008 by Mindy

[worldlogicleague]

Hi Mindy,

Interesting questions. As to the three mental operations of reflective thinking: conception, judgment, and reasoning, yes I think the natural psychological process underlying reflection is important to understand and purposely and consciously control, to improve ones critical thinking ability. Classical logic needs to be expanded and modernized somewhat based on some principles found in Veatch's book, Two logics, and I have done this and call it simply neo-classical logic. The problems with schools in relation to the complex 21st century have been clearly described in reports produced by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills. They also conducted a survey of US voters and found that 90% said that schools need to do a better job in teaching critical thinking. So the groundwork has been well laid by this major organization.

Practice makes perfect in logic - the art of reasoning, and in training the mind to flow as described above, and move purposely and objectively from evidence to conclusions. The logic game my website provides offers a fun, challenging, competitive way to do this for fifth graders on up, and our mission is to help in the improvement of the 21st century skill of critical thinking and promote the 2nd age of reason. The website will go live in 2/3 weeks (going through final testing now), and then I will conduct a major ad campaign on Facebook directly targeting 150,000 students a month. I'm also going to start a Facebook forum page where students can discuss this still little known corporation/government identified need for developing critical thinking skills, and the implications of this 2nd age of reason for their future. Also I will be conducting an experiment at the local university where we pre-test subjects in deductive logic, have them play the logic game, and then post-test them to see if they improve. Based on a logic test conducted by Johnson-Laird on students, the resulting improvement should be major. I'm posting here to get feedback, input, suggestions and comments from you already higher-order thinking people, and to see what I can learn.

[Mindy Newton]

Elwood,

Are you aware of the very poor quality of textbooks and lesson materials generally, including those of the major educational publishing houses? Also, the abject disorganization of the curricula? The most motivated student couldn't get an education with texts that don't make sense and lessons that are filled with errors and inaccuracies. (This is brought up in the name of not re-inventing the wheel.)

*****

I would say "critical thinking" differs from simple "thinking" in that it has a question and its answer, or a problem and its solution to evaluate. Critical thinking is re-thinking, but it has more parts to be thought through, and must address, also, the relations of those parts.

So critical thinking should, perhaps, start with an analysis of the subject-matter. There are probably a limited number of paradigms for this sort of analysis--yes/no decisions, choice of options, wide-open problems, etc.

To be thorough, our "critic" must look at the original question as if he were to solve it. He needs to know the full context of resources and restraints that apply. He needs to search for an answer himself, noting what the dead-ends are, refining the options, etc.

Then he needs to look at the answer to see if it indeed is an answer to that question, if it is the only answer, and if it is the best answer. This is just off the top of my head, but I think preparing students to think critically is nowhere near as difficult as preparing them to think at all.

Here, I suppose, you have recognized the relevance of Rand's observations about concepts and thought. Words used with approximate meaning don't foster thought. It's like drawing fuzzy lines on a map. Our primary and secondary schools are extremely sloppy in word-use and prefer "guesstimates" of meaning. The emphasis on language is on "creativity," meaning anything is OK if it is idiosyncratic. This bequeaths businesses half-literate employees. If you want thinking people, you need literate ones! If you want people to use logic, you first have to get them to use terms.

Is there a plan for this in your programme?

=Mindy

[worldlogicleague]

Mindy,

I don't really know much about current textbooks or curricula organization. My logic game does come with a short manual on the fundamentals of critical thinking for non-specialists. I will have to leave these problems to the educators, and hopefully via improved critical thinking they will solve them

Good points about what needs to be addressed to improve thinking. Much of what you mention is already subsumed under the current definition of critical thinking.

For example, from criticalthinking.org:

Why Critical Thinking?

The Problem

Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically cultivated.

A Definition

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking - about any subject, content, or problem - in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking

by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them.

The Result

A well cultivated critical thinker:

raises vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely; gathers and assesses relevant information, using abstract ideas to

interpret it effectively comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards; thinks openmindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and

communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems.

Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native egocentrism and sociocentrism.

(Taken from Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools, Foundation for Critical Thinking Press, 2008).

So we all think and critical thinking is essentially learning to do this thinking in an organized and objective way as opposed to a disorganized and egocentric way.

I agree completely with your point on meaning and terms. This is the beauty of the categorical reasoning of classical logic. It forces you to separate out the object classes and define them, before making judgments and arguments with them so that for instance you don't employ two different definitions for a term in an argument. This isolating of object terms and their definition is a critical benefit of the conception operation in reflective thinking.

Elwood

Edited September 8, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[Chris Grieb]

Welcome and enjoy your stay.

[Mindy Newton]

Mindy,

I don't really know much about current textbooks or curricula organization. My logic game does come with a short manual on the fundamentals of critical thinking for non-specialists. I will have to leave these problems to the educators, and hopefully via improved critical thinking they will solve them

Good points about what needs to be addressed to improve thinking. Much of what you mention is already subsumed under the current definition of critical thinking.

For example, from criticalthinking.org:

Why Critical Thinking?

The Problem

Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically cultivated.

A Definition

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking - about any subject, content, or problem - in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking

by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them.

The Result

A well cultivated critical thinker:

raises vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely; gathers and assesses relevant information, using abstract ideas to

interpret it effectively comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards; thinks openmindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and

communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems.

Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native egocentrism and sociocentrism.

(Taken from Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools, Foundation for Critical Thinking Press, 2008).

So we all think and critical thinking is essentially learning to do this thinking in an organized and objective way as opposed to a disorganized and egocentric way.

I agree completely with your point on meaning and terms. This is the beauty of the categorical reasoning of classical logic. It forces you to separate out the object classes and define them, before making judgments and arguments with them so that for instance you don't employ two different definitions for a term in an argument. This isolating of object terms and their definition is a critical benefit of the conception operation in reflective thinking.

Elwood

How would you define non-critical thinking? Or by "critical thinking" do you mean, more or less, "good thinking?"

=Mindy

[worldlogicleague]

I guess I would say that the goal is to teach students so that they transition from non-critical thinking which is unorganized, undirected, ego-centric, and without any fundamental logic knowledge to critical thinking which is organized, objective, based on fundamental logic knowledge, and purposeful, meaning aimed at moving from gathered evidence to valid conclusions. And this would be, relative to where they started, better thinking.

Edited September 9, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[Mindy Newton]

I guess I would say that the goal is to teach students so that they transition from non-critical thinking which is unorganized, undirected, ego-centric, and without any fundamental logic knowledge to critical thinking which is organized, objective, based on fundamental logic knowledge, and purposeful, meaning aimed at moving from gathered evidence to valid conclusions. And this would be, relative to where they started, better thinking.

I see. Basically, in my terminology, you're just talking about thinking. What I wrote about before was "critical thinking" as a special case of thinking. So I understand your aims better. Your accounts, and those at the web site you referred to, express their goals in terms of what you want your thinkers to be able to do. Do you venture into the fundamental theory of what it is to think? Including distinguishing thought proper from concept-formation, and from formal reasoning?

=Mindy

[worldlogicleague]

I like to use the 3 mental operations of reflective thinking: conception, judgment, and reasoning. Are you referring to this?

stage 1. conception - isolating object classes via terms: {A,B,C,} where A means U which are XX, B - U which are YY, C - U which are ZZ

stage 2. judgment (thought proper?) - forming a complete thought: A is B. , B is C.

stage 3. reasoning - forming valid conclusions from premises: A is B. , B is C. therefore A is C.

Edited September 9, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[worldlogicleague]

I see. Basically, in my terminology, you're just talking about thinking. What I wrote about before was "critical thinking" as a special case of thinking.

=Mindy

So are you saying I'm talking about thinking, which I'm then scaling from worse to better, as opposed to identifying two species of thinking, non-critical thinking and critical thinking?

Edited September 9, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[Mindy Newton]

I see. Basically, in my terminology, you're just talking about thinking. What I wrote about before was "critical thinking" as a special case of thinking.

=Mindy

So are you saying I'm talking about thinking, which I'm then scaling from worse to better, as opposed to identifying two species of thinking, non-critical thinking and critical thinking?

Yes, with "disorganized thinking" at the low end and "critical thinking" at the high end.

I was distinguishing "critical thinking" as a review, fault-finding process, from thinking itself. Thought itself is creative, in the linguistic sense (and more broadly, I believe.) A review process doesn't aim to be creative. That's the distinction I was making.

I understand your three-stage structure. The third is, of course, the easiest to teach. The whole enterprise depends utterly on proper use of concepts. Approximate meanings and reading between the lines and idiosyncratic associations are rampant. It doesn't get you anywhere if you teach well-formed arguments unless people are able to state--and grasp--the actual meaning of the terms, and are able to couch their information in the correct terms, etc. How do you, or do you, address that?

I'm now aware that your work is more specific than the 21stCentury project's goal. Are you limiting your efforts to the three steps as given? So, for example, you begin with sharpening student's awareness of the hierarchical structure of concepts, inheritance relations, intersecting and alternative extensions of some terms, etc. And you just rely on the student to possess accurate knowledge of the meanings of his useable vocabulary?

What, in outline, is the programme related to no. 2, thought proper? (This is a pet subject for me.)

And no. 3 is teaching the patterns of logical and fallacious reasoning.

Is there an age group you are specifically aiming at? Is there a time-frame for the learning process?

And, if you didn't want to be questioned like this, do say so!

=Mindy

[worldlogicleague]

Hi Mindy, thanks for your input. Its helping me think these matters over. I'll need to mull over your Q's a little to respond. I will say that I'm not trying to bring about an all encompassing change in thinking all by myself. My manual is for 5th graders on up and so it provides only the most basic info to get a useful upgrade from disorganized thinking without any logic knowedge to a more critical thinking with basic logic knowledge. I'll be happy if they simply memorise the 3 stages and consciously and purposely apply them to work from gathered evidence based on set definitions to valid conclusions.

I did also sort thinking into reflective thinking with the purpose of understanding things and creative thinking with the purpose of changing things. I discuss the latter under the heading logical problem solving because improved critical thinking and problem solving are the two "thinking and learning skills' identified by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills as being required subject matter in 21st century schools. You will probably find my logic game interesting because its competitive with weekly rankings posted. The idea is to play the logic game, and see how many correct predictions (conclusions) you can make AND how quickly you can make them. I've a feeling you would be ranked high! The cost to join the league is only $14.95 and when I get enough members I hope to be setting up cash prize tournaments. So the purpose of the league really is 1/2 competitive entertainment and 1/2 educational.

Elwood

Edited September 10, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[Mindy Newton]

I was wondering how you look on de Bono's work?

= Mindy

[worldlogicleague]

I was wondering how you look on de Bono's work?

= Mindy

de Bono is an interesting case because we are involved in the same subjects.

From Wikipedia -

Edward de Bono (born May 19, 1933, in Malta) is a British physician, author, inventor, and consultant. He is best known as the originator of the term lateral thinking (structured creativity) and the leading proponent of the deliberate teaching of thinking in schools.

Lateral thinking, in contrast to logical or rational thinking, is unpredictable and unconventional thinking outside the box. In de Bonos words lateral thinking emphasizes the searching for different approaches and different ways of looking at things.’ (de Bono, 1993: 54)1

The difference is:

1. He wants to teach informal techniques like the de Bono Thinking Hats (6 thinking strategies), etc., and I want to see taught just the basics of deduction and induction for reflective thinking (to understand things)

2. He wants to teach informal lateral thinking (structured creativity), and I want to see taught the basics of scientific/engineering hypothesis formation and application for creative thinking (to change things). It works well for them, and for me these two represent the fundamental base of higher order thinking all students should know well, at the very least.

Consider this from his institute: http://home.um.edu.mt/create/ma_catalogue.pdf

The Edward de Bono Institute for the Design and Development of Thinking UNIVERSITY OF MALTA

Master of Arts in Creativity and Innovation: Aims and Course Catalogue:

Master in Creativity and Innovation:

Critical Thinking

Participants will be provided with tools to develop their critical thinking skills. Critical thinking involves a

process of evaluation, and this can be applied to statements, arguments, experiences and action. Critical

thinking is a skilful activity that is contrasted with unreflective thinking. Good critical thinking meets a

number of intellectual standards. Some attitudes that are necessary conditions for the development of critical

thinking include intellectual curiosity, objectivity, open-mindedness, flexibility, intellectual skepticism,

intellectual honesty, being systematic, persistence, decisiveness and respect for other viewpoints.

Critical thinking further involves developing skills to identify assumptions, ask pertinent questions and

draw out implications.

The attitudes of critical thinking are right on the mark, but where is the substance of concepts, definitions, axioms, observations, propositions, induction, deduction, hypothetico-deductive method, Mill's Canons for testing hypothesis (abduction). If you don't get these right, his informal techniques will be built on shaky ground.

And there is evidence of this shaky ground on the Institute's website: http://home.um.edu.mt/create/ :

The Creative Thinking Programme was set up in October 1992 in collaboration with Professor Edward de Bono, the inventor of Lateral Thinking. The setting up of this programme has involved the teaching of Creative Thinking and Thinking Skills as a subject on an interdisciplinary basis within various faculties including the Faculty of Education, the Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy and the Institute of Health Care.

Knowing you like to think with precision Mindy, as do I, I'm sure you see instantly the problem here. Their program involves the teaching of "Creative Thinking" and "Thinking Skills". This is faulty classification. Is not Creative thinking a Thinking Skill? Thinking Skills is the genus, and Creative thinking and Reflective Thinking are the two species of the genus, as they are in my system. Not knowing the fundamentals causes these kinds of errors. And what good will informal techniques be if one is making these kinds of mistakes?

Thanks for bringing de Bono up Mindy. This is helping me to work through my ideas.

Edited September 16, 2008 by worldlogicleague

[Mindy Newton]

Thanks for bringing de Bono up Mindy. This is helping me to work through my ideas.

You're welcome. I do see your point. His approach is somewhat undisciplined, fails to be thorough, misses fundamentals, and, I find, is overly dependent on jargon.

He is deliberately formulating down-and-dirty heuristics for problem-solving and critical reviews. He self-consciously chooses jargon as labels for these heuristics. The influence of marketing considerations comes through loud and clear. He However, I think he's on the right track by emphasizing alternatives, exploration of the "problem space," etc., and in making explicit some hindrances to effective thinking--like hurry or familiarity/comfort with an alternative.

I'm debating with myself whether his techniques--like the six hats, the "pros, cons, and interesting" categories, etc., belong to thinking proper, or to a slightly higher level, such as the "critical thinking" I distinguished in my early post on this thread. His "matrix" of characteristics of a product, and the exercize of permutating them in search of a new product, or product improvement is a good one, I think.

I originally read his book on lateral thinking long ago, and didn't think it was very original. I will look at his subsequent work more closely. If I find anything particularly interesting, I'll mention it here.

= Mindy

[worldlogicleague]

Thanks for bringing de Bono up Mindy. This is helping me to work through my ideas.

You're welcome. I do see your point. His approach is somewhat undisciplined, fails to be thorough, misses fundamentals, and, I find, is overly dependent on jargon.

He is deliberately formulating down-and-dirty heuristics for problem-solving and critical reviews. He self-consciously chooses jargon as labels for these heuristics. The influence of marketing considerations comes through loud and clear. He However, I think he's on the right track by emphasizing alternatives, exploration of the "problem space," etc., and in making explicit some hindrances to effective thinking--like hurry or familiarity/comfort with an alternative.

I'm debating with myself whether his techniques--like the six hats, the "pros, cons, and interesting" categories, etc., belong to thinking proper, or to a slightly higher level, such as the "critical thinking" I distinguished in my early post on this thread. His "matrix" of characteristics of a product, and the exercize of permutating them in search of a new product, or product improvement is a good one, I think.

I originally read his book on lateral thinking long ago, and didn't think it was very original. I will look at his subsequent work more closely. If I find anything particularly interesting, I'll mention it here.

= Mindy

Yes, I agree that informal rules of thumb (heuristics) can be devised that are useful, and his could well be. This reminds me that I don't want to imply an overly hardline on this. So my point is that one can have fundamentals and heuristics (added on top) as an effective strategy, but heuristics alone, without any grounding in fundamentals, is not an effective strategy for teaching thinking in middle and high schools. Since fundamentals should come first, and there is only a very limited amount of time to dedicate to this addition to their course work, the most effective strategy would be to just teach the fundamentals.

Edited September 16, 2008 by worldlogicleague