Return to Critical Thinking

The objective of this essay is to articulate and demonstrate (1) a working knowledge of what is critical thinking by both definition and practice, (2) Validate through a series of articles, books, and scholarly documents on how critical thinking has individual and societal benefits and hindrances.

What is Critical Thinking?

Socrates is considered among many scholars to be the “Ideal critical thinker.” His method of questioning and cross-examining positions was known as the ‘Socratic Method’ and was characterized after the technique he used in Plato’s (470-347 BC) earliest dialogues. In one of Plato’s most famous works, Apology, where Socrates is on trial for impiety, and corrupting the youth of Athens “He assures his accusers that his death sentence would guarantee that the world would know that he was executed for the crime of thinking for himself and encouraging others to do the same” (Carroll, p.3). Critical thinking affords us the opportunity to seek truth in a systemic manner rather than rely on opinions, which are beliefs or conclusions held with confidence but not substantiated by knowledge or proof. A more recent definition says, “Critical thinking is the careful application of reason in the determination of whether a claim is true” (Parker& Moore, Critical Thinking, 2005). Linguist and cognitive scientist, Noam Chomsky (1928) says this about truth; “the search for truth is a cooperative, unending endeavor. We can and should engage in it to the extent we can and encourage others to do so as well, seeking to free ourselves from constraints imposed by coercive institutions, dogma, irrationality, excessive conformity and lack of initiative and imagination, and numerous other obstacles”. To engage in the level of “truth seeking” the aforementioned authors and scholars cite, often requires a significant shift in the lens by which we view the world and ourselves.

The Practice of Critical Thinking

There is no easy way to develop the intellectual traits of critical thinking.

Thus, a deliberate effort must be made to acquire the inherent skill and ability to understand how to apply this new way of thinking. This process begins with becoming familiar with the foundational tools, qualities and methods that facilitate the practice of this discipline. Robert Todd Carroll (b.1946), PhD, an American writer and academic outlines in his book “ Becoming A Critical Thinker” (2005), the three most important areas of philosophy related to critical thinking. They are logic, epistemology and ethics. He defines them as follows:

• Logic: studies the principles of valid and invalid reasoning

• Epistemology: studies the origin, nature and limits of knowledge

• Ethics: evaluates of the morality of actions

These foundational constructs are inextricably linked to qualities all critical to be put into practice. These qualities include:

Truth seeking: Critical thinkers want to know the truth. In their quest,

they are willing to consider and even accept ideas that undermine there

assumptions or self-interest. These thinkers follow reason and evidence

wherever they lead.

Open-minded: A skilled critical thinker not only recognizes that

people disagree—she values this fact. She respects the right of others to

express different views. Beyond seeking out a variety of viewpoints,

critical thinkers check their speaking and thinking for signs of bias.

Analytical: The critical thinker recognizes statements that call for

evidence. He is alert to potential problems. In addition, the critical

thinker foresees possible consequences of adopting a point of view.

Systematic: Staying organized and focused are two more qualities of a

critical thinker. She’s willing to patiently gather evidence, test ideas,

and stay with a tough or complex question.

Self-confident: This quality of a critical thinker supports the others.

Since he trusts his intellectual skills, the critical thinker is willing to

seek the truth, listen with an open mind, and do the hard and useful

work of thinking.

Inquisitive: The critical thinker wants to know. She is hungry for facts

and concepts. She is willing to explore the universe of ideas even

before she knows how to apply the insights she gains.

Mature: As a mature person, the critical thinker possesses wisdom

born of experience. He understands that a problem can have several

solutions—even solutions that seem to contradict each other. He resists

the desire to reach quick, superficial answer, and he is willing to

suspend judgment when evidence is incomplete. At the same time, he

recognizes that human beings are often called to act before all the facts

are in.

Benefits and Hindrances of Critical Thinking

Norman Vincent Peale (1898-1993) respected author and theologian is quoted as saying, “Change your thoughts…you change your world.” The practice of critical thinking has transformational capability and is beneficial to both the individual and society. Individuals are more open –minded, skeptical yet tentative and are less likely to allow emotions to rule. Critical thinking fosters self-confidence, humility and resolve to search for truth regardless of where it may lead. Critical thinking makes you more self-aware. It causes you to see the world not just though your eyes but through those whose arguments you are evaluating. A society that trains its people to critically think raises the bar on “truth seeking”. Arguments in the media that are more rhetorical than substance, more opinion that truth, will crumble under the weight of public debate and discourse. Inaccuracies in reporting would be discovered more readily resulting in a higher level of accountability of media sources. This kind of progressive change would potentially invalidate Walter Lippmann’s (1928-1974) thesis in his book “Public Opinion” (1921), where he reason’s that the media and ultimately the masses lacked the ability to think critically. This lack of capability was due to media misinformation and the inability of the public to reconcile the mental models in their head to reality.

With all the stated benefits there are also hindrances; Carroll says” We should not expect critical thinking to lead to universal agreement on all issues, even on important ones about which there is abundant information and general agreement on the facts.” Ignorance, bias, Self –handicapping (Berglas, 1990), and fixed intelligence (Dweck, 2002), are barriers to exercising critical thinking individually and in society at large. Michael Scriven (1928), author and academic reminds us, “critical thinking of any kind is never universal in any additional individual, everyone is subject to episodes of undisciplined and irrational thought”. (Francis A. Kerns, Suzanne M. Bean, 2009,p.261)

Conclusion:

Critical thinking in essence is “truth seeking” built on the foundations of Logic, ethics and epistemology. The practice of critical thinking requires characteristics such, truth seeking, an open-mind, analytic capability, self-confidence, inquisitiveness, and maturity. Hindrances to critical thinking also exist.

Ignorance and bias are impediments and every individual is subject to episodes of irrational thought. Building capability in the discipline of critical thinking benefits individuals in a number of ways that include, improving self-awareness, self-confidence and a framework to consciously consider alternative arguments other your own. Critical thinkers help to create a more enlightened public that can help society at large. Since embarking on this area of study, my personal habits with respect to critical thinking have changed. My recent tendency is to be more attentive and listen for both the argument of media sources or advertising to try and ascertain someone is trying to get me to do believe.

As a Media psychologist the importance of practicing critical thinking is a skill that must be continually nurtured and developed, because for me the benefits far out weigh the barriers we often face when putting critical thinking into action.

References:

Carroll, Robert Todd (2003, The Skeptic’s Dictionary: A collection of Strange Beliefs, Amusing Deceptions & Dangerous Delusions. Wiley & Sons.

Dweck, Carol S. (2002), “ Beliefs that make smart people Dumb. ”In why Smart People Can be can be So Stupid, ed. Robert J. Sternberg. Yale University Press.

Ellis, David B. (2009). Becoming a master student, 12^th edition, p. 207. Houghton, Mifflin.

Kerns, Francis A, Bean, Suzanne M. (2009). Methods, and materials for teaching the gifted: “Critical thinking. Scriven, Michael, Paul, Richard. Prufolk Press.

Moore, Brooke Noel. (2005). Critical thinking, 9^th edition. McGraw HIll

Social Media and Education

here is little doubt that the use of social media tools such as wikis, blogs, and Facebook to name a few, are transforming the way we communicate and collaborate from business to education. I want to use this week’s blog to focus on the use of social media tools in education. The video featuring Will Richardson was very instructive,Understanding instructional technologies. Mr. Richardson, an educator, who calls himself an “evangelist” for the use of internet related technologies in the classroom, and who talks about the“ Read/ Write Web,” says in his book, Blogs, Wikis, Podcast and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms, (2009), that “while 90% of our connected students who have access to the internet use social Web technologies in their personal lives, only a small fraction of teachers and educators, have begun to understand fully how a networked learning environment could assist them in teaching students”.

Social media tools create a meeting place, either in or out of a traditional classroom setting, where teachers and students can connect, read/ write, create content, and publish in a continuous cycle. This constant communication and collaboration allows the student and the teacher to switch roles where the focus is on “everyone learning and everyone teaching.” Additionally, Richardson says, teachers and educators have to also learn together about on-line communities and then connect their students with these communities, inspiring them to learn while emphasizing the teachers’ way is not the only way. These on-line communities may provide alternative solutions and ideas that are both creative and useful. Familiarity of social media tools should be part of a teacher’s professional development. This point was further illustrated by comments made in a 2009 report by the The Knowledgeworks Foundation titled: The Knowledgeworks Foundation Presents: 2020 Forecast, Creating The Future of Learning. the authors of this report stated:

“ If you think that the future will require better schools you’re wrong! The future of education will call for entirely different learning environments.”

“If you think that we will need better teachers you’re wrong! Tomorrow’s learners will need guides who take on different roles.”

This phenomenon of social media in education is taking place at the college and post–graduate level as well. In a recent New York Times article entitled “Universities Use Social Media to Connect,” (A. Pfeiffer, New York Times, March 30, 2010), Alice Pfeiffer writes that ArXiv.org which emerged as far back as 1991 at Cornell University allows free world-wide access and response to 600,000 on-line research papers in physics, math, computer science and was one of the earliest applications of academic social networking. This open-source platform created by researchers as an information and communications vehicle had other benefits, including allowing scientist to conduct peer-to peer research validation prior to submitting for publication.

Other examples include New York University, one of many academic institutions using Blackboard, a website that facilitates the sharing of materials and ideas and Fielding’s use of FELIX. These tools are helping students learn in ways that were not possible in the past. What is clear is that social media’s impact on education will become even more pervasive as time goes on and digital literacy among teachers and educators will no be an longer an option. Their future in education will require it.

Consumer Psychology: turning persuasion into sales

Advertisers are dependent on the their ability to persuade you to buy their product or service. Advertising expenditures continue to rise, however, I am not convinced that actual sales are following a similar trajectory. One advertising medium that seems to be most successful in turning persuasion into sales is the informercial. This extended television commercial which airs anywhere from 2 to 30 minutes informs the viewer about a product in an entertaining manner and makes the consumer aware this is paid programming. It is considered effective advertising because:

• The products advertised tend to have everyday practical application ( Proactive skin care, George Forman Grill, etc.)
• The product and its benefits are described in great detail using customer testimonials, industry experts, and celebrity endorsers
• Provides the consumer with the value proposition and usually urges you to buy now, offering a bonus of some kind with the purchase.

The biggest difference between the infomercial and a standard 30 second ad, is that product sales can be directly linked to how well the infomercial persuaded the consumer to buy. As an example, since its introduction in 1994, The George Forman Grill has sold more that 80 million units, with unofficial estimates suggesting that revenue has exceeded the cost of producing and airing its infomercials by 20 times. In contrast, traditional television ads have many of the same elements that informercials deploy, however;

1. they are condensed into a smaller time frame (30 seconds), leaving less time to persuade
2. provide no viable means of correlating the expense to produce and air the advertisement to sales.

To provide context, let's examine one of the most sought after and expensive ad spaces is Super Bowl advertising. To highlight the performance of one its advertisers, the cost of a Super Bowl ad in 1977 was approximately $438, 000. To run a similar spot in the most recent Super Bowl ( XLIII), the cost was $3M. The Coca-Cola Company spent over $6M on its Super Bowl advertising, but according to TiVo research, didn't place among the top 10 of the most favorite ads aired during the telecast. This is an important measure because the higher the rank the more likely it is that consumers watched your ad, connected with your product and hopefully will purchase. These results lead you to conclude that the commercials didn't do a very good job of persuading consumers and thus its less likely that incremental sales will be linked to the airing of these ads. Since Coke probably spent at least $500, 000 to produce these two 30 second ads and over $6M to air them, you have to conclude that this was a poor investment. To further accentuate the point, for Coke to reach a break-even on its Super Bowl ad-buy excluding production cost, Coke would have to sell 229, 357, 798, cases of 20 ounce product at $ 1.09 per bottle at retail.

The math in this example may seem like an extreme illustration, but it illuminates the point, that not only was Coke unable to persuade consumers, but its unlikely that enough sales will be generated to make this investment viable.

Author Kevin Dutton recently coined the phrase " supersuasion." He describes this as "a brand new kind of influence that disables our cognitive security systems in seconds." He outlines six characteristics of those who master " supersuasion." They are:

• Simplicity
• Perceived self interest
• Incongruity
• Confidence
• Empathy
• Humor.

Even before the term "supersuasion" was invented, I think the Coca-Cola brand embodied these characteristics starting with the ad " Hilltop" which was released in 1971. During the time the "Hilltop" campaign was in market, Coke enjoyed robust growth in both sales and earnings for its flagship brand. It certainly paid its own way. However, I don't think very many brands or products have mastered the techniques described by Dutton, and in fact I believe most won't! Apple may be one of the more notable exceptions.

After all that I've read and reviewed on "persuasion," there is no doubt it is at the core of advertising and is more sophisticated in its various executions than I have described here. However, persuasion is not really scientific. As infomercials seem to bear out, if an advertiser does an effective job of telling the consumer about a product or service that has practical application, provides them with a reasonable explanation of the value proposition, and keeps the message simple, they may have a better chance of actually turning persuasion into sales!

References: The Power to Persuade; How masters of " supersuasion " can change your mind.

Kevin Dutton ( 2005)

Infomercials and Advertising Effectiveness,: An empirical Study, Brett, A. S. Martin, Andrew Bhimy, Tom Agee, Journal of Consumer Marketing; 2002. Volume 19., Issue 6: P.468-480.

What Happens to A,B, and D, without the "C"?

One of the most important benefits of "lifelong" learning is the process of connecting previous learning and life experience to our current reality. This process helps us to better understand patterns, similarities, and outcomes as we move along life's journey. My blog this week seeks to apply the concept of lifelong learning to the reading materials, video presentations and forum discussions of the last 4 weeks. While 4 weeks is not a lifetime, I'll use my understanding of some of the methods and ideas my cohort and I have discussed, combine those with some life experiences, and offer a point of view that I believe is relevant to our discussion this week with respect to bias in the media.

The letters, A, B, and D in the blog title are the beginning letters of three words that separate and distinct definitions, but in my view constitute a relationship and meaning that call us to action each time we visit web site, listen to a telecast, podcast, read a newspaper or engage with a media source. The letter A is "Advocacy", B is for the word "Bias" and D stands for "Deception". The fourth letter begins a term that describes what action is absent most often during media interaction, and how we are sometimes "duped" without it. This term is called critical thinking."

According to the The American Heritage College Dictionary, "Advocacy", " Bias, " and "Deception are defined as follows:

• Advocacy (v) : To speak, plead, or argue in favor of.
• Bias (n): A preference or an inclination that inhibits impartial judgement.
• Deception (n) : The use of deceit , to mislead or to give a false impression.

(The American Heritage College Dictionary. 4th ed. Houghton Mifflin, 2007, 2004,2002, P.20.138.366)

While the practice of injecting the true meaning of these words into a form of media communication can impact the way we hear it or receive it , of these three the most difficult for me to digest is deception. In other words, when a media source engages in a deliberate attempt to deceive its audience its sole motive is deception, rather than advocacy or expressing a bias for or against something. In todays media saturated society, popular television personalities such as Glenn Beck, Shawn Hannity, Keith Olberman and others, seem credible and trustworthy at first glance. However, after listening and reading their commentary for a period of time, it becomes clear that they prefer to use a form of journalistic info-entertainment to try and persuade us to react in way that will generate an improvement in their ratings, which they hope in turn will lead to revenue growth for the media outlet. They use words like " socialism" or "communist"to tap our emotions. They then combine that with a generous use of rhetoric interspersed with fact and fiction, which is deceptive by its very definition. Web sites can also be deliberately deceptive. Examples of this include, martinlutherking.org/the beast.html and Canadian Health & Care, whose web address is niepleuxa.com. Remember the old adage" Don't judge a book by its cover?" While this may be true, we do need to be able to look beyond what is obvious in the media. One way to accomplish this is by becoming more media literate and by being more thoughtful each time we engage with a media source.

In some instances it is much easier to detect a bias versus an attempt to deceive. After listening to Michael Shermer's comments on science and evolution in the video" The Baloney Detection Kit", I decided to research the funding partner of the video. It was only then, did I discover that it had been financed by the Foundation of British ethologist, and evolution protagonist, Richard Dawkins, (born, March 26, 1941). When I watched the video a second time, I watched it taking into account Shermer's obvious pro-evolution bias. However, I didn't then, nor do I now believe that there was a deliberate attempt to deceive the audience.

What is then the "so what" of all of this? It boils down to our ability to determine if a media source is biased, deceptive or advocating a particular position or agenda. This may well depend on not just improving our media literacy as mentioned earlier, but also how we develop our skill and capability in the area represented by the "C" in our blog title; critical thinking.

During the last few weeks I've reviewed several definitions of this discipline, including those by authors, Michael Scriven and Richard Paul. I also was very impressed with the framework of critical thinking created by David B. Ellis, in the book" Becoming A Master Student" ( David B. Ellis, 1998). However, while doing some additional research on the subject, I came across another interesting approach found in the book, " Critical Thinking" - A Concise Guide"( Tracey Bowell, Dr Gary Kemp, 2008). These two professors of Philosophy have confined their definition of critical thinking to a logical framework, which precisely analyzes the effectiveness of a persuasive argument by determining whether it is just rhetoric or truly gives us a reason to believe or act.

To be clear, the use of critical thinking as a practice is an effective way to detect bias, advocacy and deception. However, I found the approach used in Bowell and Kemp's book not only interesting, but also much easier to use, because it simplifies the critical thinking process to the analysis of an argument to determine whether the argument actually provides a reason for us to believe.

In the end, whether the media source is biased, advocates a position or agenda, or deliberately attempts to deceive, without the discipline of critical thinking regardless of the methodology, you will rarely understand the intent of the media source that is trying to engage you. If this happens the ultimate outcome will be that our quest for lifelong learning especially with respect to media literacy is seriously compromised!

Urban Legends: Why do you believe them?

I'd like to explore the concept of urban legends from two perspectives, one scientific and one not so scientific. Let me begin with the non-scientific.

When we discuss urban legends, we often turn our attention to the source of the information. Legends have been described as a form of story-telling, or information that is written or verbally communicated, to advance a particular agenda or belief system. Obviously, the impact of these stories can be harmful or helpful to individuals or society depending on how this information is received or interpreted. A case in point was Michael Shermer's video about the "baloney detection kit" which was both humorous and interesting , however,much to my chagrin, I discovered that the video was funded by The Richard Dawkins Foundation. Dawkin's, a British ethologist(born, 26 March, 1941) is a protagonist of memetics, which has its foundation in the "gene centered" view of evolution. It was therefore no surprise that during the video, Shermer spoke about evolution in a matter of fact fashion, and repeated several times that " science is the best tool ever devised to understand the world." His comments don't suggest to me that he would consider tools other than science to explain the world, therefore, you would have to conclude that if it can't be proven scientifically, whatever you saying or doing is probably not true. Since I now know his bias, I'm now pretty skeptical about him , Skeptic magazine, and the baloney detection kit!

While I was a bit disappointed to find out about the connection between Dawkins and the video because of its lack of objectively, I don't think it was deliberately deceptive. However, in some instances urban legends or stories are created to deliberately deceive those who read or hear them. Where information comes from, and the credibility we assign to these sources, usually gives us confidence that what was said and reported is true. Have urban legends ever began in "The Wall Street Journal?" Since the WSJ is perceived to be a credible financial source, one would assume that the contents are true, and while I don't have any evidence that they have deliberately wrote an article designed to deceive its readers, my own personal bias would would not rule it out. Even though most us are aware that some urban legends are probably not true,why do we fall prey to them?Are we convinced what they say is true? What role do feelings and emotions play?

Do people who create urban legends believe what they write? Do they write with such a degree of certainty, that they believe what they've written cannot be wrong? I chose to explore this question scientifically, which led me to read renowned author and neuroscientist,Robert A Burton's book entitled; On Being Certain.. Believing that you are right even you're not.

Dr, Burton deals with the biology of the brain and the "feeling of knowing". His approach attempts to "dispel the myth of knowing what we know by conscious deliberation is in fact affected by everything from genetic predispositions, to perceptual illusions common to all bodily sensations." This could explain why when we read some of these urban legends and buy into them, we do this not just because of the source of the information, but also because we are so entrenched in what we believe we know about the subject. Dr Burton's thesis about our absolute unshakable belief in what we think we know, is in contrast to the cognitive dissonance theory which leads to "selective perception," a theory put forward by social psychologist, Leon Festinger (1919-1989). Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling that's caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. My belief is that we subscribe to urban legends or not, either because of the certainty and the "feeling of knowing" what we believe, or we refuse to be effected by urban legends or stories, because it doesn't agree with our current beliefs. While the source of urban legends is important, feelings, emotions and our belief systems play an even larger role in how we view these stories. Whether you keep out what you don't agree with, or you allow your belief systems to have free reign, you should be aware of what you take in and how it affects you, no matter the source of the information.

The Persuasive role of Visual and Musical paridgms

The Persuasive Role of Visual and Musical Paradigms: It’s really about the brain isn’t it?

A definition of a paradigm offered by the American Heritage College Dictionary (4^{th edition, 2007, 2004, 2002, p.1008.)} says that a paradigm is a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitute a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them. The triad of visual images, words and music form a powerful coalition that creates the paradigm and mental model that advertisers have used to talk to us about a given product or service, since the early part of the twentieth century. In advertising, media and ad agency executives, have come to realize there really is a lot of science in the art of persuasion. They understand that an emotional reaction is better than a logical one. The science part of this paradigm is all about the brain. Visual images and music present to the brain a formidable duo. They can momentarily alter reality and distract from critical thinking. As Media Psychologist David Giles noted; the stronger the emotional appeal, the greater the persuasion and therefore less incentive to observe critically (Giles, 2003;Westen, 2007).

Dr. Jean –Pierre Isbouts , professor of Media Psychology at Fielding Graduate University noted; that “visual interpretation happens when light enters the eye, is transformed into electric current, passes through the nervous system and is processed in the brain”. Likewise, sound, which is the central component to music is also processed in the brain. Sound consists of traveling waves and given a certain reverberation of those waves enters our ears and is uniquely processed in the brain as well. Dr. Daniel J Levitan’s book “This is your Brain; the Science of a Human Obsession” (2006.p25), discusses how music crosses the intersection of psychology and neurology which is now called neuroscience. Dr. Levitan a rocker turned neuroscientist, explores the persuasive connections we make in our brain with music and the effect it has on our moods from a neurological perspective. His research opens the door to discuss questions relating to facts such as if men and women speak at different pitch levels or tonality, could that be a reason for certain advertised brands to use a man’s voice versus using a woman’s. We keep coming back to the science of this phenomena and the brain.

Renowned musician, writer, composer and humanitarian Quincy Jones who has recovered from brain seizures he suffered back in 1974 recently remarked in an interview with Ebony magazine (March 2010; p.57), “ music is the only thing that affects both sides of the brain simultaneously, it engages the emotion and the intellect. I think water and music will be the last things to leave this planet.” Its hard to argue with “Q” as he is affectionately called by his friends, but if there is a significant emotional response to a visual and or a musical impulse, the more likely you will be in no position to make a logical decision. The messages the brain receives act on the persuasive information it receives whether it be musical or visual which begs the question it is about the brain isn’t it??

The Definition of Critical Thinking: A lifestyle or a Diet?

When sculptor and painter Auguste Rodin (1840-1917) finished "The Thinker"in 1902, and unveiled it in 1904, his reputation as one of the greatest artist of that time period was confirmed. This significant work of art depicts a man deep in thought seemingly almost perplexed. Yet one might conclude that if this statue were created for contemporary times , it would depict a man engaged in "critical thinking". David B. Ellis, an author of many books including North Americas-best selling college text book, Becoming a Master Student, wrote in 1997, " critical thinkers distinguish between fact and fiction; ask questions, make detailed observations, uncover assumptions and define their terms, and make assertions based on sound logic and solid evidence. Authors Michael Scriven, and Richard Paul suggest that "critical thinkers can be seen as having two components, (1) a set of skills to process and generate information and (2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment of using those skills to guide behavior.

While Scriven, Paul and Ellis define critical thinking differently, each definition contains a common thread, that thread being, critical thinking requires discipline and skill and most importantly consistency and commitment. I think of consistency and commitment with respect to critical thinking as a lifestyle not a diet. I believe its fair to say that lifestyle changes tend to be more permanent, while diets come and go. However, Scriven and Paul also wrote that"critical thinking is never universal in any individual and therefore everyone is subject to episodes of undisciplined or irrational thought", which for me clarifies that no matter how often you do anything, as a human being you are bound to get it wrong sometimes. Often its not only about getting it wrong, more often than not, we allow external influences like the media to distract us from critical thinking by sending a barrage of messages and communications that appeal to our emotional impulses. Clement and Lochhead commented in their book , Cognitive Process Instruction (1980) " We should be teaching students how to think instead we are teaching them what to think". Unless we can practice critical thinking and "take charge of our thinking" as Linda Elder and Richard Paul suggest in their article, "critical thinking'; why we must transform our teaching, , we are destined to be on a critical thinking diet rather than making it part of our lifestyle. If we live on on that kind of diet , I'm not sure any of us can accomplish all that we are capable of.