Teacher Charlie's news and adventures from the world; Korea to Germany and all points in between!

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Applying a lesson learned - Students will open up if you help them

Kriengsak Niratpattanasai

A few months ago, I wrote about my experiences during a half-day workshop for fourth-year bachelor's degree students at a local university. My topic was international service, part of the school's International Business Management curriculum.

I had divided the class into small groups and asked them to compare the strengths, weaknesses and uniqueness of McDonald's and MK Restaurants, and of Thai Farmers Bank and Citibank.

For the first few minutes, the groups were almost silent; undergraduates are used to one-way lectures, not workshops. Finally I asked why they did not want to discuss things very freely. Among their comments: ``I have not learned the topic yet, so how can I answer?'' ``I'm afraid my answer in a group discussion will not be the `right' one. I will kai nah (lose face).'' ``I didn't want to show off too much among my peers. It's nice to be passive.'' ``I didn't want to look stupid among my peers.''

One remark _ ``I haven't learned it yet so how can I answer?'' _ is crucial when it comes to evaluating the Thai education system. We have not trained our students to think. The feeling that the student must give the ``right'' answer also limits our creativity.

I recently returned to the same university to discuss the same topic with a different group. This time I applied the lessons I had learned before. I changed my introduction radically as I realised it was imperative to outline clear expectations and benefits. The result was fantastic. Students had more participation and involvement. Here is what I did differently from the first session.

1. I told the students about the previous session and the hang-up on ``right'' answers. I told the new group that the exercise was not about right answers but about learning. We would learn how making a mistake in the class could prevent us from making a mistake in the workplace. I encouraged ``wrong'' answers. In fact, I had a gift _ a book I have just published on selling techniques _ ready for the person who supplied the most ``wrong'' answers.

2. I told them that I really believed I could help people learn. I said I would give my small fee to charity, and I would not come back if the class today did not participate. It was their responsibility as well as mine to make the class interesting. In a nutshell, I transferred the ``ownership'' of the success of learning to them.

3. I outlined the workshop format as I had in the earlier session, saying one goal was to help break the ice among students. By starting out in small groups first, students would feel more comfortable about discussing things when the full class of 30 reconvened. Increasingly in the modern workplace, I said, qualities such as the ability to speak out and even disagree were expected. Thai values such as kreng jai, sia na or mai pen rai could be obstacles to those expected qualities.

4. I checked their response by observing non-verbal behaviour. Those assigned to discuss banking appeared uncomfortable and I asked them why. They said they had little experience and knowledge about banking, unlike the fast food. I compromised by allowing all groups to discuss same case. This made them more sabai-jai (comfortable or relaxed). As an instructor, I have to be more open to their suggestions. Otherwise the students might not trust me and might be reluctant to propose any new ideas if they think I have a pre-set answer for everything.

5. I noticed more open discussion than in the previous class. After a few minutes, the class was noisy. I walked around and praised them for their good input. Whenever, the noise level went down, I told them: ``I want more noise, people. Louder!'' I acted like a musician egging on his audience.

It was an amazing class for me. I made a commitment to hold another session since the students had done a great job for me and for themselves.

- Kriengsak Niratpattanasai is head of training and development at a large joint-venture corporation. He has extensive working experience in cross-cultural environments. You can reach him at knirat

Millions in China travel ahead of holiday season



Tens of millions of migrant workers in China have been travelling home to celebrate the lunar new year holiday with their families.

For many, the weeklong break is their only chance to see their families each year. And nothing, not even the packed crowds and ticket shortages, could deter them from making the journey.

Tony Birtley reports from Hebei province in China.

-----------------------

A good video about holiday travel with clear English.

An Introduction to Critical Thinking

Introduction to Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is an important and vital topic in modern education. All educators are interested in teaching critical thinking to their students. Many academic departments hope that its professors and instructors will become informed about the strategy of teaching critical thinking skills, identify areas in one's courses as the proper place to emphasize and teach critical thinking, and develop and use some problems in exams that test students' critical thinking skills. This critical thinking manual has been prepared to inform and aid you to accomplish these things, and it has been kept brief and straightforward so that all faculty members will have the time and opportunity to read it and follow the suggestions it contains.

Purpose and Rationale of Teaching Critical Thinking

The purpose of specifically teaching critical thinking in the sciences or any other discipline is to improve the thinking skills of students and thus better prepare them to succeed in the world. But, you may ask, don't we automatically teach critical thinking when we teach our subjects, especially mathematics and science, the two disciplines which supposedly epitomize correct and logical thinking? The answer, sadly, is often no. Please consider these two quotations:

"It is strange that we expect students to learn, yet seldom teach them anything about learning." Donald Norman, 1980, "Cognitive engineering and education," in Problem Solving and Education: Issues in Teaching and Research, edited by D.T. Tuna and F. Reif, Erlbaum Publishers.

"We should be teaching students how to think. Instead, we are teaching them what to think." Clement and Lochhead, 1980, Cognitive Process Instruction.

Perhaps you can now see the problem. All education consists of transmitting to students two different things: (1) the subject matter or discipline content of the course ("what to think"), and (2) the correct way to understand and evaluate this subject matter ("how to think"). We do an excellent job of transmitting the content of our respective academic disciplines, but we often fail to teach students how to think effectively about this subject matter, that is, how to properly understand and evaluate it. This second ability is termed critical thinking. All educational disciplines have reported the difficulty of imparting critical thinking skills. In 1983, in its landmark report A Nation at Risk, the National Commission on Excellence in Education warned:

"Many 17-year-olds do not possess the 'higher-order' intellectual skills we should expect of them. Nearly 40 percent cannot draw inferences from written material; only one-fifth can write a persuasive essay; and only one-third can solve a mathematics problem requiring several steps."

While we as professors have the ability ourselves to think critically (we had to learn these skills to earn advanced degrees in our disciplines), many students--including our own--never develop critical thinking skills. Why? There are a number of reasons. The first goal of education, "what to think," is so traditionally obvious that instructors and students may focus all their energies and efforts on the task of transmitting and acquiring basic knowledge. Indeed, many students find that this goal alone is so overwhelming that they have time for little else. On the other hand, the second goal of education, "how to think" or critical thinking, is often so subtle that instructors fail to recognize it and students fail to realize its absence.

So much has become known about the natural world that the information content of science has become enormous. This is so well known that science educators and science textbook writers came to believe that they must seek to transmit as much factual information as possible in the time available. Textbooks grew larger and curricula became more concentrated; students were expected to memorize and learn increasingly more material. Acquisition of scientific facts and information took precedence over learning scientific methods and concepts. Inevitably, the essential accompanying task of transmitting the methods of correct investigation, understanding, and evaluation of all this scientific data (that is, critical thinking) was lost by the roadside. This situation became especially severe in primary and secondary education, and over the last decades there has been a well-known decline in the math and science ability of students in our country compared to other industrialized countries. Studies have shown that our students abilities in math and science begin on level with students in other countries, but then progressively decrease as they make their way through our educational system. By the end of high school, United States students rank among the lowest in the industrialized world in math and science achievement. We in introductory college science education inherit these students and have to deal with their deficiencies in scientific and critical thinking.

In retrospect, it seems obvious that when the information content of a discipline increases, it becomes even more vital to spend time, not learning more information, but learning methods to acquire, understand, and evaluate this information and the great amount of new information that is not known now but will surely follow. Frankly, it is counterproductive to simply memorize and learn more new and isolated facts when future facts may eventually displace these. Thus, our science education policy has been completely backward, teaching more science facts and less scientific method rather than the converse. The errors of primary and secondary education in math, science, and other disciplines during the last forty years are now well known and are currently being addressed. The latest science books, for example, emphasize critical thinking and the scientific method. They focus on teaching students the proper ways to obtain new reliable knowledge for one's self, not on engendering factual overload. Curriculum reforms in science, such as Project 2061 of the AAAS and Scope, Sequence and Coordination of the NSTA, are also being instituted. It will be another generation before these textbook and curriculum reforms will have achieved results, if ever, and until then we must be aware of students' lack of critical thinking skills and of our need to enhance them. (It is accepted, one assumes, that students entering college should already have mastered all basic critical thinking skills; that is, they should have learned these skills during their primary and secondary education and thus be able to bring them with them into the college math and science classroom. The fact that this manual has been prepared is an indication that students have not learned these skills. We may be the last opportunity such students have to appreciate and learn critical thinking.)

A final rationale for critical thinking is explained by William T. Daly (1990) in a short article, "Developing Critical Thinking Skills." He says that

"the critical thinking movement in the U.S. has been bolstered and sustained by the business community's need to compete in a global economy. The general skill levels needed in the work force are going up while the skill levels of potential employees are going down. As a result, this particular educational reform movement . . . will remain crucial to the education of the work force and the economy's performance in the global arena. This economic pressure to teach critical thinking skills will fall on educational institutions because these skills, for the most part, are rarely taught or reinforced outside formal educational institutions. Unfortunately, at the moment, they are also rarely taught inside educational institutions."

Definition of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking means correct thinking in the pursuit of relevant and reliable knowledge about the world. Another way to describe it is reasonable, reflective, responsible, and skillful thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do. A person who thinks critically can ask appropriate questions, gather relevant information, efficiently and creatively sort through this information, reason logically from this information, and come to reliable and trustworthy conclusions about the world that enable one to live and act successfully in it. Critical thinking is not being able to process information well enough to know to stop for red lights or whether you received the correct change at the supermarket. Such low-order thinking, critical and useful though it may be, is sufficient only for personal survival; most individuals master this. True critical thinking is higher-order thinking, enabling a person to, for example, responsibly judge between political candidates, serve on a murder trial jury, evaluate society's need for nuclear power plants, and assess the consequences of global warming. Critical thinking enables an individual to be a responsible citizen who contributes to society, and not be merely a consumer of society's distractions.

Children are not born with the power to think critically, nor do they develop this ability naturally beyond survival-level thinking. Critical thinking is a learned ability that must be taught. Most individuals never learn it. Critical thinking cannot be taught reliably to students by peers or by most parents. Trained and knowledgable instructors are necessary to impart the proper information and skills. Math and science instructors have precisely this information and these skills. Why?

Critical thinking can be described as the scientific method applied by ordinary people to the ordinary world. This is true because critical thinking mimics the well-known method of scientific investigation: a question is identified, an hypothesis formulated, relevant data sought and gathered, the hypothesis is logically tested and evaluated, and reliable conclusions are drawn from the result. All of the skills of scientific investigation are matched by critical thinking, which is therefore nothing more than scientific method used in everyday life rather than in specifically scientific disciplines or endeavors. Critical thinking is scientific thinking. Many books and papers describing critical thinking present it's goals and methods as identical or similar to the goals and methods of science. A scientifically-literate person, such as a math or science instructor, has learned to think critically to achieve that level of scientific awareness. But any individual with an advanced degree in any university discipline has almost certainly learned the techniques of critical thinking.

Critical thinking is the ability to think for one's self and reliably and responsibly make those decisions that affect one's life. Critical thinking is also critical inquiry, so such critical thinkers investigate problems, ask questions, pose new answers that challenge the status quo, discover new information that can be used for good or ill, question authorities and traditional beliefs, challenge received dogmas and doctrines, and often end up possessing power in society greater than their numbers. It may be that a workable society or culture can tolerate only a small number of critical thinkers, that learning, internalizing, and practicing scientific and critical thinking is discouraged. Most people are followers of authority: most do not question, are not curious, and do not challenge authority figures who claim special knowledge or insight. Most people, therefore, do not think for themselves, but rely on others to think for them. Most people indulge in wishful, hopeful, and emotional thinking, believing that what they believe is true because they wish it, hope it, or feel it to be true. Most people, therefore, do not think critically.

Critical thinking has many components. Life can be described as a sequence of problems that each individual must solve for one's self. Critical thinking skills are nothing more than problem solving skills that result in reliable knowledge. Humans constantly process information. Critical thinking is the practice of processing this information in the most skillful, accurate, and rigorous manner possible, in such a way that it leads to the most reliable, logical, and trustworthy conclusions, upon which one can make responsible decisions about one's life, behavior, and actions with full knowledge of assumptions and consequences of those decisions.

Raymond S. Nickerson (1987), an authority on critical thinking, characterizes a good critical thinker in terms of knowledge, abilities, attitudes, and habitual ways of behaving. Here are some of the characteristics of such a thinker:

  • uses evidence skillfully and impartially
  • organizes thoughts and articulates them concisely and coherently
  • distinguishers between logically valid and invalid inferences
  • suspends judgment in the absence of sufficient evidence to support a decision
  • understands the difference between reasoning and rationalizing
  • attempts to anticipate the probable consequences of alternative actions
  • understands the idea of degrees of belief
  • sees similarities and analogies that are not superficially apparent
  • can learn independently and has an abiding interest in doing so
  • applies problem-solving techniques in domains other than those in which learned
  • can structure informally represented problems in such a way that formal techniques, such as mathematics, can be used to solve them
  • can strip a verbal argument of irrelevancies and phrase it in its essential terms
  • habitually questions one's own views and attempts to understand both the assumptions that are critical to those views and the implications of the views
  • is sensitive to the difference between the validity of a belief and the intensity with which it is held
  • is aware of the fact that one's understanding is always limited, often much more so than would be apparent to one with a noninquiring attitude
  • recognizes the fallibility of one's own opinions, the probability of bias in those opinions, and the danger of weighting evidence according to personal preferences

This list is, of course, incomplete, but it serves to indicate the type of thinking and approach to life that critical thinking is supposed to be. Similar descriptions of critical thinking attributes are available in the very extensive literature of critical thinking. See, for example, Teaching Thinking Skills, 1987, edited by J. B. Baron and R. J. Steinberg; Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking,1985, edited by A. L. Costa; The Teaching of Thinking, 1985, edited by R. S. Nickerson and others; Critical Thinking, Fifth Edition, 1998, by B. N. Moore and Richard Parker, and Critical Thinking, Second edition, 1990, by John Chaffe. These books are representative of the genre.

Relationship of Critical Thinking to the Scientific Method

Because of the identification of critical thinking as scientific thinking, it is reasonable to conclude that math and science courses are a good place to learn critical thinking by learning the scientific method; unfortunately, this is not always true. Good scientists who conduct science must practice critical thinking, and good science teachers usually teach it, but few ordinary individuals learn the scientific method, even those who successfully take a number of science classes in high school and college. This is because, as discussed above, science in the United States is often poorly taught as a fact-based discipline rather than as a way of knowing or method of discovery. As incredible as it may seem, studies reveal that 3% of the U.S. population is scientifically literate, down from 5% about twenty years ago. Thus, it does not appear that science alone will teach critical thinking to the masses. In fact, critical thinking programs are almost always designed by social scientists and directed toward improving thinking in the humanities and social studies, but the same can be accomplished with math and science courses. Properly taught university courses should teach a student critical thinking in addition to the disciplinary content of the course.

It is useful to ask why the scientific method--now recognized, in its guise of critical thinking, as so important to modern education that hundreds of critical thinking programs exist in thousands of schools across the nation--is so valuable for an individual to learn and practice. The reason is because the scientific method is the most powerful method ever invented by humans to obtain relevant and reliable knowledge about nature. Indeed, it is the only method humans have of discovering reliable knowledge (knowledge that has a high probability of being true). Another name for this type of knowledge is justified true belief (belief that is probably true because it has been obtained and justified by a reliable method). Nobel Prize-winner Sir Peter Medawar claimed that, "In terms of fulfillment of declared intentions, science is incomparably the most successful enterprise human beings have ever engaged upon." Other methods of gaining knowledge--such as those using revelation, authority, artistic and moral insight, philosophical speculation, hopeful and wishful thinking, and other subjective and authoritarian means--have historically resulted in irrelevant and unreliable knowledge, and they are no better today. These nonscientific methods of discovering knowledge, however, are more popular than scientific methods despite their repeated failures in obtaining reliable knowledge. There are many reasons for this, but two of the most important are that nonscientific methods are (1) more congenial to emotional and hopeful human nature, and (2) are easier to learn and practice than scientific methods. Despite these reasons, however, the value and power of possessing reliable knowledge--as contrasted with the usual unreliable, misleading, irrelevant, inaccurate, wishful, hopeful, intuitive, and speculative knowledge most humans contend with--have caused modern government, business, and education leaders to place the scientific endeavor in high regard, and caused them to promote teaching the scientific method and its popular manifestation: critical thinking.

Humans are conditioned from birth to follow authority figures and not to question their pronouncements. Such conditioning is done by parents and teachers using a wide variety of postive and negative reinforcement techniques. Most individuals reach adulthood in this conditioned form. The result of such conditioning is the antithesis of both scientific investigation and critical thinking: individuals lack both curiosity and the skills to perform independent inquiry to discover reliable knowledge. Individuals who think critically can think for themselves: they can identify problems, gather relevant information, analyze information in a proper way, and come to reliable conclusions by themselves, without relying on others to do this for them. This is also the goal of science education. Critical thinking allows one to face and comprehend objective reality by gaining reliable knowledge about the world. This, in turn, allows one to better earn a living, achieve success in life, better solve life's problems, and be reconciled to existence, mortality, and the universe. If a person is happier possessing reliable knowledge and living in objective reality, rather than living in ignorance and possessing false or unreliable beliefs, this is as good a reason as any for teaching and learning critical thinking.

Formal Critical Thinking Programs

There are two ways to teach critical thinking in the classroom. The first method, and the one we will find endorsed in this manual, is also the easiest, least time-consuming, and the least expensive. This method is to simply modify one's teaching and testing methods slightly to enhance critical thinking among one's students. This method is explained in the following two sections.

The second method--more difficult, time-consuming, and expensive--is briefly described now. This method makes use of formal critical thinking exercises, programs, and materials that have been prepared by specialists and can be purchased for immediate use by the teacher or instructor. These materials are the dominant means by which critical thinking is now being taught in primary and secondary education. For a single classroom, school, or school district, such formal critical thinking materials cost hundreds to thousands of dollars. The fact that critical thinking programs exist today is a sad commentary on the decline of education in the United States, for students apparently once learned critical thinking in our country without such materials.

Dozens of formal critical thinking programs exist. Here are just three that arrived unsolicited in my faculty mailbox:

First, the "CORT Thinking Program" by Dr. Edward de Bono, is a set of 60 "thinking lessons" that promise to "succeed in motivating students of all ages and abilities to: think--and develop creative solutions to problems--both inside and outside the classroom, improve the quantity and quality of their creative writing, and see themselves as active thinkers, and therefore able to hold a better self image of themselves and have confidence in their own ability to succeed."

Second, the "Strategies for Teaching Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum" from Education Testing Service consists of a two-phase professional development program for secondary-level educators that will enable them to "integrate the teaching of thinking skills into their instructional program, and train teachers in their schools and/or districts to do the same." Phase I teaches "introduction to thinking skills, concept formation, finding patterns, making inferences, formulating and testing hypotheses, and understanding and constructing meaning." Phase II teaches the teachers to train other teachers.

The third program, from Teacher's Press, asks "Are you concerned when American teenagers lack logical thinking skill, equate influence with tricks and bribery, are unable to evaluate the reliability of data?" They have prepared high school course materials that actively address these concerns. For example, the description of their unit on "A Study of Logical Fallacies" states that, "Teaching critical thinking skills has long been accepted as a major goal of most teachers. Most probably say that they want to develop in their students a trusting, but questioning, world outlook. Most want students to actively investigate the world in a structured, scientific way--as opposed to blind acceptance of tradition, authority or folk wisdom."

Course Areas In Which to Emphasize Critical Thinking

The prior sections of this manual were written to describe critical thinking, to inform you about the pressing need to promote it among students, and to encourage you to make it part of your course curriculum and teaching method. Now you will learn where and how to do this in your own courses. Critical thinking can be presented or emphasized in all classroom areas: lecture, homework, term papers, and exams. We will examine each in turn. Some slight extra effort on the part of the instructor will be necessary, but the effort will be worthwhile because the results are so valuable for the student. Remember, as you teach critical thinking, teach also why it is worthwhile.

Critical thinking can be taught during:

1. Lectures You may of course directly teach critical thinking principles to your students during lecture, but this is neither required nor advisable. Stay with your subject matter, but present this is such a way that students will be encouraged to think critically about it. This is accomplished during lecture by questioning the students in ways that require that they not only understand the material, but can analyze it and apply it to new situations.

2. Laboratories Students inevitably practice critical thinking during laboratories in science class, because they are learning the scientific method.

3. Homework Both traditional reading homework and special written problem sets or questions can be used to enhance critical thinking. Homework presents many opportunities to encourage critical thinking.

4. Quantitative Exercises Mathematical exercises and quantitative word problems teach problem solving skills that can be used in everyday life. This obviously enhances critical thinking.

5. Term Papers The best way to teach critical thinking is to require that students write. Writing forces students to organize their thoughts, contemplate their topic, evaluate their data in a logical fashion, and present their conclusions in a persuasive manner. Good writing is the epitome of good critical thinking.

6. Exams Exam questions can be devised which promote critical thinking rather than rote memorization. This is true for both essay question exams and multiple-choice exams.

Your mission, if you decide to accept it, is to use one or more of the following classroom strategies or techniques to teach critical thinking in one or more of the above four course areas. You are encouraged to explore the possibilites and use as many as you wish. If you are already using some of these techniques, and many of you are, then you don't have to change a thing.

Critical Thinking Teaching Strategies and Classroom Techniques

Critical thinking cannot be taught by lecturing. Critical thinking is an active process, while, for most students, listening to lectures is a passive activity. The intellectual skills of critical thinking--analysis, synthesis, reflection, etc.--must be learned by actually performing them. Classroom instruction, homework, term papers, and exams, therefore, should emphasize active intellectual participation by the student.

Lectures: Enhancement of critical thinking can be accomplished during lecture by periodically stopping and asking students searching and thoughtful questions about the material you have just presented, and then wait an appropriate time for them to respond. Do not immediately answer such questions yourself; leave sufficient time for students to think about their answer before they state it. If you constantly answer such questions yourself, students will quickly realize this and not respond. Learn students' names as quickly as possible and ask the questions of specific students that you call upon by name. If an individual cannot answer a question, help them by simplifying the question and leading them through the thought process: ask what data are needed to answer the question, suggest how the data can be used to answer the question, and then have the student use this data in an appropriate way to come up with an answer.

You may, of course, ask simple questions that merely ask students to regurgitate factual information that you have just given them in lecture. Many students have trouble with these factual questions because they are not paying attention in class, they simply have never learned how to listen to a lecture and take mental and written notes, or they don't know how to review their notes and the textbook in preparation for an exam. Perhaps the most basic type of critical thinking is knowing how to listen to a lecture actively rather than passively; many students don't know how to do this because they were never taught it and they were able to get through the educational system to their present situation--your class--without having to practice it. (A good book to read or suggest to students that they read is How to Speak, How to Listen by Mortimer J. Adler.) It is probably wise to begin asking the factual type of question so that students will realize that they have to pay attention. However, the goal of critical thinking requires that you eventually ask questions that require students to think through a cause and effect or premise and conclusion type of argument. This obliges them to reason from data or information they now possess through the lecture to reach new conclusions or understanding about the topic. For example, in chemistry, after presenting information about chemical reactions, you could ask students to describe chemical reactions that occur to them or near them everyday by the combination of commonplace chemical materials. Ask them to explain what type of reaction it is (oxidation, reduction, etc.) using whatever knowledge they possess of the reactant materials and their new knowledge of chemical reactions.

Dr. Dennis Huston of Rice University, winner of numerous teaching awards, recommends asking such questions in class. He complains that we teach students to be mere receivers of information from the instructor, rather than getting them to talk about and trust their own thoughts about the subject matter. Huston states that thoughtful and searching questions often have uncertain and ambiguous answers; this is more true in his area of study (literature) than in math and science, but the concept is the same. Rather than condition students to value only what the instructor says, get them to think deeply about the topic and value what they think and feel. Teach so that students think their ideas matter. Ask them to make connections and recognize patterns. They will experience a responsibility for their own education and think about what they learn and read. Students will be involved with their own learning, will feel deeply about it, and learn to value and trust their own thoughts and ideas. These recommendations are a perfect application of promoting critical thinking.

After lecture but before the class ends, ask students to write one-minute papers on the most significant thing they learned in class today and what single thing they still feel confused about. Dr. Huston says this is the single most important exercise you can do. You get immediate feedback about what the students are learning and what they still need to understand (technically, this is an application of what is called "classroom research" or "classroom assessment," the deliberate discovery of what and how much students are learning and of how you are teaching). He says it also improves their writing. In our present case, of course, this exercise improves critical thinking.

In class, encourage questions from students. Always respond postively to questions; never brush them off or belitte the questioner. Instead, praise the questioner (for example, say "Good question!" or "I bet a lot of you want to know that"). Questions from students mean they are thinking critically about what you are saying; encourage that thinking!

During lecture, bring in historical and philosophical information about math and science that enables students to understand that all scientific and mathematical knowledge was gained by someone practicing critical thinking in the past, sometimes by acts of great courage or tedious painstaking work in the face of seemingly insurmountable difficulties.

Laboratories: Many science courses have laboratories connected with them. Science laboratory exercises are all excellent for teaching critical thinking. The reasons should be obvious. Here, the student learns the scientific method by acually practicing it. This method of teaching critical thinking is so clear and obvious that it seems odd that critical thinking is not promoted more in primary and secondary education by simply beginning science instruction in the first grade and requiring that students take more science courses. You will have to decide for yourself why this isn't the case. Since laboratories automatically teach critical thinking to some degree, we will spend no more time on this topic.

Homework: Innumerable opportunities exist to promote critical thinking by homework assignments. For reading homework, Dr. William T. Daly recommends that you provide students the general questions you want answered before they begin reading, and insist that they organize their notes around these questions. Require that students transform the information and make it their own by requiring them to paraphrase, summarize, or outline all reading assignments. He suggests that you can grade their written efforts with oral quizes that can be structured to require abstract conceptualization and graded as students speak, for most students will prepare carefully in order to avoid failing repeatedly in public. You may also, of course, collect, grade, and return their written efforts.

As stated above, getting students to write more is the best, and perhaps the easiest, way to enhance critical thinking (this is also the answer to the question, "How did students learn critical thinking before there were formal critical thinking exercises and modules?"). Writing forces students to organize their thoughts and think critically about the material. Ask students to write short papers about pertinent topics, review science articles, even paraphrase news articles and textbook chapters. These exercises can be as elaborate as you wish to make them. For example, Drs. Robin W. Tyser and William J. Cerbin (1991,Bioscience, v. 41, no. 1, p. 41-46, "Critical thinking exercises for introductory biology courses") propose the assignment of "science news exercises" designed to promote critical thinking. Students are asked to read a short science news article taken from the popular media (newspaper, science magazine, etc.), contemplate a list of take-home questions that include one or two hypothetical claims about the article, and a week later take a short quiz made up of questions selected from the list. The instructor prepares the questions and copies and distributes them and the news article to the students at biweekly intervals about six or seven times a semester. The authors state, "The ultimate goal of these exercises is to improve students ability to compose a concise, logically persuasive line of reasoning about why a claim should be either conditionally accepted or not accepted." They point out that their's and others' critical thinking exercises have been empirically demonstrated to develop science-related thinking skills in a course without sacrificing the disciplinary content. For other examples of this type, please see W. R. Statkiewicz and R. D. Allen, 1983, "Practical exercises to develop critical thinking skills," Journal of College Science Teaching, vol. 12, p. 262-266, and M. P. Donovan and R. D. Allen, 1989, "Critical thinking questions for examinations and exercises," p. 13-16, in L. W. Crow, editor, Enhancing Critical Thinking in the Sciences, Society for College Science Teachers.

Quantitative Exercises: Problem solving is critical thinking; thus, courses such as mathematics, chemistry, and physics, that require the solution of various mathematical problems, automatically teach critical thinking to some extent just by following the traditional curriculum. When students are required to solve math problems, they are practicing critical thinking, whether they know it or not. Mathematics, chemistry, and physics problems belong, of course, to only a limited subset of critical thinking, but this subset is an important one. Indeed, all science courses--including those that do not traditionally require mathematical problem-solving skills at the introductory level, such as biology, geology, oceanography, astronomy, and environmental science--should begin to incorporate some mathematical problems in the curriculum. Asking students to solve math problems in a science gets them thinking about nature and reality in empirical and quantitative terms, key components of critical thinking.

One point, however, has been made by mathematics professor Dr. Robert H. DeVore. Do not, he says, make the mistake of believing that teaching mathematical manipulation alone will lead to critical thinking. Many arithmetical and mathematical problems and exercises will give the student the facility to manipulate numbers, but will not teach critical thinking. Dr. DeVore believes that mathematical word problems, that ask the student to approach the empirical world from a numerical or quantitative viewpoint, are essential to enhancing critical thinking. Indeed, he feels that math students who do not intend to take higher-level math courses should be educated in the context of word problems to the greatest extent possible. Obviously, students who are given math problems to solve in the sciences are essentially working on word problems, so the point is automatically made here.

Here are some examples of mathematical word problems prepared by Dr. DeVore (1-5) and Dr. John B. Scott (6-10) that were specifically devised to enhance critical thinking:

1. Show that to convert a Celsius temperature (C°) to a Fahrenheit temperature (F°), you can double C°, deduct 10% from the result, and add 32°.

2. Bob buys an item for X dollars. He raises the price 15% and sells to Tom. Tom lowers the price he paid by 15% and sells back to Bob. Bob's gain on the two transactions is $2,812.50. What is the value of X?

3. Does a(bc) = (ab)c on a calculator? First, use variables of your own choosing. Then, try using a = 10-60, b = 10-60, and c = 1060. On my calculator (Sharp EL-506A), the left side of the equation is 10-6 and the right side is 0.

4. Does a+(b+c) = (a+b)+c on a calculator? Again, use variables of your own choosing. Now, try using a = 1, b = 1020, c = -1020. On my calculator, the left side of the equation is 1 and the right side is 0.

5. Is any law of algebra correct on a calculator?

6. Using a standard non-digital watch or clock, at what exact time in hours, minutes, and seconds are the hour and minute hands precisely coincident after 3:00 ?

7. A merchant has a square carpet priced at $1.00 per square foot and a rectangular carpet, with length three times its width, priced at $1.50 per square foot. The combined area of the carpets is 112 square feet, and the value of the rectangular carpet is $8.00 more than the value of the square carpet. Find the dimensions of each carpet.

8. Two airports A and B are 400 miles apart, and B is due east of airport A. A plane flew from A to B in 2 hours and then returned to airport A in 2 1/2 hours. If the wind blew from due west with a constant velocity during the entire trip, find the speed of the the plane in still air and the speed of the wind.

9. A boat can travel 36 miles downstream in 1 hour and 48 minutes, but requires 4 hours for the return trip upstream. Assuming the boat and the stream have constanat velocities, find the velocity of the stream and the velocity of the boat in still water.

10. The periods of time required for two painters to paint one square yard of floor differ by one minute. Together, they can paint 27 square yards in one hour. How long does it take each painter to paint one square yard?

Term Papers: Term papers promote critical thinking among students by requiring that they acquire, synthesize, and logically analyze information, and that they then present this information and their conclusions in written form. Term papers are not traditionally required in math and science courses, although they may be and perhaps should be. We math and science instructors really don't require that students write very much and, when we do, don't requre that they use correct spelling, punctuation, grammar, and syntax. At the very least, we should allow term papers as extra credit to give students a means to make up poor exam grades. Students who are doing poorly always ask if there is anything they can do to make up their grade; tell them from the first day that an optional term paper--of appropriate style, content, and length--will enable them to improve their grade in the course. Tell them that poor spelling, grammar, punctuation, syntax, and form will result in lesser credit. This technique can be used in any math or science course and is strongly recommended as a way to improve students' critical thinking skills. Perhaps as they research and write it, they will begin to think critically about the benefits of keeping up with lectures and studying for exams.

Examinations: Examinations should require that students write or, at least, think. For written exams, short- and long-answer essay questions are the obvious solution. For example, Dr. James T. Hunter, a biology professor, typically uses a few short-answer essay questions on each exam that test the ability of students to analyze information and draw conclusions. This commonly-used technique, by itself, helps to teach critical thinking. Some examples of these questions are as follows:

1. Using diagrams and/or descriptions, describe the synthesis of a protein beginning at the DNA level and ending with a finished protein.

2. Contrast the relative advantages and disadvantages of the light and electron microscopes.

3. Explain the importance of plasmids, biologically and in genetic engineering.

4. In your own words, give at least six ground rules for the collection of clinical specimens for microbiological studies.

But other possibilities exist. For example, Dr. Hunter modified some of his essay questions to challenge the student's critical thinking even more. He changed Question 4 above to the following:

4. Lab technician Jim collects a culture from a patient on which the doctor previously operated. Jim carefully collects pus from a wound on the leg of the patient using a toothpick and then, seeing another wound on the face of the patient, washes the face wound with iodine and, using the same toothpick, collects serum from that wound. Jim drops the toothpick into a tube of nutrient broth, puts the name of the doctor on the broth culture tube, and takes it to the lab on the way home from work. List the mistakes Jim made.

In an experiment designed to further encourage critical thinking among students, Dr. Hunter included a take-home bonus question. These questions were chosen "to go beyond the lecture material and to force use of the book and lecture notes to arrive at and phrase a reasoned answer to a complicated question." This is an example of an essay question written specifically to enhance critical thinking. But please remember, almost any essay question, including those less elaborate than this, will serve to promote critical thinking. This is because writing, in itself, promotes critical thinking.

Finally, let us consider multiple-choice questions. Although these are constantly characterized as being inimical to the promulgation of critical thinking, the fact remains that they must often be used for exams. Large class sizes and student expectation of impartial grading are the two primary reasons to rely on multiple-choice questions. It is therefore encouraging to learn that multiple-choice questions can serve to enhance critical thinking if they are designed correctly. Let us examine some examples prepared by Dr. Steven D. Schafersman. First, as counter-examples, the following two questions do not promote critical thinking, because they rely solely on simple memorization:

1. The nucleus of an atom is composed of

a. protons and ions
b. neutrons and electrons
c. protons and electrons
d. isotopes and ions
e. neutrons and protons

2. The most abundant rock-forming mineral in the Earth's crust is

a. quartz
b. clay
c. feldspar
d. calcite
e. olivine

The following questions do promote critical thinking, because they ask the student to perform some reasoning along with the memorization:

3. If you drilled a well 8 kilometers deep and encountered rock of the mantle, your drilling rig would be

a. far offshore in the deep ocean
b. on the coastal plain near a continent's shoreline
c. on a mountain range
d. in a deep valley or basin near the center of a continent
e. nearshore in a subduction zone

4. Although 95% of the crust of the Earth is composed of either igneous or metamorphic rock, 75% of the exposed surface of the continental crust is sedimentary rock. This is because

a. erosion of surface soil and rocks has produced a veneer of sediments over most of the Earth, and lithification of these sediments has produced sedimentary rock strata
b. the temperature of the Earth increases downward, leading to the creation of vast amounts of igneous and metamorphic rocks
c. oceanic crust, which covers about 70% of the Earth's surface, is largely composed of igneous rocks, such as basalt, which forms at oceanic ridges
d. constitute such a small percentage of the surface of the Earth that they contribute much less material to the surface than do physical and chemical precipitation of sediment

5. Of the following areas, the one least likely to be affected by a catastrophic mudflow is

a. the Ozark Mountains of SW Missouri and NW Arkansas
b. the central Argentine Andes
c. the Cordilleras of Colombia
d. the Cascade Range of N California, Oregon, and Washington
e. the Texas Hill Country west of Austin

6. Which of the following is least likely to either trigger or enhance a mass-wasting process?

a. an earthquake
b. a prolonged period of drought
c. marine erosion of a cliff face
d. rapid tectonic uplift
e. abundant precipitation in a brief period

7. Which of the following desert proceses is most essential to the production of loess?

a. deflation
b. saltation
c. rolling
d. oxidation
e. solution

The idea here is not profound. Many of you probably use this type of multiple-choice "think question" already. They simply ask that the student read the information provided in the question, examine the alternative answers, and perform one or more acts of reason in addition to any memorization necessary. Choosing among alternatives in multiple-choice exams, as in real life and any other intellectual pursuit, should involve more than memorization. Please design some of your multiple-choice questions in the future with this in mind.

Copyright © 1991 by Steven D. Schafersman


Steven D. Schafersman

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Asian Philosophy and Critical Thinking: Divergence or Convergence?

Soraj Hongladarom

Department of Philosophy
Chulalongkorn University


Introduction

It is widely recognized nowadays that critical thinking has become a necessary ingredient in all levels of education. Educators and educational policy makers agree that one of the desirable goals of education is that students are able to think critically. In Thailand, many have felt the need to inculcate critical thinking more seriously in educational curricula. Thais have gone so far as to include a clause in the newly promulgated Constitution that a bill on education be passed by Parliament. At the moment the act is being considered by various factors and agencies. The core of the proposed act is the idea that the students be able to think critically and independently. Although there are widespread disagreements on what critical thinking actually is,[1] there is an agreement that it has become very important in the world deluged by huge amount of information (Hongladarom 1998b).

This acknowledgement of the value of critical thinking has also reached the countries of Asia, whose cultural traditions are very different from that of the West. Some Western educators who teach at schools or universities in a number of Asian countries have voiced their difficulties and problems they encounter while trying to teach critical thinking and other related skills to Asian students. Bruce Davidson (1995) argues that a set of Japanese cultural factors act as a kind of barrier against teaching critical thinking to students. Atkinson (1997) goes so far as to argue that critical thinking is culturally specific, and is a part of the social practices of the West having no place within Asian cultures, which do not adopt such practices. What these educators have in common is the feeling that some elements in Asian cultures do prevent the full realization of critical thinking skills in the students. Most of these elements perceived by Western educators in Asia are quite well known--the beliefs that teachers are superior and always right, that knowledge is not to be made here and now, but exists eternally, so to speak, to be handed down by teachers, that social harmony is to be preferred rather than asking probing questions--to mention just a few.

Is critical thinking really culture specific? Can the traditional belief systems of Asia respond to the challenge of the modern world while still retaining their distinctive identities? Are Asian philosophy and critical thinking necessary divergent or possibly convergent? These are very significant question not just for Asian cultures, but for understanding how cultures of the world respond to globalization. In addition the question also has a bearing on the problematic relation between critical thinking and the cultural milieux in which it happens to be embedded.

In this paper, I attempt to argue that critical thinking is not necessarily incompatible with Asian traditional belief systems. In fact I will show that both India and China do have their own indigenous traditions of logical and argumentative thinking. Since the logical traditions within both Indian and Chinese cultures were perceived to be not conducive to their respective ideals, they were eventually supplanted by the more dominant traditions which did not emphasize criticism or argumentation as much as social harmony or intuitive insights. I will further try to show that, since the logical traditions are already there in the major Asian cultural traditions, they can and should be reexamined, reinterpreted and adapted to the contemporary situation. This would be an answer to the Western educators who have found no such tradition in the East.

Logical Tradition in India and China

It is widely known that India had a highly advanced logical tradition, spanning more than two thousand years. The successes of Indian mathematicians and computer programmers are perhaps due to the fact that logic and critical thinking have been integral to the Indian way of thinking since time immemorial. Such an integration can also be witnessed in the fondness of Indians for talking and debating. Tscherbatsky (1962: 31-34) tells us that in the times of Dignaga and Dharmakirti, two of the greatest Buddhist logicians, the fate of entire monasteries depended on public debates. According to Tscherbatsky, Dignaga won his fame and royal support through his defeat of the brahmin Sudurjaya at Nalanda Monastery (31-34).

In another vein, Matilal (1990: 1-8) argues that the Indian logical tradition is entirely home grown, since there is no evidence of India's being influenced by Aristotelian ideas. Matilal also shows that many topics which are of interest by contemporary logicians and philosophers today were discussed and researched into with sophistication by Indian scholars. Such topics include theory of inference, empty names, reference and existence, perception, knowledge of the external world, substance, causality, and many others (Matilal 1990). Moreover, Tscherbatsky's (1962) work, dealing mainly with the works of Dignaga and Dharmakirti iillustrates that India is one of the great logical and philosophical civilizations of the world.

There are a number of topics which both traditions discovered independently of each other. For example, Matilal notes that the counterpart of the Aristotelian syllogism is the "five-membered argument" found in such texts as Caraka and Nyayasutra. Instead of the three propositions found in Aristotelian syllogism, the five-membered argument consists of five propositions, the first of which is the conclusion, and the last repeating what is already stated in the first. The remaining three propositions in between are the premises. Here is one example of the five-membered argument cited by Matilal (1990: 5):

1. There is fire on this mountain.
2. For, there is smoke there.
3. Smoke goes with fire always (or, in all cases, or in all places): witness, kitchen.
4. This is also a case of smoke.
5. Therefore, there is fire there (on the mountain).

Logicians will immediately be able to reconstruct this argument in the familiar Aristotelian form as follows:

The place on the mountain is a place where there is smoke.
A place where there is smoke is a place where there is fire.
Therefore, the place on the mountain is a place where there is fire.

Matilal, however, notes that there is at least a dissimilarity between the Indian and the Aristotelian argument forms presented here. For instance, he says that the conclusion of the Indian argument form is in the form of `singular proposition,' (i.e., modified by demonstratives like `this' or `that') whereas that of the Aristotelian syllogism is either universal or particular (i.e., modified by quantifiers like `all' or `some'). But the dissimilarity here could be amended, as indexicals (terms like `this' or `that' which relies on the context of utterance for their full meaning) could be dispensed with by supplying the required information on the context in which they are uttered. Thus it could be safely stated that the Indian logical tradition fully comprehended the essence, so to speak, of logic, which is the concept of validity and the basic valid argument form.

Another of the world's great civilizations, China, also had its own indigenous and independent logical tradition. Two of China's logical school of thought are the Mohists and the Logicians. The former was founded by Mo Ti, who lived between 479 to 381 B.C., during the Warring States period of Chinese history (Ronan 1978: 114). Among the typical Chinese scholars the Mohists are better known for their doctrine of universal love and the condemnation of offensive war rather than their interests and achievements in the physical sciences. In the latter Needham reports that the Mohists went very far toward realizing the thought system which was prerequisite for modern science. Most significantly, the Mohists appeared to be in grasp of the concepts of deduction and induction. They viewed the former as a way of thinking which follows a `mental model,' which guarantees that whoever follows it will never fail to be right in their thinking. Here is an example of reasoning based on following such mental model:

Model-thinking consists in following the methods [of Nature].
What is followed in "model-thinking" are the methods.
Therefore if the methods are truly followed by the "model-thinking" [literally: hit in the middle], the reasoning will be correct.

But if the methods are not truly followed by the "model-thinking," the reasoning will be wrong (Ronan 1978: 119).

On the other hand, the Mohists also recognized the value of `extension' which is a kind of reasoning from the known examples and `extend' it to unknown cases similar to them:

Extension is considering that that which one has not yet received [i.e. a new phenomenon] is identical [fromthe point of view of classification] with those which one has already received, and admitting it (Ronan 1978: 119).

It is clear then that the former is an instance of deductive thinking, while the latter represents the basic idea of inductive thinking.

The two most well known representatives of the Logicians are Hui Shih and Kungsun Lung. The former is known for his paradoxes resembling that of Zeno, and his writings were designed to shock and to illustrate deep logical point. For example, Hui Shih's writing that "The Heavens are as low as the Earth; mountains are on the same level as marshes" (Ronan 1978: 122) could be regarded as a way of illustrating the fact that, viewed from the cosmic perspective, the sentence written by Hui Shih here is actually true. Other pieces of his writings concern what and how we perceive:

Fire is not hot.
Eyes do not see (Ronan 1978: 122).

These are designed to lead one to think that what is hot in fire may well not be in the fire at all, but is located within our tactile perception of it. And the factor that actually does the seeing is not the eyes themselves, but the consciousness or whatever that gives rise to the perception.

Similarly, Kungsun Lung had a system of logical and paradoxical thinking that could well serve as the foundation of modern science, according to Needham. The following excerpts show that Kungsun Lung grasped such concepts as the universality and unlocalizability of number and universals and their contrasts with particulars which are their instances. Most interestingly, Kungsun Lung's discussion of changes in Nature could well point to modern scientific way of thought:

Q Is it permissible to say that a change is not a change?
A It is.
Q Can "right" associating itself [with something] be called change?
A It can.
Q What is it that changes?
A It is "right."
...
Q If "right" has changed, how can you still call it "right"? And if it has not changed, how can you speak of a change?
A "Two" would have no right if there were no left. Two contains `left-and-right.' A ram added to an ox is not a horse. An ox added to a ram is not a fowl (Ronan 1978: 121-122).

Here one finds a discussion of the unchangeability of universals and their distinction from particulars. One thing, A, located to the right of another thing, B, would form two things, A-and-B. This thing, A-and-B would undergo a change if A happens to move to the left of B. What is changed here is the relation between A and B. However, the Right itself is changeless, even though the particulars forming right or left relation to each other do. Thus, a ram added to an ox would still be two animals, and won't become either a horse or a fowl. The changelessness of universals is a different matter altogether from the mutability of particular things. Kungsun Lung's writing here is reminiscent of Western medieval treatises on logic and the problem of universals, such as those of Abelard or Duns Scotus.

No matter how similar or different these Asian writings on logic and philosophy are from those of Europe, it is certain that both India and China do indeed have rigorous and profound systems of logic and critical thinking, systems which could well form a launching pad for advanced scientific research and innovation that actually took place in the West. Thus Atkinson's argument that critical thinking is culturally specific to the West is clearly not borne out by historical facts and thus is mistaken. However, when we look at the situations in the Asian countries today, especially in Thailand whose cultural tradition is mostly influenced by Buddhism, which originated within the Indian philosophical and religious milieu, Atkinson seems to be right in that there is a felt need for teaching Thai students to be able to think critically. McGuire (1998) argues that there is a need to teach critical thinking and that critical thinking can be taught to Asian students because it does not necessarily go against the grain of local cultures and contains universal elements which any local culture can find acceptable. If critical thinking is already there in these cultural traditions, then why are there concerns for introducing it to them? Something must have happened to these cultural traditions so that there feels a need to bring in the skills and practices of critical thinking from outside. Or is it really the need to reintroduce and to reacquaint these traditions with something which is clearly their own, but is somehow lost?

Needham's Grand Question and Fuller's Interpretation

An adequate investigation into what actually caused the decline of the logical traditions in India or China would comprise one thick book. However, I believe that a glimpse toward an answer could be found if we compare the dominant positions in the two civilizations with the logical traditions. In India, the logical schools, Nyaya, Mimamsa, together with the Buddhist logic and dialectic schools of Dignaga, Dharmakirti and Nagarjuna never gained the ascendancy when compared to the other traditions such as the Vedanta. This may be due to the fact that the teachings and the disputations of the logical schools were limited to the monks or brahmins who practiced them. And when the logical tradition had to compete with other traditions which could garner more popular appeal, it is quite conceivable that the remote logical schools would lose support. Perhaps in India the tradition of logical and critical thinking was limited to the élite educated class in such a way that the general population knew nothing of it, and this could be one explanation, though very sketchy and tentative, as to why modern scientific thinking did not develop in India. For science to develop, there must be a tendency toward a comprehension of all of Nature through a few general laws which could be learned and understood by anyone. The method of learning such laws must be such that no one is excluded from studying except through his own intellectual capabilities.

In China, Needham suggests that the reasons for modern science's lack of development are due to historical, economic, social and cultural factors (Needham 1969: 190-217). Needham rightly dismisses the interpretation of Europe's eventual mastery of modern scientific techniques in geographical or racial determinism. The scientific and mathematical achievements in both India and China during the ancient and medieval periods is so great that it is hardly conceivable at all to think of Europe's success in terms of her `destiny' or `superior level of advancement' as propagated by the Hegelian tradition. On the other hand, Needham seems to believe that it is more a matter of luck that Europe could eventually mastered the arts of modern science and became dominant. Needham writes:

The further I penetrate into the detailed history of the achievements of Chinese science and technology before the time when, like all other ethnic cultural rivers, they flowed into the river of modern science, the more convinced I become that the cause for the break-through occurring only in Europe was connected with the special social, intellectual and economic conditions prevailing there at the Renaissance, and can never be explained by any deficiencies either of the Chinese mind or of the Chinese intellectual and philosophical tradition. In many ways this was much more congruent with modern science than was the world-outlook of Christendom (Needham 1969: 191).

The "special social, intellectual and economic conditions" that explain Europe's success are nowhere necessarily attached to the historical development of Europe. They seem only to be those that Europeans adopted, consciously or not, in response to their historical, social, and mercantile needs. Those needs apparently were not in the minds of Indians or Chinese, whose priorities for their civilization as a whole seemed to be something else. Thus, instead of looking for a unifying theory capable of explaining and predicting natural phenomenon so that men could harness the power of Nature to their own material needs as well as feel a sense of mastery when Nature is thus comprehended, Indians and Chinese chose to put the ideals of their civilizations in another way.

The summum bonum of the Indian philosophical tradition, attainment of Moksha or Liberation, is quite contrary to the ideals and presuppositions of modern scientific thinking. Instead of looking for the way to liberate oneself from the endless cycle of rebirths through strenuous regimens of self discipline, Europeans sought to advance their own self interests which are more inclined to the mundane. In China, the rapid transformation from feudalism to state bureaucratism, coupled with the pervasiveness of the Confucian ethos, while hugely successful in preserving China's cultural identity amidst the great variety of people and localities, nonetheless made it the case that material innovations and proto-scientific and logical theories would be given scant attention. Writings on such matters are relegated to the `Miscellaneous' category by the mandarin scholars who put the highest priority to moralistic, ethical, or historical writings (Ronan 1978: 19)

This interpretation, which is focused on the contingent character of the rise of modern science in Europe, is regarded by Steve Fuller as the "underdeterminist" one. According to Fuller, the reason why China did not develop modern science was that it was not specifically promoted (Fuller 1997: 80-88). He contrasts this with the "overdeterminist" mode--the kind of explanation that seeks to explain the lack of progress of modern science through the idea that it was specifically prevented from occurring. Thus, according to the former outlook, the reason science did not develop in China was because historical, social, economic conditions were such that they were simply incompatible with its rise. This could be due to the Chinese not putting a high priority on things scientific. On the other hand, the overdeterminist would assume that science is part of a culture's destiny which would materialize anyway if the circumstances were favorable. However, in the case of China these circumstances were not favorable, blocking science's potential development. To view the history and development of science in the latter mode would mean that science is a necessary part of a culture's path of development, which is the same for all cultures. A culture in which science successfully develops is thus viewed as more "advanced" than another where the development of science is somehow stinted. On the other hand, the underdeterminist would argue that such a picture of each cultural entity racing along the same path smells too much of teleology and "God's design" to be tenable. Instead of so viewing, each culture should be regarded as having its own path not necessarily shared with others.

Since critical thinking and modern scientific thinking are closely related, discussions of the historical rise of science in various cultures are directly related to our investigation of whether critical thinking is compatible with the major Asian cultural traditions. Discussions on the rise of modern science seems to enable us to see, analogously, how the tradition of critical thinking arose and how they were promoted or discourgated. If the underdeterminist mode of interpretation is accepted, then the lack of critical thinking tradition in Asia could be explained by the fact that somehow members of these traditions decided not to go put critical thinking high on their list of priorities. This despite the fact that critical thinking skills could be found deep within the traditions themselves.

Asian Philosophy and Critical Thinking: Divergence or Convergence?

Hence, the values typically associated with Asian culture such as social harmony and deference to the elders and teachers are thus seen as consequences of the cultures deciding to put a certain set of priorities above others. Social harmony was instrumental in bringing about the cultural cohesiveness which is the most distinctive characteristic of Chinese culture. It is valued above most other types of values because it goes hand in hand with social stability, whose alternative is perceived as chaos and general disruption of social structure. The prioritization of social harmony can also be seen in other Asian cultures such as the Thai one, and results in Thais trying as far as they possibly can to avoid open conflicts and disagreements. In the case of China, since all the elements which could bring about the rise of modern science were in place, it is quite clear that the Chinese culture actually chose not to go along the path taken by the Europeans. The decision made by a culture to adopt a particular system of beliefs and practices certainly did not happen suddenly, as if at one particular moment of history, members of a culture had a meeting and declared their cultures' adoption of this or that set. The decision occurred gradually throughout the historical development of a culture, and can be seen in China adopting Confucianism rather than the more materialistic and scientifically inclined Taoism and Mohism, and in India adopting the more mystical doctrine emphasizing the role of meditation and private insights rather than publicly demonstrable methods of knowing. Reasons for such decision are enormously complicated, but it is hardly conceivable that China was somehow destined to lag behind Europe in the science race due to factors they could not control.

This may be taken to show that critical thinking and Asian thought are divergent. If the Asian cultures chose not to go along the path where critical thinking is one milestone, then both do not seem to go with each other, and Atkinson may be vindicated when he argues that critical thinking is a part of Western culture only. If the Asian cultures prioritize sets of values which are incompatible with critical thinking, and if they freely chose those sets over the set adopted by Europeans for whatever reasons, then it appears that critical thinking would belong to European culture only, and to adopt it to Asian cultures would be tantamount to importing foreign ideas and practices to alien lands. Thus, Atkinson's argument seems prima facie to fit well with the underdeterminist position.

This line of reasoning, however, would be valid only if what a culture decided as its own set of priorities at one time will always remain so for all other times. If the Thai culture, for example, once decided that social harmony should take precedence over critical argumentation and open debates, then critical thinking practices would be forever alien to it if the members of the culture always agree that decisions in the past are not to be amended no matter what. But that is surely a very unreasonable position to take. Cultures, like humans, often make decisions which later are amended or revoked, with new decisions made, when things are not the same any longer. Decisions to prioritize one set of values over another are not etched in stone, but even so the stone can be broken down or else taken to a museum or a pedestal where it loses its real meaning. Decisions at one time reflect the circumstances prevailing at that time, and to abide by past decisions with no prospect of adapting or making new decisions in response to changing circumstances would make the culture frozen and unable to participate. Opting not to amend their past decisions, a culture would in effect be telling the world that it is constructing a wall around itself, giving nothing to the world and receiving nothing. However, sociological and economic conditions of the contemporary world do not permit such a scenario from happening. Cultures need to change themselves, not merely to survive, but to prosper and to permit better lives for their members.

Consequently, Asian cultures and critical thinking are divergent only if the former opt not to amend their decisions. But since we are talking only about decisions, then it is not difficult at all to conceive that cultures would make new decisions in response to changing times. Doing so would make the two more convergent. Hence, the divergence and convergence, after all, depend on what decisions a culture makes. There is nothing necessarily attached to a culture's path along history that makes it essentially divergent or convergent from the modern critical thinking tradition, or from any tradition for that matter. Since the philosophy of a culture is but an abstract and theoretical expression and justification of the culture's decision to choose one set of priorities over another, Asian philosophy and critical thinking are neither necessarily divergent nor necessarily convergent.

Conclusion

Any attempt to introduce, or we should say, to bring back critical thinking practices to the cultures of Asia would, therefore, begin within the cultures themselves. This is in line with the underdeterminist idea that each culture has its own peculiar development path which is not necessarily shared with others. The missionary zeal of propagating the "truth" of one culture to another is a misplaced one which, apart from sounding imperialistic and patronizing, is something the contemporary sensibility cannot accept. Thus the first step in such an attempt must consist of a series of arguments designed to show to most members of the culture where critical thinking is to be introduced that critical thinking is really good. But to do that would at least require one full substantial paper, something which is definitely out of scope of this present paper. Besides, to argue that critical thinking is actually a good thing to have is difficult, because it may run counter to the deeply entrenched belief that critical thinking is just a label for the confrontational and disputatious mode of life which the culture finds unpalatable.

Though the task is difficult, I believe that it is unavoidable. As an insider of my own cultural tradition, I am trying to convince the members of my culture of the value of critical thinking and its important role in educating the Thai citizens for the increasingly globalized world of today and tomorrow. An important part of my argument for integrating critical thinking and its corollary belief systems to the Thai culture is the idea that Thais should view the elements of their culture which could present the most serious obstacles to critical thinking as "benign fiction." That is, elements such as reverence of the elders and the belief in social hierarchy and so on should be viewed in the same way as a modern person views his or her own traditional customs and ceremonies. One is in one sense a part of the culture where the ceremonies happen, but in another sense one is detached from it since one knows that they only serve a certain function in one's culture and since one knows about other cultures to be able to detach oneself from one's own customs and ceremonies.

Such an argument would naturally require a lot more space and time than is available here. What I hope to have accomplished in this paper, however, is much more modest. It is, as we have seen, an argument that Asian philosophy and Asian thought in general do not necessarily conflict with critical thinking and its presuppositions. Furthermore, it is the contingent making of decisions throughout the history of each culture itself, which, I believe, is flexible and adaptive enough to effect substantial changes for the future.[2]

References

Atkinson, D. 1997. A Critical Approach to Critical Thinking. TESOL Quarterly 31, 71-94.

Blair, J. Anthony and Ralph H. Johnson. 1991. Misconceptions of Informal Logic: A Reply to McPeck. Teaching Philosophy 14.1, 35-52.

Davidson, Bruce. 1995. Critical Thinking Education Faces the Challenge of Japan. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 14.3, 31 pars.,http://www.shss.montclair.edu/inquiry/spr95/davidson.html.

Fuller, Steve. 1997. Science. Birmingham: Open UP.

Hatcher, Donald. 1995a. Critical Thinking and Epistemic Obligations. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 14.3, 38 pars., http://www.shss.montclair.edu/inquiry/spr95/hatcher2.html.

Hatcher, Donald. 1995b. Should Anti-Realists Teach Critical Thinking?. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 14.4, 21 pars., http://www.shss.montclair.edu/inquiry/summ95/hatcher.html.

Hongladarom, Soraj. 1998a. Critical Thinking and the Realism/Anti-Realism Debate, http://pioneer.chula.ac.th/~hsoraj/web/CT.html.

Hongladarom, Soraj. 1998b. Humanistic Education in Today's and Tomorrow's World. Manusya: Journal of Humanities, 1 (forthcoming).

Hostetler, Karl. 1991. Community and Neutrality in Critical Thought: A Nonobjectivist View on the Conduct and Teaching of Critical Thinking. Educational Theory, 41.1, 1-12.

Matilal, Bimal Krishna. 1990. Logic, Language and Reality: Indian Philosophy and Contemporary Issues. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

McGuire, John. 1998. Is Critical Thinking Cultural Thinking?. Unpublished ms.

McPeck, John E. 1991. What is Learned in Informal Logic?, Teaching Philosophy, 14.1, 25-34.

Needham, Joseph. 1969. The Grand Titration: Science and Society in East and West. London: Allen & Unwin.

Paul, Richard. 1993. Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Survive in a Rapidly Changing World. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Ronan, Colin A. 1978. The Shorter Science and Civilization in China: An Abridgement of Needham's Original Text. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Sutton, Robert. 1995. Realism and Other Philosophical Mantras. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 14.4, 18 pars., http://www.shss.montclair.edu/inquiry/summ95/sutton.html.

Tscherbatsky, F. Th. 1962. Buddhist Logic. New York: Dover.

Notes

[1]The literature on the nature and definitions of critical thinking are enormous. Probably the most intense debate among critical thinking experts centers around the question whether critical thinking can be a separate, autonomous academic discipline dealing with the general form of thinking to be applied by students in all of their subsequent academic endeavors, or whether it is not autonomous at all, but should always be part of substantial academic disciplines. The chief representative of the latter view, McPeck (1991), is often roundly attacked in the literature, as can be witnessed by attack by Blair and Johnson (1991) on McPeck's view. However, I believe that this line of debate gives us little in terms of how we are to understand we should take critical thinking to be, for critical thinking would be nothing if not applied to real cases, and the study of it would not be totally effective if the skills and theories peculiar to it were not abstracted and studied on their own. The more fruitful line of debate focuses on the nature of critical thinking, or the meaning of `critical thinking' itself. Richard Paul (1993) provides a definition that no one can gainsay: Critical thinking is the kind of thinking one thinks of one's thinking in order to make one's thinking better. Hatcher (1995a; 1995b) calls for the kind of critical thinking that is based on the so-called `epistemological realist' position. This is contrasted by Sutton (1995) and Hostetler (1991), who argue that critical thinking is more amenable to the anti-realist position. I have argued elsewhere that both positions mistake the actual nature of the practice of teaching critical thinking, which presupposes neither realism nor anti-realism (Hongladarom 1998a). [Back].

[2]Research for this paper was partially supported by a grant from the Silver Jubilee Fund, Chulalongkorn University. I would like to thank Prof. Somsak Panyakaew and Dr. Sutthilak Pathumraj for their support.[Back].

http://pioneer.chula.ac.th/~hsoraj/web/APPEND.html

Monday, March 29, 2010

The Dreamers are the Architects of Greatness

THE DREAMERS
---
They are the
architects of greatness. Their vision
lies within their souls. They never see
the mirages of Fact, but peer beyond
the veils and mists of doubt and pierce
the walls of unborn Time.

Makers of empire, they have fought for
bigger things than crowns and higher
seats than thrones.
They are the Argonauts, the seekers of
the priceless fleece--The Truth.
Through all the ages they have heard
the voice of destiny call to them from
the unknown vasts.


Their brains have wrought all human
miracles. In lace of stone their spires
stab the Old World's skies and with
their golden crosses kiss the sun.

They are the chosen few--the blazers of
the way--who never wear a doubt's
bandage on their eyes--who starve and
chill and hurt, but hold to courage and
to hope, because they know that there
is always proof of truth for them who
try--that only cowardice and lack of
faith can keep the seeker from his
chosen goal, but if his heart be strong
and if he dream enough and dream it
hard enoudh, he can attain, no matter

where men failed before.

Walls crumble and the empires fall.
The tidal wave sweeps from the sea and
tears a fortress from its rocks. The
rotting nations drop off Time's bough,
and only things the dreamers make live
on.


They are the Eternal Conquerors--their
vassels are the years.


-----


Herbert Kaufmam

Travel Teach and Live Life in Korea

Phitsanulok Thailand - A contemporary history

Phitsanulok is a city in the lower part of Northern Thailand rich in historical, cultural and natural resources located 377 kilometers from the nation's capital, Bangkok.

The province covers an area of 10,815 square kilometers featuring mountains, plains and forest in the east and a large fertile river basin. The Nan River, lifeline of the province, runs through the very heart of the city.

History

The city dates back to the 10th century when the Khmer ruled this region. Formerly, the city was named Song Khwae, meaning two rivers, as it was located between the Nan and the Khwae Noi River. The original location of Song Khwae city is at Wat Chulamani.

Around the year 1357, the King of Sukhothai, Phra Maha Thammaracha Lithai, decided to move the town to its present location. Since then, Phitsanulok served as a strategic border town ruled by members of the royal family.

During the Ayutthaya Period, the town played a larger role as a buffer town between Ayutthaya, the capital city, and the northern kingdom. Following administrative reform by King Borommatrailokkanat, it served as the capital city for 25 years. After that, the town was downgraded to a strategic border town.

It has played a major role in blocking the invasion of Burmese troops as well with King Naresuan the Great mobilizing troops from Phitsanulok to fight against the Burmese, who then ruled over the Siamese Kingdom, which regained independence in 1584.

...to be continued!

Edited by Ajarn Charlie

Chiang Mai, Thailand weekend

Phitsanulok's AUA Center

I dropped by today to see the AUA (American University Alumni) center here in Phitsanulok. Met the manager, Norman Edwards, who stated he had been there 26 years. The AUA center here shares facilities with the Pibulsongkram Rajabhat University and is a bit hard to find initially with the signs not really indicating you need to go up to the 3rd floor in Building 6 on the campus.

All in all, the classrooms look neat and large. Staff helpful with good English as you might hope. They can be phoned at 055-282736.

Mr. Norman also showed me a large facility being build adjacent to the campus as well as a rendition of the facility hanging on the wall near the receptionist. Seems somebody is pumping a bunch of money into a campus to train hotel staff as well as a cultural center next to it.

email: aua_phitsanulok@hotmail.com
www.auathailand.org/phitsan

Ajarn Charlie
mysticsailor@gmail.com

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Phitsanulok to Chiang Mai by Honda Wave 125



Returned from a weekend road trip to Chiang Mai this evening. Two days and 10 hours on the road total. A bit hot in the afternoons as you might expect with some light rain in the late morning on the way back.

I ride around Thailand on a Honda Wave 125 and I manage to cruise between 100-110 kph most of the time. This trip down from Chiang Mai's Railroad Station on Sunday started early at 07:25 with the odometer showing 13,248km. Headed south along the tracks towards Lumphun for 28 km, where I turned east at 09:00, and fueled up again with another 2.17l. Cost was 70 Baht and the meter showed 13,350 km.

As I have noticed everywhere I ride, roads are constantly being improved and widened. From the most southeastern border town of Hat Yai (Hat Lek/Koh Kong) to Chiang Mai, everything is being improved. This ride was no different but the road construction wasn't that big a deal on the Wave as I just scooted around any construction delays and the line of traffic that had built due to it.

The next fuel stop was at 13,433 where I took on another 1.72 liter, costing 55 Baht. I found out on the way up to Chiang Mai that along some sections gas stations are few and far between, so it is better to stop and top off instead of waiting until you are near empty.

I had one more fuel stop at 13,544 km at 12:30, not far north of Phistanulok where I took on another 2.13 liter, costing 80 Baht. It is also at the this stop that I finally figured out the whistling noise that I had been hearing when I was moving fast and let up on the throttle was the air filter cover had come loose and one of the screws was almost ready to fall out.

One interesting thing about the road as you drop into Phistanulok is that you hit an intersection called 'IndoChina Intersection', with road signs showing if you turn left and to the east, Danang, Vietnam is 1,010 km and if you turn right, Rangoon, Burma is 670 km to the west. This junction is where Hwy 11 bisects Hwy 12. Forgot the number used on these Thai highways for the 'Asia Highway' numbers.

The final count for the trip south was 337 km, hitting the railroad station in Phistanulok at 13,585 on the bike. Easy run and a lot of fun.

Ajarn Charlie
mysticsailor@gmail.com


Saturday, March 27, 2010