Critical Thinking, Taoism, & Agnostic Buddhism

[Encephalon]

I was a CT junkie as an undergrad and was lucky enough to attend the campus that hosts the annual CT conferences; always had a chance to volunteer and attend for free. Whether it's about overhauling our educational system, communicating effectively in a forum, or managing our thoughts and feelings about the Gulf oil catastrophe, CT offers as much if not more than the otherworldly philosophies. I'd be eager to discover any elements of the following traits that could be construed in any way as antithetical to spiritual values.

From http://www.criticalthinking.org/articles/valuable-intellectual-traits.cfm

 

Intellectual Traits

 

Intellectual Humility: Having a consciousness of the limits of one's knowledge, including a sensitivity to circumstances in which one's native egocentrism is likely to function self-deceptively; sensitivity to bias, prejudice and limitations of one's viewpoint. Intellectual humility depends on recognizing that one should not claim more than one actually knows. It does not imply spinelessness or submissiveness. It implies the lack of intellectual pretentiousness, boastfulness, or conceit, combined with insight into the logical foundations, or lack of such foundations, of one's beliefs.

 

 

Intellectual Courage: Having a consciousness of the need to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs or viewpoints toward which we have strong negative emotions and to which we have not given a serious hearing. This courage is connected with the recognition that ideas considered dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part) and that conclusions and beliefs inculcated in us are sometimes false or misleading. To determine for ourselves which is which, we must not passively and uncritically "accept" what we have "learned." Intellectual courage comes into play here, because inevitably we will come to see some truth in some ideas considered dangerous and absurd, and distortion or falsity in some ideas strongly held in our social group. We need courage to be true to our own thinking in such circumstances. The penalties for non-conformity can be severe.

 

 

Intellectual Empathy: Having a consciousness of the need to imaginatively put oneself in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them, which requires the consciousness of our egocentric tendency to identify truth with our immediate perceptions of long-standing thought or belief. This trait correlates with the ability to reconstruct accurately the viewpoints and reasoning of others and to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas other than our own. This trait also correlates with the willingness to remember occasions when we were wrong in the past despite an intense conviction that we were right, and with the ability to imagine our being similarly deceived in a case-at-hand.

 

 

Intellectual Integrity: Recognition of the need to be true to one's own thinking; to be consistent in the intellectual standards one applies; to hold one's self to the same rigorous standards of evidence and proof to which one holds one's antagonists; to practice what one advocates for others; and to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in one's own thought and action.

 

 

Intellectual Perseverance: Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations; firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others; a sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended period of time to achieve deeper understanding or insight.

 

 

Faith In Reason: Confidence that, in the long run, one's own higher interests and those of humankind at large will be best served by giving the freest play to reason, by encouraging people to come to their own conclusions by developing their own rational faculties; faith that, with proper encouragement and cultivation, people can learn to think for themselves, to form rational viewpoints, draw reasonable conclusions, think coherently and logically, persuade each other by reason and become reasonable persons, despite the deep-seated obstacles in the native character of the human mind and in society as we know it.

 

 

Fairmindedness: Having a consciousness of the need to treat all viewpoints alike, without reference to one's own feelings or vested interests, or the feelings or vested interests of one's friends, community or nation; implies adherence to intellectual standards without reference to one's own advantage or the advantage of one's group.

[C T]

Well presented Blasto. Its a great model to have as one's guide.

 

Just a small point: i seem to have detected an equation between high intellect with expansive consciousness somewhere in your post. Correct me if it was an erroneous read. Thanks.

[goldisheavy]

Fairmindedness: Having a consciousness of the need to treat all viewpoints alike, without reference to one's own feelings or vested interests, or the feelings or vested interests of one's friends, community or nation; implies adherence to intellectual standards without reference to one's own advantage or the advantage of one's group.

 

I disagree with this. First of all, to pretend to not have interest is intellectual dishonesty. I am willing to try to suspend my own interests at times to take a look from another point of view. So I can practice what is described here during analysis. When that's done, I will return to my own point of view and proceed from there. It's also important to keep in mind that this ability is not necessarily going to be reciprocated. You might be the only person willing to take another person's view.

 

In particular, in every case, strongly religious people absolutely refuse to take on an opposing viewpoint and therefore I am unwilling to meet these folks halfway either. They don't want to bend, and neither will I, if that's how they are.

[3bob]

I was a CT junkie as an undergrad and was lucky enough to attend the campus that hosts the annual CT conferences; always had a chance to volunteer and attend for free. Whether it's about overhauling our educational system, communicating effectively in a forum, or managing our thoughts and feelings about the Gulf oil catastrophe, CT offers as much if not more than the otherworldly philosophies. I'd be eager to discover any elements of the following traits that could be construed in any way as antithetical to spiritual values.

From http://www.criticalthinking.org/articles/valuable-intellectual-traits.cfm

 

Intellectual Traits

 

Intellectual Humility: Having a consciousness of the limits of one's knowledge, including a sensitivity to circumstances in which one's native egocentrism is likely to function self-deceptively; sensitivity to bias, prejudice and limitations of one's viewpoint. Intellectual humility depends on recognizing that one should not claim more than one actually knows. It does not imply spinelessness or submissiveness. It implies the lack of intellectual pretentiousness, boastfulness, or conceit, combined with insight into the logical foundations, or lack of such foundations, of one's beliefs.

 

 

Intellectual Courage: Having a consciousness of the need to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs or viewpoints toward which we have strong negative emotions and to which we have not given a serious hearing. This courage is connected with the recognition that ideas considered dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part) and that conclusions and beliefs inculcated in us are sometimes false or misleading. To determine for ourselves which is which, we must not passively and uncritically "accept" what we have "learned." Intellectual courage comes into play here, because inevitably we will come to see some truth in some ideas considered dangerous and absurd, and distortion or falsity in some ideas strongly held in our social group. We need courage to be true to our own thinking in such circumstances. The penalties for non-conformity can be severe.

 

 

Intellectual Empathy: Having a consciousness of the need to imaginatively put oneself in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them, which requires the consciousness of our egocentric tendency to identify truth with our immediate perceptions of long-standing thought or belief. This trait correlates with the ability to reconstruct accurately the viewpoints and reasoning of others and to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas other than our own. This trait also correlates with the willingness to remember occasions when we were wrong in the past despite an intense conviction that we were right, and with the ability to imagine our being similarly deceived in a case-at-hand.

 

 

Intellectual Integrity: Recognition of the need to be true to one's own thinking; to be consistent in the intellectual standards one applies; to hold one's self to the same rigorous standards of evidence and proof to which one holds one's antagonists; to practice what one advocates for others; and to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in one's own thought and action.

 

 

Intellectual Perseverance: Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations; firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others; a sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended period of time to achieve deeper understanding or insight.

 

 

Faith In Reason: Confidence that, in the long run, one's own higher interests and those of humankind at large will be best served by giving the freest play to reason, by encouraging people to come to their own conclusions by developing their own rational faculties; faith that, with proper encouragement and cultivation, people can learn to think for themselves, to form rational viewpoints, draw reasonable conclusions, think coherently and logically, persuade each other by reason and become reasonable persons, despite the deep-seated obstacles in the native character of the human mind and in society as we know it.

 

 

Fairmindedness: Having a consciousness of the need to treat all viewpoints alike, without reference to one's own feelings or vested interests, or the feelings or vested interests of one's friends, community or nation; implies adherence to intellectual standards without reference to one's own advantage or the advantage of one's group.

 

all fine and useful tools but even the best of such tools also needs memory, yet who of us would dare to set down memory after the tools have done their respective jobs?

[Martial Development]

Faith In Reason?

 

That's check and mate, pal.

[Spectrum]

Observations of the natural learn to forget.

[Encephalon]

Well presented Blasto. Its a great model to have as one's guide.

 

Just a small point: i seem to have detected an equation between high intellect with expansive consciousness somewhere in your post. Correct me if it was an erroneous read. Thanks.

 

It never occurred to me that the distinctions between the two could be significant. I don't believe Ken Wilber gives it too much thought. Precise definitions of terms are are essential here, of course.

[Encephalon]

I disagree with this. First of all, to pretend to not have interest is intellectual dishonesty. I am willing to try to suspend my own interests at times to take a look from another point of view. So I can practice what is described here during analysis. When that's done, I will return to my own point of view and proceed from there. It's also important to keep in mind that this ability is not necessarily going to be reciprocated. You might be the only person willing to take another person's view.

 

In particular, in every case, strongly religious people absolutely refuse to take on an opposing viewpoint and therefore I am unwilling to meet these folks halfway either. They don't want to bend, and neither will I, if that's how they are.

 

I'm fairly certain this is a misreading of the intention. The reference in question is about vested interests, not general interest.

These are cognitive tools we use to maintain balance in the midst of unsound reasoning. They are not courtesies that we extend or withhold depending upon irrational thoughts of those we might contend with.

[Encephalon]

all fine and useful tools but even the best of such tools also needs memory, yet who of us would dare to set down memory after the tools have done their respective jobs?

 

I'm not entirely clear about what you're suggesting, but these are tools that we practice like any other skill, and the more we practice, the better we become at using them.

[Encephalon]

Faith In Reason?

 

That's check and mate, pal.

 

The usage of terms is perfectly adequate here. They aren't prescribing blind adherence to an untested set of principles, but a conviction that the use of reason can avoid the pitfalls of irrational thinking.

[Encephalon]

Observations of the natural learn to forget.

 

So, let us give this thread a proper burial. Thanks.

[Martial Development]

The usage of terms is perfectly adequate here. They aren't prescribing blind adherence to an untested set of principles, but a conviction that the use of reason can avoid the pitfalls of irrational thinking.

 

The chosen terms themselves are not the problem. I am not interested enough to deconstruct the entire piece, only to point out that the foundation and basis of all their reasoning is desire, which they reframe as faith, the significance which you then de-emphasize, a stance which seems inappropriate in a thread discussing "Agnostic Buddhism". How about applying a little critical theory to this love letter for critical thinking? Or, at least a few self-directed rounds of the "5 Whys" game?

[Encephalon]

The chosen terms themselves are not the problem. I am not interested enough to deconstruct the entire piece, only to point out that the foundation and basis of all their reasoning is desire, which they reframe as faith, the significance which you then de-emphasize, a stance which seems inappropriate in a thread discussing "Agnostic Buddhism". How about applying a little critical theory to this love letter for critical thinking? Or, at least a few self-directed rounds of the "5 Whys" game?

 

Just for the record, this is not my love letter. As originally stated, it's cut/paste. This is just one of several documents that have been composed over three decades of work in the academic CT community. How one to come to such a dismissive conclusion without any background or experience or, as you say, even interest, is intriguing at best. It's too late to submit a proposal for this years conference, but perhaps you'll have the opportunity to enlighten them on the fallacious nature of their life's work in 2011. The website is www.criticalthinking.org

[3bob]

I'm not entirely clear about what you're suggesting, but these are tools that we practice like any other skill, and the more we practice, the better we become at using them.

 

What if one became "better" to the point of exceeding the maximum design potential of a tool, then to go any further that tool would have to be set down? (granted such a setting down could be a very long ways down the road)