(1) On "Speaking with Evidence"
My previous ideas and knowledge points are different. Although I know that critical thinking is not easy to believe what others say, I didn't think of "speaking with evidence"
The two are different, because I didn't say that people with critical thinking might trust others to do something. There are many things that make others believe, such as emphasizing feelings and putting the other person in a passive environment, such as providing evidence. Critical thinking in knowledge points only focuses on evidence and will not trust others easily because of feelings and environment.
In addition, the critical thinking I emphasize affects whether I believe others or not, and it is a response to others' "talking", while the knowledge points not only emphasize whether I believe others, but also emphasize how I can make others believe. In other words, people with critical thinking will provide evidence when expressing their opinions, and will also look at whether there is evidence when looking at other people's opinions.
(2) About "integrating different viewpoints"
For critical thinking, I have never thought of the word "integration" before, only the word "criticism". "Integration" is to extract reasonable parts of different viewpoints and form new ones, which are very constructive; The word "criticism" only finds out the shortcomings of the viewpoint, but adds a barrier to the rumor, which is not new and constructive.
In addition, "criticism" may mean criticizing one viewpoint or criticizing many viewpoints. But integration is not, at least two must be integrated.
(3) Regarding "attaching importance to causality"
I used to attach great importance to causality, because only by knowing this reason can I take effective measures (change the cause) and solve the problem (change the result). But I didn't know it was a critical thinking. After all, literally, it has nothing to do with the word "criticism".
(4) Regarding "paying attention to relevant factors"
This is further away from the word "criticism". I didn't expect it anyway. I checked "critical" again, and the Chinese explanation is "key (disease or condition) is serious; Criticize; Critical; Criticism ",did not find the meaning of" attaching importance to relevance "; The same is true of Ying Ying's explanation. What brain hole do you think this is? ! Strange!
On the platform of Getting, Xu Cen said that "critical thinking is thinking of grasping essence and discovering laws". This has something in common with critical thinking in knowledge points, for example, laws must contain causality. But the difference is also obvious. Zhang did not emphasize the essence in knowledge points; Xu's point of view did not point out the specific operation, so I will not "grasp the essence and find the law" until now. Zhang's expression can be easily translated into concrete operations. Listen, I'm integrating their views.
Ding Bu, the initiator of the "Book Sound" activity, said that in his eyes, critical thinking has three meanings. First, criticize yourself; The second is to identify hypothesis, test hypothesis and correct hypothesis; The third is thinking, that is, getting rid of those who are unreliable.
This has something in common with Zhang's point of view. Obviously, both the discrimination hypothesis and the test hypothesis (D) are based on evidence, and both of them are based on evidence (Zhang). There is also Zhang's "integrating different viewpoints", which is similar to Ding's "thinking about thinking" and "revising assumptions". At the same time, both sides emphasize the object, which includes both themselves and others.
Teacher Yu Guilan said that critical thinking is reflection and evaluation. This is also very easy to operate. It is also linked with other versions. For example, reflection is thinking about thinking. There are many objects to evaluate, which can be spoken words and other people's opinions (Zhang) or assumptions (D).
(Haha, I found that the feeling of "merging different viewpoints" was quite good: it increased the dimension, enriched the connotation and standardized the operation. )
(1) Self-reflection: When expressing your own opinions, define related concepts first.
Zhang Xiaojun (the person who asked the first question) mentioned "critical thinking" on many occasions. But in my impression, he did not emphasize the meaning of this word carefully (it is estimated that everyone has a consensus on this word). As a result, after listening to his reports many times, I still can't integrate his "critical thinking" into my own teaching exploration.
Teacher Yu Guilan did it. When sharing, she particularly emphasized that the critical thinking in her eyes is reflection and evaluation.
So this is a wake-up call for yourself. Before expressing my views, I should make clear the core words, otherwise it will be difficult to achieve effective communication.
(2) Self-reflection: the study of important concepts is too superficial.
Critical thinking is a super important concept. But it's embarrassing to learn. In Xu Cen's class, I didn't learn anything, just remembered his views. I don't remember anything when I talked to Ding Bu, and then I asked him again. I have listened to Zhang Xiaojun's sharing many times, but I haven't thought carefully about what this concept means every time. I heard teacher Yu Guilan's explanation and didn't combine my own reflection report.
Well, I'm not a fake schoolmaster. )
(3) self-reflection: it is not appropriate to swallow dates.
I listened to Zhang's sharing in August this year, and I also wrote a five-question reflection report at that time. But my reflection report included a whole page of his ppt. That page emphasizes a lot, besides critical thinking, there are also problem-solving skills, learning to learn, international perspective, cross-cultural leadership and communication skills, digital literacy, innovation and entrepreneurship, shaping values and sustainable development awareness. Of course, I don't remember all this, so I went back to watch it again. )
Most of these things are unfamiliar to me. Even if you are familiar with me, there is no guarantee that my understanding is the same as Zhang's. For example, I am familiar with learning, but I still don't know if my point of view is consistent with his. Therefore, every item in this page of ppt is enough for me to write a five-question reflection report. As a result, I put so many things together and wrote an article!
Now it seems that the effect is really bad. I also emphasized to students before that each article only wrote one knowledge point, but I was greedy and wrote n at a time, which was a shame!
(4) reflect on yourself: when should I believe it?
It suddenly occurred to me that when I met a missionary abroad, the other person was always speechless to me, because I kept asking why. The other side couldn't answer many questions, so the other side failed to preach.
Now that I think about it, if the other person can really answer, I may have religious beliefs. But this tendency is very dangerous.
Liu Run said in the official WeChat account that "Why+Opinion" is like a syringe, and it is easy to inject specious things into other people's minds.
For example, "why do you know a lot of truth but can't live this life well?" Because the stratum is solidified, knowledge can't change fate. So, accept it. "Something like this is a syringe.
I haven't been brainwashed by this kind of thing since I knew about this syringe. However, Liu Run's statement did not indicate when to believe it.
Combining the knowledge points, I think when the other party provides enough evidence, and I really think the evidence is impeccable, I can believe it. Of course, believing is action, otherwise it is false belief.
(5) Optimizing decision-making: How to cultivate critical thinking?
The first step: set the cultivation of critical thinking as the goal, set it as your own growth goal and set it as the learning goal of students.
Step 2: Modify the answer requirements of the reflection report and write the reflection report as required.
In the answer to question 4, add "speak with evidence, integrate different viewpoints, clarify causal relationship, identify hypothesis and test hypothesis" (the article "attach importance to relevant factors" already exists, that is, "correlation").
In the answer to the fifth question, after "trying to innovate", add "such as revealing the law, hitting the essence directly, and correcting the hypothesis".
Step 3: Practice deliberately in daily life.
For example, when communicating with students, use evidence to influence them.
For big coffee, no matter who he is, always remind yourself not to become brain powder, and don't hesitate to accept everything the other party says. Whether to accept the letter depends on whether the evidence is conclusive. Be wary of being brainwashed by the syringe of "opinion+why" and be wary of emotional decision-making.
For many big coffees with different views (for example, some big coffees say that academic evaluation is not important, but students' learning is important), they don't just stand in line, but analyze their own essence and improve their theories.
When reading WeChat articles and reading books, analyze whether the relationship mentioned in it really has a causal relationship.
(6) Try to innovate
The first version: people with critical thinking (1) always analyze whether there is evidence in what they say to others, and ask themselves to speak with evidence, instead of using volume, tone and movement to make a sound; (2) For seemingly different viewpoints, we can always find similarities, complement each other and form new viewpoints; (3) Strive to grasp the essence, find the law, analyze what the object is, how to develop and change (law, cause and effect), and what factors are related (who is the cause and who is the effect); (4) When analyzing the opinions of yourself or others, you can always find those potential assumptions (not necessarily facts), always test these assumptions, and if you find these assumptions unreasonable, you will also correct them; (5) Constantly alert yourself or others' thoughts: Is this really the case?
The second edition: critical thinking is the thinking of pursuing truth. Truth is a real fact, essence and law. The process of pursuing truth is to identify hypotheses (often hidden in opinions), test hypotheses, and correct hypotheses to make them close to the truth through evidence analysis. In the process of pursuing the truth, we should monitor the thinking of ourselves and others, otherwise we will get farther and farther away from the truth. (Wow, satisfied)
Next, I use the second edition of critical thinking to analyze "why do you know a lot of truth but still have a bad life?" Because the stratum is solidified, knowledge can't change fate. So, accept it. "This specious words.
1) "I know a lot of truth but I still can't live this life" is it true? Don't! Because there is an underlying assumption that "knowing these principles can change your life." This is only a hypothesis, not a fact. The fact (I think) is that knowing and doing can change your life.
2) Is it true that "class is solidified and knowledge cannot change fate"? Don't! Because many people change their destiny by knowledge. Me, too, or I would be processing disposable backpacks in a small workshop in the village now. Therefore, the truth (I think) is that knowledge itself cannot change people's destiny, but people can use it.
3) Is "resignation" acceptable? Of course not! This conclusion is invalid because none of the previous ones are valid.
After my version of critical thinking, I know whether to live a good life or to act first, that is, to implement the principles I know into my daily life and realize the unity of knowing and doing.
See, learning through the five-question reflection report is profound enough. Memory understanding is a small dish, and your own reflection and innovation is a big meal.
(But it's not good for my cow, akimbo)