Критическое мышление вообще (тексты, видео, картинки)

Для рационального взгляда на мир аналитического мышления недостаточно

Для рационального взгляда на мир аналитического мышления недостаточно

от Евгений Волков -
Количество ответов: 3

Для рационального взгляда на мир аналитического мышления недостаточно

https://chrdk.ru/news/analiticheskogo-myshleniya-nedostatochno

Вера в явления, существование которых не доказано наукой и, в целом, не подтверждено доказательствами, довольно широко распространена в современном обществе. Есть мнение, что «прививкой» от подобных убеждений служит аналитический стиль мышления. Психологи из Университета Иллинойса и Амстердамского свободного университета провели исследование, показавшее, что этого мало. Важны также когнитивные способности и мотивация к рациональности.

Исследование состояло из двух частей; ученые сосредоточились на двух типах необоснованных верований — теориях заговора и паранормальных явлениях. В первой части исследования участвововало 343 человека. Сначала они прошли тест, позволяющий определить мотивацию к рациональному подходу — то, насколько важным лично для себя они считают необходимость делать те или иные выводы только на основе строгих доказательств. Часть вопросов теста касалось не личных убеждений, а насколько люди считают неэтичным принимать решения без доказательств. Все участники также прошли тест на аналитический стиль мышления, то есть склонность до принятия решения собирать информацию и структурировать ее. Результаты первого и второго теста хорошо коррелировали между собой.

Далее все участники прошли тест на веру в теории заговора, для чего им предложили девять популярных утверждений типа «Высадка на Луну — фейк» или «Власти США заранее знали об атаках 11 сентября» и общие утверждения вроде «В мире существуют секретные организации, влияющие на политические решения». И наконец, был предложен тест на веру в паранормальные явления — от астрологии до реинкарнации.

Анализ полученных данных показал устойчивые связи между показателями. Участники, получившие высокие баллы по тестам на аналитическое мышление и мотивацию к рационализму, оказались наименее подвержены как вере в паранормальное, так и в теории заговора.

Во второй части исследования ученые поставили задачу отделить склонность к аналитическому мышлению от собственно уровня этого мышления, то есть когнитивных способностей. В этой части также участвовало чуть более 300 человек. В дополнение к тестам на стиль мышления и ценность рационального подхода они прошли два теста на когнитивные способности — решали логические и числовые задачи, а не просто отвечали на вопросы о том, как они предпочитают разбираться с проблемами.

Участники, как и в первом тесте, также ответили на вопросы о теориях заговора и паранормальных явлениях. Ученые с помощью статистических методов проверили связь каждого из трех параметров — аналитического стиля мышления, когнитивных способностей и мотивации к рациональному подходу — и их сочетаний с необоснованными верованиями.

Наиболее сильная связь обнаружилась у совокупности двух параметров. А именно, сочетание высокого уровня когнитивных способностей с мотивацией к рациональному подходу оказалось лучшим предиктором того, что человек не будет верить в паранормальное и теории заговоров. То есть важен не сам подход к анализу проблем — аналитический стиль мышления. а именно интеллектуальные способности.

«Представленные результаты свидетельствуют о том, что высокие когнитивные способности прежде всего важны для рационального взгляда на мир, но и они не дают людям прививку от иррациональных убеждений сами по себе. Люди должны хотеть использовать свою способность мыслить в поиске истины», — заключают авторы работы.

Статья с результатами исследования опубликована в журнале Personality and Individual Differences.

Недавно также было доказано, что развивать критическое мышление помогает изучение истории.

всего слов - 482

В ответ на Евгений Волков

Epistemic rationality: Skepticism toward unfounded beliefs requires sufficient cognitive ability and motivation to be rational

от Евгений Волков -
Elsevier

Personality and Individual Differences

Volume 122, 1 February 2018, Pages 155-163
Personality and Individual Differences

Epistemic rationality: Skepticism toward unfounded beliefs requires sufficient cognitive ability and motivation to be rational

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886917306323

Highlights

• Analytic thinking is not sufficient to promote skepticism toward various unfounded beliefs.
• Analytic thinking and valuing epistemic rationality interactively predict skepticism.
• Cognitive ability, rather than analytic cognitive style, seems to account for these findings.

Abstract

Why does belief in the paranormal, conspiracy theories, and various other phenomena that are not backed up by evidence remain widespread in modern society? In the present research we adopt an individual difference approach, as we seek to identify psychological precursors of skepticism toward unfounded beliefs. We propose that part of the reason why unfounded beliefs are so widespread is because skepticism requires both sufficient analytic skills, and the motivation to form beliefs on rational grounds. In Study 1 we show that analytic thinking is associated with a lower inclination to believe various conspiracy theories, and paranormal phenomena, but only among individuals who strongly value epistemic rationality. We replicate this effect on paranormal belief, but not conspiracy beliefs, in Study 2. We also provide evidence suggesting that general cognitive ability, rather than analytic cognitive style, is the underlying facet of analytic thinking that is responsible for these effects.

Keywords

Paranormal belief
Conspiracy belief
Cognitive ability
Analytic cognitive style
Epistemic rationality
Importance of rationality

всего слов - 251

В ответ на Евгений Волков

Why It’s Not Enough to Have Critical Thinking Skills

от Евгений Волков -

Why It’s Not Enough to Have Critical Thinking Skills

 

Support more videos like this at patreon.com/rebecca!

Transcript:

Last year, a University of Illinois at Chicago researcher published a paper showing a distinction between people who personally value their own critical thinking skills and those who feel a moral imperative for everyone to be rational. The latter group may think they’re above moral indignation until they realize that they think less of a person for making an irrational choice.

That same researcher has teamed up with a colleague in Amsterdam to publish a new paper exploring the traits a person needs to be an active critical thinker — someone who doesn’t hold irrational beliefs about things like religion and the paranormal. What they found isn’t exactly groundbreaking but it does merit some discussion: essentially, it’s not enough to have analytical skills. A person also has to be in that group of people who values their own critical thinking skills enough to use them.

This makes sense: I have both a hammer and nails and yet I have a framed print that I haven’t hung up for the past four months. I have the tools, but I lack the motivation to use them because I don’t respect the importance of not having sad, empty walls.

The researchers showed this by asking 300 people questions about their beliefs in conspiracy theories like “the moon landing was faked” and then judging how analytical each person was in their thinking. They also figured out whether the subjects fell into one of the two groups from the previous research — did they value their own critical thinking skills and/or did they have a moral imperative for rationality?

The people who were least likely to believe in nonsense were not necessarily the people who had analytical skills, but those who both had the skills and valued their personal skills. I found it really interesting that there was no correlation between a lack of belief in nonsense and the other group, subjects with a desire for all people to think rationally.

I suspect that many people in the skeptic and atheist communities are in that latter group of people who make moral judgments about those who make irrational decisions, but I’m not sure how many are in the group who truly value their own personal critical thinking skills. I’ve often wondered why a group of people so vocal about critical thinking can hold so many irrational beliefs, like those who think all the social sciences are useless, or (to refer to a video I made last month) who believe anything Steven Pinker says.

The moral of this study (pun intended) is to spend less time worrying about other people’s irrational decisions and more time worrying about your own if you want to rid your world of irrationality.

Rebecca Watson

Rebecca Watson

Rebecca leads a team of skeptical female activists at Skepchick.org. She travels around the world delivering entertaining talks on science, atheism, feminism, and skepticism. There is currently an asteroid orbiting the sun with her name on it. You can follow her every fascinating move on Twitter or on Google+.

всего слов - 532

В ответ на Евгений Волков

To think critically, you have to be both analytical and motivated

от Евгений Волков -

To think critically, you have to be both analytical and motivated

You need more than just critical analysis skills—you need to value using them.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/11/to-think-critically-you-have-to-be-both-analytical-and-motivated/

In a world where accusations of "fake news" are thrown around essentially at random, critical thinking would seem to be a must. But this is also a world where the Moon landings are viewed as a conspiracy and people voice serious doubts about the Earth's roundness. Critical thinking appears to be in short supply at a time we desperately need it.

One of the proposed solutions to this issue is to incorporate more critical thinking into our education system. But critical thinking is more than just a skill set; you have to recognize when to apply it, do so effectively, and then know how to respond to the results. Understanding what makes a person effective at analyzing fake news and conspiracy theories has to take all of this into account. A small step toward that understanding comes from a recently released paper, which looks at how analytical thinking and motivated skepticism interact to make someone an effective critical thinker.

Valuing rationality

The work comes courtesy of the University of Illinois at Chicago's Tomas Ståhl and Jan-Willem van Prooijen at VU Amsterdam. This isn't the first time we've heard from Ståhl; last year, he published a paper on what he termed "moralizing epistemic rationality." In it, he looked at people's thoughts on the place critical thinking should occupy in their lives. The research identified two classes of individuals: those who valued their own engagement with critical thinking, and those who viewed it as a moral imperative that everyone engage in this sort of analysis.

In this new paper, Ståhl and van Prooijen look into how well this sort of critical thinking protects people from bizarre beliefs. They focused on a mixture of actual conspiracy theories—the Moon landing was a hoax, the US knew the 9-11 attacks were coming—to more general conspiratorial thinking, like “there are secret organizations that greatly influence political decisions.” They also added a series of questions about paranormal beliefs, like astrology and ESP.

In the first survey, more than 300 people answered these questions and took a test to determine whether they tended to approach problems critically, termed an "analytic cognitive style." They also were evaluated based on Ståhl's earlier work to determine if they personally valued critical thinking or viewed doing so as a moral requirement for everyone.

Overall, a tendency for analytical thinking did provide consistent protection against conspiratorial thinking and other irrational beliefs, but only if it was accompanied by a belief in the value of critical thinking. The moralizing version of this belief, where you think everyone should be approaching things critically, didn't seem to have any influence on holding irrational ideas.

Willing but not able?

The authors, however, acknowledge a limitation in their test for analytical thinking: it only tells whether a person approaches problems analytically—it says nothing about whether they're any good about doing so. You can think of this question as addressing the issue of whether better education on critical thinking would help. So they set up a similar experiment but focused on actual analytical ability through tests of numerical and verbal ability. This showed that analytical ability was associated with lower levels of belief in conspiracies and the paranormal.

Overall, the authors conclude that their studies "provided support for the notion that skepticism toward paranormal and conspiracy beliefs requires sufficient analytic skills, as well as motivation to form beliefs based on logic and evidence." While it may seem obvious—people need to be both motivated and capable to do something—it gets at the issue of whether greater education in critical thinking would help. It suggests that we need to accompany any education efforts with parallel efforts to make critical thinking seem valuable or fun, or it won't end up being the default approach.

The worst-case scenario is that we add critical thinking education in a way that leaves people thinking it's boring and, therefore, less likely to engage in it. We've certainly managed to do similar things in the past.

That said, this work shouldn't be viewed as the final word on this topic. There were some differences between the two survey populations (one from Mechanical Turk, the other from Crowdflower) that the researchers haven't explored. And it doesn't handle all the issues we mentioned above, like the ability to recognize when critical analysis is appropriate. But if it holds up, the finding could go a long way toward explaining why conspiracy theories persist in a world where most measures of cognitive ability have gone up over time.

Personality and Individual Difference, 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.10.026  (About DOIs).

всего слов - 820