Characteristics of Critical and Uncritical Thinkers - ( Progressive vs. Conservative )

[greyl]

Critical Thinkers

Are honest with themselves, acknowledging what they do not know, recognizing their limitations, and being watchful of their own errors.

Regard problems and controversial issues as exciting challenges.

Strive for understanding, keep curiosity alive, remain patient with complexity and ready to invest time to overcome confusion.

Set aside personal preferences and base judgments on evidence, deferring judgment whenever evidence is insufficient. They revise judgments when new evidence reveals error.

Are interested in other people's ideas, so are willing to read and listen attentively, even when they tend to disagree with the other person.

Recognize that extreme views (whether conservative or liberal) are seldom correct*, so they avoid them, practice fair-mindedness, and seek a balanced view.

Practice restraint, controlling their feelings rather than being controlled by them, and thinking before acting.

Uncritical Thinkers


Pretend they know more than they do, ignore their limitations, and assume their views are error-free.

Regard problems and controversial issues as nuisances or threats to their ego.

Are impatient with complexity and thus would rather remain confused than make the effort to understand.

Base judgments on first impressions and gut reactions. They are unconcerned about the amount or quality of evidence and cling to earlier views steadfastly.

Are preoccupied with self and their own opinions, and so are unwilling to pay attention to others' views. At the first sign of disagreement they tend to think, "How can I refute this?"

Ignore the need for balance and give preference to views that support their established views.

Tend to follow their feelings and act impulsively.

-Vincent Ryan Ruggiero

"Conservatives don't feel the need to jump through complex, intellectual hoops in order to understand or justify some of their positions, he said. "They are more comfortable seeing and stating things in black and white in ways that would make liberals squirm," Glaser said.

He pointed as an example to a 2001 trip to Italy, where President George W. Bush was asked to explain himself. The Republican president told assembled world leaders, "I know what I believe and I believe what I believe is right." And in 2002, Bush told a British reporter, "Look, my job isn't to nuance."
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml

I don't mean to suggest that all of us fall into one of the two categories at all times.
These categories are just as valid and useful as mean people and nice people or altruistic people and selfish people. These are functional generalizations, not black and white compartments.

Earlier thread

[petgoat]

1. I would submit that a taoist approach is appropriate.

To indulge in uncritical consideration of new ideas, whether your own or
others', to see what they might imply and where they might lead, and then
to analyze these ideas critically and rigorously to find their weaknesses.

In particular I'd suggest that avoiding the extremes is a mistake. All
revolutionary ideas are radical when they're new.

[greyl]

2. This is a Taoist approach.

[greyl]

3. so is this