MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W282972777 · doi:10.15173/russell.v22i2.2021

Russell and Critical Thinking [review of "Bertrand Russell and Critical Thinking": special issue of <i>Inquiry</i>]

2002· article· en· W282972777 sur OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Hitchcock

Notice bibliographique

RevueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiquePhilosophy, Science, and History
Établissements canadiensMcMaster University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCritical thinkingIdeal (ethics)EpistemologyConstruct (python library)SociologyPhilosophyComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

 Reviews RUSSELL AND CRITICAL THINKING D H Philosophy / McMaster U. Hamilton, , Canada   @. “Bertrand Russell and Critical Thinking”: a special issue of Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines. Vol. , no.  (winter ): –. .. n  John Dewey published a book entitled How We Think in which he Idistinguished a type of thinking which he called “reflective thought”, characterized as “active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it, and the further conclusions to which it tends.” Dewey proposed that the education of children develop the habit of this kind of thinking, which he associated with the scientific method. His construct has become a widely recognized educational ideal, under the label “critical thinking”. An ideal “critical thinker” is characterized not only by certain skills but also by dispositions to use the skills appropriately; see for example the characterizations in Ennis and Facione. In a paper presented at the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy, William Hare pointed out that, although Russell does not use the term “critical thinking”, this ideal is central to Russell’s philosophy. Hare extracted from Russell’s social, political and educational writings a rich conception of critical thinking, which includes not only skills and dispositions but also attitudes. Among the skills required for what Russell called “judicial habits of thought” (PfM, p. ) are the abilities to form an opinion for oneself, to find an impartial solution, and to identify and question assumptions. Among the constitutive  John Dewey, How We Think (Boston, New York and Chicago: D. C. Heath, ), p. ; italics in original.  Robert H. Ennis, “Critical Thinking: a Streamlined Conception”, Teaching Philosophy,  (): –; Peter A. Facione, Critical Thinking: a Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction (research findings and recommendations prepared for the Committee on Pre-College Philosophy of the American Philosophical Association; ERIC document ED–).  William Hare, “Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking”, Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy, http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Educ/EducHare.htm [visited  December ]. Also published in the Journal of Thought,  (): –.  Nor is Dewey’s book in Russell’s personal library in , McMaster University.  Hare, op. cit. Reviews  dispositions are the habits of impartial inquiry, of weighing evidence, of attempting to see things truly, and of living from one’s own centre (Hare, ibid.), and a readiness to act in various ways: to admit new evidence against previous beliefs, to discard hypotheses which have proved inadequate, to adapt oneself to the facts of the world (ibid.). Russell further identified a critical attitude, which includes a realization of human fallibility, open-mindedness, a refusal to think that our own desires and wishes provide a key to understanding the world, and a tentativeness which proportions one’s confidence in one’s beliefs to the evidence warranting them. In his World Congress paper, Hare argued that Russell’s conception of critical thinking anticipates many insights in the recent literature on critical thinking and avoids many objections which have been raised against recent accounts of critical thinking. In particular, Russell’s emphasis on judgment embodies the insight that critical thinking cannot be reduced to a formula which can be routinely applied. Russell urges that critical thinking must include critical thinking about our own attempts at criticism, and that it should be constructive rather than destructive. Russell is well aware of the fallibility of rationality. Further, Russell does not advocate complete suspension of judgment or complete detachment. Subsequently, Hare invited a number of Russell specialists to contribute to a special issue of the journal Inquiry devoted to Bertrand Russell and critical thinking. Besides an introduction by Hare, a caricature of Russell by Antony Hare and an abridged version of Russell’s essay “A Philosophy for Our Time” (; Papers ), the issue includes essays by Paul Hager, A. D. Irvine, Howard Woodhouse, Ian Winchester, Sheryle Bergmann Drewe and Nicholas Griffin. In “Russell’s Conception of Critical Thinking: Its Scope and Limits”, Hager points out that Russell himself did not regard the complex of skills, dispositions and attitudes identified by Hare as a comprehensive elixir for all situations. Russell’s list of ten commandments for the conduct of life includes much else. So does his...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,697
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,007
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,050
Tête enseignante GPT0,281
Écart entre enseignants0,232 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2002
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell StudiesMême sujetPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryTravaux en français237 207