Critical Thinking is used to mediate any brashness or flippancy to moderate our immediate reactions and include reason, contemplation, and evidence to form the most appropriate response to question or hypothesis
pls respond to this three post
Critical Thinking is used to mediate any brashness or flippancy to moderate our immediate reactions and include reason, contemplation, and evidence to form the most appropriate response to question or hypothesis. As an exercise it requires form and practice. Not to diminish ones gut feelings about an argument, but Critical thinking can help navigate the seas of information and assist in finding a logical and solid base for reasoning and opinion. The method in the learning examples here is a solid framework for using Critical Thinking to answer and analyze ones response. That method involves; Establishing what the question is, gathering information, and thinking through the concepts and assumptions that underly the original question. Is the response logical and what are the implications? What are the other viewpoints?
Consistently in my work two forces are at play; maintenance/mission and supply of services. When there is a divergent point between the two, a directive that indicates certain actions prior to acquisition, these two forces should be examined for the most appropriate response. In one sense the organizations mission is straight forward, in our case it would be having flight ready aircraft on the ground, and any prohibition to that should be examined. Man-hours and facility are commonly next identified as the strongest reason to support a maintenance decision to amend a directive for acquisition. Using the previous cited method well examine the following case. A piece of material is coded for maintenance action that corresponds to a direction that sates the item should be submitted to a higher capable maintenance activity. The question is, We have capable personnel to complete the task without diverting the item, and it will bring the aircraft back to an operation status sooner than submitting the material to another activity for work faster. Should we proceed on our own path, and ignore the directive. The underlying concept here is that multi-tiered maintenance and repairs facilities an activity to keep aircraft ready preventing prohibitive time constraints for availability. Another concept is that the process for submitting items for repair is broken and that it is actually more effective to complete repairs at the home activity rather than depending on an outside organization to complete. History in the case of the coding is murky, the next higher capable maintenance activity IS used to facilitate repairs, but not often when the item coding is the identified issue. So, the assumption by the maintainer has no hard data that the items submission is prohibitive to the timeline, since it rarely is followed to a T. Essentially the idea that submission to the next activity boils to an opinion then regarding the effectiveness of those higher capable activitys repairs. In that sense, with an actual shortage of data, the decision by the maintainer to not follow the directive is not logical. Furthermore, the consistent practice to amend the adherence to the directive is causing the next higher maintenance activitys capabilities and output to be diminished, they are not operating to their intended capacity and the skirting practice is causing a knowledge void at their level from not completing the intended tasks.
Explain and evaluate the different elements of critical thinking.
Critical thinking is described in the Oxford dictionary as “the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.” Every human being is capable of thinking clearly, philosophers from the beginning of time have enjoyed asking questions and using their critical thinking to answer their questions about life, existence and just about any thought the human mind can create.
There are five core critical thinking elements involved in order to “think critically” according to Herr (2007) Listed below are the five elements.
- Identification of premises and conclusions. Critical thinkers break arguments into basic statements and draw logical implications.
- Clarification of arguments: Critical thinkers locate ambiguity and vagueness in arguments and propositions.
- Establishment of facts: Critical thinkers determine if the premises are reasonable and identify information that has been omitted or not collected. They determine if the implications are logical and search for potentially contradictory data.
- Evaluation of Logic: Critical thinkers determine if the premises support the conclusion. In deductive arguments, the conclusions must be true if the premises are true. In inductive arguments, the conclusions are likely if the premises are true.
- Final evaluation: Critical thinkers weigh the evidence and arguments. Supporting data, logic and evidence increase the weight of an argument. Contradictions and lack of evidence decrease the weight of an argument. Critical thinkers do not accept propositions if they think there is more evidence against them or if the argument is unclear, omits significant information, or has false premises or poor logic.
Which elements would you use in conducting research and why?
I would use all elements and even look into other authors’ version of their critical thinking elements and see which elements I can add and utilize.
Use examples to support your position. Offer any personal experiences that you have in this regard.
This may not be exactly about critical thinking but in high school our professor would require us to follow her guide step by step and we were not allowed to deviate from it. It was about conducting a research paper and she taught or rather enforced us to follow every step. Guides are made for a reason, they’re meant to help you complete a task easily and conveniently. This is the reason why the military will have step by step guides even for the simple task of cleaning a window (and yes this is true).
Before getting into my own thoughts on critical thinking, here are the elements of critical thinking from someone much more expert than me. Richard W. Paul was the Director of Research and Professional Development at the Center for Critical Thinking and was Chair of the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. Paul’s elements of critical thinking were: the empirical dimension, purpose, question at issue, assumptions, concepts, inferences, implications, and point of view (PAUL, 1993). There’s a lot of ground to cover here, but these can be shortened to: the objective truth, why, impact, and perception. Those four things cover broadly what Paul viewed as the elements of critical thinking. He believed that building these elements into a habitual way of thinking would help people think critically.
I think critical thinking can be even simpler than that. By my definition, critical thinking is an understanding of the issue, yourself, and the context. You must truly understand the problem before you can begin to solve it or contribute to discussion about it. You must understand your mindset and all of the bias or assumptions that you carry in your thinking. Finally, you need to understand the context around a topic to navigate the perceptions of others and any tangential factors that are not directly related to the issue. These things taken together will let you effectively solve a problem, understand the impacts created, and consider the people and context around an issue before you address it.
From my own life, I was attempting to negotiate an arrangement with another maintenance shop within my group that works in the same area but on different equipment. These sites are an hour drive away and require guarding. We send out teams with guards and they send out their own team with their own guards. There are volumes of guidance on what needs to be met before maintenance can be done in these situations. I wanted to send two of my members out with one of their teams. Our people would do separate tasks, work on their own, and use the other shops guards instead of wasting another guard team. It was more efficient and let them have an extra set of hands on site. They didn’t want the help. They heard “more work on site in the same amount of time”, and worried that they would end up doing all the work. It took weeks of explaining that they are literally not allowed to even if they wanted to before they would even come to the table to negotiate.
This example hits everything I mentioned in using critical thinking. Understanding the issue of having a finite number of teams and guards while being expected to get more done. Understanding my own assumptions they would be amenable to having more hands and be enthusiastic about the idea, and understanding the perspective fears that they came with of being burdened with more work.
PAUL, R. W. (1993). The logic of creative and critical thinking. American Behavioral Scientist, 37(1), 21-39. doi:10.1177/0002764293037001004
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
