Russell and Critical Thinking

Abstract

 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...