Creative Critical Thinking Roderic A. Girle Philosophy Department University of Auckland

1. Creative Critical Thinking Roderic A. GirlePhilosophy DepartmentUniversity of Auckland

2. CCT Should the title not be: Creative AND Critical Thinking

3. CCT Should the title not be: Creative and Critical Thinking The most sympathetic orthodox view : Two sides of the one coin. Creative and Critical complement each other.

4. CCT Should the title not be: Creative and Critical Thinking How is it possible ? To be both Creative and Critical ? To be Creatively critical ?

5. David Picture of the Statue of David (The actual image makes the file too large for easy publication. The image in the presentation came from: http://au.search.yahoo.com/search/images?p=statue+David)

6. CCT This marvelous statue is the result of the combination of critical and creative thought and imagination. Creative work builds on critical and technical skills. That foundation of critical and technical skill can be built -- creativity can not be constructed, only prepared for.

7. CCT There is a story to be told about critical thinking.

8. CCT There is a story to be told about critical thinking. We begin with standard Critical Thinking courses.

9. CCT There is a story to be told about critical thinking. We begin with standard Critical Thinking courses. Consider an alternative.

10. CCT Say that students have almost finished a standard Critical Thinking course. Then you give them a audio clip, and ask, “Give an analysis of the argumentation in this clip.” Here is the clip (it’s part of a TV show).

11. CCT TABLE TALK (Documentary New Zealand)

12. TVONE documentary of an after dinner discussion. There are several people. Kath sets the scene. Susan asks the opening question, Kath responds, Tom buts in and speaks in a very blunt fashion. Kath responds. Then Susan asks Tom a leading question. Tom responds. Finally there is a comment from Nola. (The audio clip is removed to make the file smaller. The script follows anyway.)

13. (The script begins with:- ) Susan: If it makes any sense to ask this question, tell me. Nameless: Shoot! Susan: If you could have chosen your own sex, what would you have chosen? Kath: Well I was going to be called something like “Rodney”, if I was a boy; so I am really glad I am a girl, because “Rodney” does not sit well with me.

14. CCT What would be the standard CT issues? What are the premises? What are the conclusions? Are there any arguments at all?

15. CCT We could analyse and develop some premise/conclusion arguments -- pack in the so called ‘suppressed’ premises and even the ‘suppressed’ conclusions. For example:-

16. Susan: If it makes any sense to ask this question, tell me. Nameless: Shoot! Susan: If you could have chosen your own sex, what would you have chosen? Kath: Well I was going to be called something like “Rodney”, if I was a boy; so I am really glad I am a girl, because “Rodney” does not sit well with me.

17. Susan: If it makes any sense to ask this question, tell me. Nameless: Shoot! Susan: If you could have chosen your own sex, what would you have chosen? Kath: Well I was going to be called something like “Rodney”, if I was a boy; so I am really glad I am a girl, because “Rodney” does not sit well with me.

18. CCT What are the premises? What are the conclusions?

19. CCT What are the premises? What are the conclusions? If I was a boy I was going to be called something like “Rodney” “Rodney” does not sit well with me. So I am really glad I am a girl.

20. CCT What are the premises? What are the conclusions? If I was a boy I was going to be called something like “Rodney” “Rodney” does not sit well with me. So I am really glad I am a girl. Not Valid

21. CCT If I were to be a boy, I would have been called something like “Rodney.” “Rodney” does not sit well with me. If “Rodney” does not sit well with me, then I would not want to be called something like “Rodney”. If I would not want to be called something like “Rodney”, then I would not want to be a boy. If I would not want to be a boy, then I would be glad to be a girl. So I am really glad I am a girl.

22. CCT If I were to be a boy, I would have been called something like “Rodney.” “Rodney” does not sit well with me. If “Rodney” does not sit well with me, then I would not want to be called something like “Rodney”. If I would not want to be called something like “Rodney”, then I would not want to be a boy. If I would not want to be a boy, then I would be glad to be a girl. So I am really glad I am a girl.

23. CCT If I were to be a boy, I would have been called something like “Rodney.” “Rodney” does not sit well with me. If “Rodney” does not sit well with me, then I would not want to be called something like “Rodney”. If I would not want to be called something like “Rodney”, then I would not want to be a boy. If I would not want to be a boy, then I would be glad to be a girl. So I am really glad I am a girl. Clumsy

24. CCT The real problem here is that this party discussion is not really about arguments. We analysed and developed a premise/conclusion argument -- packed in the so called ‘suppressed’ premises, and got a really clumsy result.

25. CCT The real problem here is that this party discussion is not really about arguments. We analysed and developed a premise/conclusion argument -- packed in the so called ‘suppressed’ premises, and got a really clumsy result. What a waste of time!

26. CCT The real problem here is that this party discussion is not really about arguments. We analysed and developed a premise/conclusion argument -- packed in the so called ‘suppressed’ premises, and got a really clumsy result. That is not the point -- this discussion is about a question.

27. CCT Why then would students push to find, or even manufacture premise/conclusion arguments and not say anything about questions? The answer is that a theory pushes the search for premise/conclusion arguments.!

28. Susan: If it makes any sense to ask this question, tell me. Nameless: Shoot! Susan: If you could have chosen your own sex, what would you have chosen? Kath: Well I was going to be called something like “Rodney”, if I was a boy; so I am really glad I am a girl, because “Rodney” does not sit well with me. Tom: It’s a senseless question. I think it’s absolutely senseless. I do not know what it feels like to have breasts and no genitalia. I just have no idea what it’s like. Everyone: buzz buzz! Oh my God! ... me show you!

29. Susan: If it makes any sense to ask this question, tell me. Nameless: Shoot! Susan: If you could have chosen your own sex, what would you have chosen? Kath: Well I was going to be called something like “Rodney”, if I was a boy; so I am really glad I am a girl, because “Rodney” does not sit well with me. Tom: It’s a senseless question. I think it’s absolutely senseless. I do not know what it feels like to have breasts and no genitalia. I just have no idea what it’s like. Everyone: buzz buzz! Oh my God! ... me show you!

30. Susan: Am I just totally a woman, all over? Is that what you’re saying? But I’m not; you know. I’m just a person like you are. Nameless: No. Susan: Isn’t there a sense in which you know if I’m me, then maybe my gender is variable or isn’t it? What do you think? Tom: Someone who adopts a social role, a sort of female oriented social role, is not someone who is asking or answering the question, “Do I want to be a woman?” Because I think when you ask or answer that question you are not talking just about the social role you took; you are also talking about the bells and whistles, the physiology.

31. Tom: I mean, like, what’s it like to have a period? I don’t know, thank God! Kath: Well, how can you say “Thank God” if you don’t know. It might be a really great experience for all you know! Tom: Well, ah,according to the testimony of those few women who I’ve had the privilege of living with, it’s not always such a great experience. Kath: You’re right actually! Nola: OK! none of the men have answered, as far as I can see, “Would you prefer to be a man or a woman?”

32. Tom: I mean, like, what’s it like to have a period? I don’t know, thank God! Kath: Well, how can you say “Thank God” if you don’t know. It might be a really great experience for all you know! Tom: Well, ah,according to the testimony of those few women who I’ve had the privilege of living with, it’s not always such a great experience. Kath: You’re right actually! Nola: OK! none of the men have answered, as far as I can see, “Would you prefer to be a man or a woman?”

33. Nola: OK! none of the men have answered, as far as I can see, “Would you prefer to be a man or a woman?” Questions and answers are of enormous importance in discussion and debate. Standard CT courses might have something about loaded questions (the fallacy of many questions). And that’s it!

34. CCT Why then would students push to find, or even manufacture premise/conclusion arguments and not say anything about questions? The answer is that a theory pushes the search for premise/conclusion arguments.!

35. CCT It’s the classical Argumentation Theory

36. CCT It’s the classical Argumentation Theory The Demonstrative Theory of Argumentation

37. CCT The Demonstrative Theory of Argumentation

38. CCT The Demonstrative Theory of Argumentation A more descriptive title is: The Premise-conclusion Theory

39. CCT The Demonstrative Theory of Argumentation A more descriptive title is: The Premise-conclusion Theory of Argumentation analysis

40. CCT It is the d o m i n a n t orthodoxy in Argumentation Analysis Theory. Critical Thinking is often called “baby logic” It is baby premise/conclusion logic.

41. CCT The Demonstrative Theory of Argumentation (Is there any other possibility?)

42. CCT The Demonstrative Theory of Argumentation There had better be other possibilities.

43. CCT To the extent that the Demonstrative Theory is a well explored, research supported theory -- fair enough. But it alone is not good enough for the world in which we live -- and in which students live. The Demonstrative Theory is too passive and reflective for people living in a highly interactive, dynamic and changing world. We need a far more interactive approach.

44. CCT The Demonstrative Theory • Ignores far too much. • It is retrospective, and is neither responsive nor pro-active. • No hot-action skills are imparted.

45. CCT We need to look at an alternative theoretical basis for CCT. The Dialogue Theory of Argumentation Analysis is part of a whole general approach to the logic of dialogue.

46. CCT The Logic of Dialogue analyses everyday interactive reasoning and argumentation in terms of • the categories of dialogue • the moves people make • the commitments they build up

47. CCT There are several important kinds of dialogue: • Information Exchange • Persuasive • Debating (competitive) • Inquiry • Epithetic (abusive, flattery) • Negotiation • Command

48. CCT The dialogue theory • Focuses on Participants’ moves

49. CCT The dialogue theory • Focuses on Participants’ moves (speech acts)

50. CCT The dialogue theory • Focuses on Participants’ moves asserting