There are various definitions, but the one that best suits our purpose and which is, in the end, perhaps the best, is . Thanks, Marcel A creek is a natural freshwater stream smaller than a river, from an online definition.
In the relevant scientific literature, of course, the term is used much more broadly as a framework for understanding human cognition. It does not have a fixed volume at a fixed moment in time, it is ever changing. Given enough time, a creek's volume can add up to more than that of a pond. Interpretation, background, and experience all influence the logic involved. Marcel Yes, you are right and you got me on this one. But I am happy that the puzzle showed how imperfect critical thinking can be and, especially how variable. Thanks so much, M Specifically, questions 2,4 and 6 evaluate the knowledge or ideas the reader has on general topics, to a certain degree, rather than testing his reasoning skills.
So, the blog is a bit of a stretch using the same kinds of reasoning involved in critical thinking analysis, with a simple puzzle twist. Marcel Well, this is the problem with critical thinking.
Psychologists seem to have given them a name, which makes sense in a way.
Maybe, as I say in the blog, my understanding of the term is not exactly what psychologists mean, although I have had discussions with them in the area of education and the idea that logic is influenced by experience is a key idea. I do really great with critical thinking, vocabulary, and spatial intelligence, but my brain completely freezes up when it comes to math.
I have a math learning disability that brought my score down to 114.But in my opinion, the best way to understand things is to construct puzzles to illustrate their basic essence. as you correctly point out, this type of problem is based on education and information. For instance, if I am aware, that human walking speed is somewhere in the range between 5-10 km/h, while most cars can move at a speed between 100 km/h-200 km/h, while I also know that the cruise speed for airplanes used in commercial flights is somewhere around 850km/h, etc.Critical thinking involves skill at recognizing a pattern in given information, and especially recognizing how the information is connected to the real world. First, consider the five words below: Now, put them in order from the slowest to the fastest, when they are going at maximum speed. As with all such puzzles, there might be slightly different solutions—one could claim that some automobiles go faster than cruise ships. The seven puzzles below are to the ones above, though hopefully more challenging. then there is no doubt I would place such options correctly when asked to order them from slowest to fastest.epistemology, philosophy of science, mathematics (with its undeniably rigorous nature).But for "beginners" and for those interested in the topic, you can check out the introductory books on critical thinking by Richard Paul (mentioned in this article) Richard Parker, Stuart Keeley, Debrah Jackson, Tracy Bowell and many more.The theme of this blog is critical thinking—and the kinds of puzzles that can be constructed around it. Yes, although I am not a psychologist, but an Anthropologist, I have found in language/cultures throughout the world that the way you label something is an interpretation and gives a practical structure to the world.This term is used frequently in psychology and education. Even the classification of animals is an interpretation, and I go back to a comment made to this blog which points this out."Critical thinking" isn't primarily about knowing anything in particular.It has more to do with doubt and skepticism about information you have to deal with rather than with possessing or memorizing any particular piece of information.In any case, these 4 questions, similar to the other 3 can hardly evaluate your "critical thinking" skills.An example of a low level "puzzle" to evaluate your critical thinking skills would be e.g. A more complex alternative would be a text where you have to identify the issue(s), the conclusion(s), evaluate the consistency of the argumentation backing up the conclusion(s), reach your own conclusion about the authors conclusions...