Teaching an engaging critical thinking course?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:

I am teaching Critical Thinking in the Fall. I took Critical Thinking as an undergraduate and it was one of the most dreadfully dull courses I ever took in my degree. The main thing I remember from it is that we spent most of the semester memorizing the forms of fallacies. So, I was wondering if anyone has suggestions for how to approach Critical Thinking in a way that would make for a more exciting/beneficial class. I'd appreciate any recommendations for good textbooks or sample syllabi that I could model my own off of. I'm particularly interested in opportunities to integrate more global voices and/or philosophy into my eventual syllabus.

Two readers submitted replies

I recommend this book for CT. I use it and students have responded well. https://www.amazon.com/Critical-Thinking-Effective-Successful-Independent/dp/152971852X/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=critical+thinking+tom+chatfield&qid=1686512965&sprefix=critical+thinking+tom%2Caps%2C164&sr=8-1 I also recommend supplementing it with Daniel Kahneman's 'Thinking Fast and Slow' - by anon

another: https://www.amazon.com/Epistemology-Psychology-Judgment-Michael-Bishop/dp/0195162307 - by critical thinking

Do any other readers have any helpful tips or resources to share?

Comments

[sahpa]

I would hesitate to draw on Kahneman. There have been replicability concerns about a lot of the studies he draws on, and his overall framework is actually quite controversial.

The Bishop/Trout book reminds me: Bishop himself has put a lot of effort into designing a (reportedly) very effective and engaging critical thinking course at FSU -- I have heard it's a bit unconventional (in a good way). You may try reaching out to him to get some pointers.

[Mark Herman]

I use David Manley’s Reason Better (via TopHat). There's a Daily Nous article (with comments) regarding it. (links below)

The distinguishing feature of this text and those in the OP seems to be the incorporation of (cognitive) psychology. (One might say that this feature points at--something like--applied cognitive psychology or the empirical study of critical thinking.) I'd be interested in any comments people have regarding this feature. Thanks!

Reason Better text:
https://tophat.com/catalog/arts-&-humanities/philosophy/full-course/reason-better-an-interdisciplinary-guide-to-critical-thinking-david-manley/3425/

Daily Nous article:
https://dailynous.com/2019/05/01/new-kind-critical-thinking-text-guest-post-david-manley/

[Michel]

I use Matthew van Cleave's textbook, which is free: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://open.umn.edu/opentextbooks/textbooks/457&ved=2ahUKEwj7tbqkycD_AhUToFsKHYneBScQFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0ouEfGBH0X2Uu2mkRGXNEy

In terms of pedagogy, every day I have my students make a short presentation on a real-life bad argument, which we pick apart and try to fix as a group. They report enjoying this.

I also make sure every single student (I have 35 per section) answers at least one sample problem every day (our classes are three hours long, once a week; and yes, that means I go through _a lot_ of questions!). We also do some group work for tougher problems. They do not particularly like being called on every day, but they appreciate how much it helps to learn the material, and how it crafts a participatory classroom.

[once you teach logic, you will always teach logic]

I use Weisberg's book, which is free: https://jonathanweisberg.org/vip/

After going through deductive logic, we cover introductory decision theory with some fun fallacies and paradoxes. I finish with L.A. Paul's Transformative Experiences. I should note that this approach is pretty formal and requires some basic math, so it might be more apt to teach to a student body coming from comp sci, econ, etc. But there is nothing too fancy when it comes to math. Students usually like thinking and talking about decision problems.

[critical]

This is one of the (perhaps few) occasions where reflecting on your learning outcomes - what do you want students to get from the course - will help. I taught critical thinking courses in the past. I used to use Giere's Scientific Reasoning. It was quite terrible. It was very contrived. And it was not clear the students really learned anything. Then I did something a bit radical - I taught Kuhn's Structure and Shapin's The Scientific Revolution. It was a much better course. I enjoyed it, and the students learned more. But you have to have a clear idea about what students should be able to do after the course.

[Grad Student]

I was a TA (including in-class teaching) in a CT course in a non-English-Speaking country several years ago. I found the CT course if done seriously and with the right attitude, to be among the most important class a student can take, and that's also the feedback I got from the students.

In my case, the CT course was also a first logic course. What worked well for me, is detecting arguments, semi-arguments, or acts of demagoguery in the social media accounts of politicians or famous journalists, and trying to analyze them as case studies with the tools the students learn in the course. I also encouraged the students to bring cases they find interesting to the classroom. It's a very revealing experience for students to see that logic doesn't discriminate between arguments based on how much we like their conclusions.