Hi Is this insularity a cause of the belief in weird things or a consequence? That is, if we believe some things firmly then there is no reason to subject them to critical thinking.
Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of Psychology University of Winnipeg Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 CANADA >>> "Gerald Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03-Oct-08 9:08 AM >>> Yes, I agree Paul, the tendency to use CT skills is important. I think we need to learn more about the factors; prior belief, traits, and learning history that promote the chance of employing CT in some areas and not others. My own view is that such tendencies are shaped by the groups with which we identify and the ideological frameworks we acquire in socialization to those key reference groups. Dramatic and vivid personal experiences, as well as being impressed with authoritative reference groups, etc., played a role in both Conan Doyle's and Alfred Wallace's lives. My only difference with Bensley is if he thinks he is saying something informative or explanatory when he says these folks simply were not critical thinkers in certain areas because they were not disposed (motivated) to employ their critical thinking skills. This seems to beg the question. Yes, they did not appear to employ their critical thinking in these areas and, yes, it was not because they lacked the smarts. Bensley suggests openness to experience and the degree to which personal experiences are trusted as evidence might be key factors. I agree and think we need to know more about how these orientations are developed. Hope all goes well there, Gary Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D. Professor, Psychology Saginaw Valley State University University Center, MI 48710 989-964-4491 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
