Search results

“The unexamined life is not worth living,” said Socrates. That is, without critically inquiring into the knowledge of life, which is well-being and valuable, life is not worth living. Critical thinking questions existing theories and their unexamined and obsessive assumptions and generalizations, constraints, and the so-called “best” practices of the prevailing system of management and tries to replace them with more valid assumptions and generalizations that uphold the dignity, uniqueness, and inalienable rights of every individual and the community. In our diverse and pluralistic cultural environment, the promise of a truly generative dialogue among occidental (western) and oriental (eastern) cultures and civilizations holds great hope for the future. Critical thinking can facilitate this dialogue such that all of us have a meaningful place in this universe. In this chapter, we explore introductory working definitions of critical thinking so that we can early enough understand its demanding domains, moral calls, and ramifications in its current critical applications. Specifically, in Part I, we examine the structured layers of our thinking and reasoning to dismantle them progressively, and in Part II, in support of our claims, we explore complexity and chaos theories as a new resource for critical thinking.

Being the most powerful creatures on the planet, we humans should carefully consider our beliefs for the simple reason that the way in which we think influences our behaviors; this in turn can either transform the world or negatively affect the world. Our mores, paradigms, and worldviews translate into behaviors (e.g., factory farming for meat production and consumption) that in turn modify the environment. In general, much of our thinking system is backed up by some concept, theory, paradigm, or ideology. Our thinking systems generate our belief systems of goals and mission statements; our belief systems, in turn, determine our behavior systems (e.g., our strategies, choices, commissions, omissions as implementation systems); our behavior systems determine our impact systems (e.g., impact on us, our families and neighborhoods, our cities and villages, our state and our country, our globe and sometimes our cosmos). Thus, our behavior systems eventually impact our thinking systems, which we started with, thus completing a circular or spiral loop. This chapter examines the thinking–beliefs–behaviors–impact loop, exploring its internal and external dynamics and validities. Specifically, in Part I, we examine the structure of our belief systems in business; in Part II, we explore the power of our structured belief systems in business; in Part III, we apply critical thinking that systematically questions and seeks to redesign our presumed thinking and belief systems.

Systems thinking calls for a shift of our mindset from seeing just parts to seeing the whole reality in its structured dynamic unity and interconnectedness. Systems thinking fosters a sensibility to see subtle connections between components and parts of reality, especially the free enterprise capitalist system (FECS). It enables us to see ourselves as active participants or partners of FECS and not mere induced factors of its production–distribution–consumption processes. Systems thinking seeks to identify the economic “structures” that underlie complex situations in FECS that bring about high versus low leveraged changes. A system is strengthened and reinforced by feedback of reciprocal exchanges that makes the system alive, transparent, human, and humanizing.

In Part I, we explore basic laws or patterns of behaviors as understood by systems thinking; in Part II we examine the basic archetypes or structured behaviors of systems thinking; in both parts we strive to see reality through the lens of critical thinking to help us understand patterns and structures of behavior among systems and their component parts. In conclusion, we argue for compatibility and complementarity of critical thinking and systems thinking to identify and resolve management problems created by our flawed thinking, and sedimented by our wanton assumptions, presumptions, suppositions and presuppositions, biases, and prejudices. Such thinking will also identify unnecessary economic and political structures of the self-serving policies we create, which imprison us.

Outlines the emergence of critical systems thinking and practice and the reasons why such a development in the systems approach was necessary. Considers the limitations of traditional systems thinking and the strengths and weaknesses of three alternatives to the traditional systems approach — soft systems thinking, organizational cybernetics and emancipatory systems thinking. Reflection on the relationship between these different strands of the systems approach gave impetus to the birth of critical systems thinking. Details the nature of critical systems thinking, as resting on five commitments, and describes a new methodology (“total systems intervention”) to operationalize this approach.

This chapter focuses on critical thinking as a new, powerful, and specialized tool and technique for understanding and analyzing the subtle operations of the free enterprise capitalist market system and its ethics and morality. Everything in the world of consumers and market enterprise systems are determined by our supply–demand system that in turn are determined by our presumed limitless production–distribution and consumption (LDPC) systems. From a critical thinking viewpoint, we study the free enterprise capitalist system (FECS) as a dynamic, interconnected organic system and not as a discrete or compartmentalized body of disaggregate parts. Systems thinking with critical thinking calls for a shift of our mindset from seeing just parts to seeing the whole reality in its structured dynamic unity; both mandate that we see ourselves as active participators or partners of FECS and not as mere cogs in its wheels or as mere factors of its production processes. Critical thinking seeks to identify the “structures” that underlie complex situations in FECS with those that bring about high- versus low-leveraged changes in various versions of capitalism. Specifically, this chapter applies critical thinking to FECS as defined by its founder, Adam Smith, in 1776 to its fundamental and structural assumptions, and as supported or critiqued by serious scholars such as Karl Marx, Maynard Keynes, C. K. Prahalad and Allen Hammond (inclusive capitalism), John Mackey and Rajendra Sisodia (conscious capitalism), and others.

All of us are born critical thinkers; some perfect this talent; others ignore it as useful in daily life. This chapter follows those who perfected this talent in order to learn from them the art and models of critical thinking in terms of its optimal inputs, processes, and outputs. According to great critical thinkers in business management, critical thinking questions – or should question – the obsessive generalizations, constraints, and “best” practices of the prevailing system of management, and try to replace them with more valid assumptions and more meaningful generalizations that uphold the dignity, uniqueness, and inalienable rights of the individual person and the community. After setting out some cases illustrating the lack of critical thinking, in Part I of this chapter, we introduce some representative management thinkers on critical thinking, and in Part II, we introduce eight models or practical approaches for critical thinking.

The aim of this personal vision research is to analyse the characteristics of physical education subject to contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through the development of competences in university students. The objective is to reflect on how critical and systemic thinking could be mobilised through the contents and methodologies in physical education to promote the SDGs.

A conceptual article is proposed in which an active investigation of how physical education could foster critical and systemic thinking has been carried out. For this purpose, articles were selected that have analysed the potential of physical education for sustainability. Databases such as Web of Science, Scopus or Google Scholar have been reviewed through keywords such as “physical education”, “sustainability”, “critical thinking” or “systems thinking”.

Strategies are presented to enable university students to understand the scope of the subject beyond the physical dimension. This study discusses that it is only through such a change of view of the subject that meaningful learning and learning situations that encourage enquiry and active participation can be introduced. Thus, this paper argues that physical education is a unique area of knowledge for mobilising critical and systemic thinking in the context of sustainable development (SD). Consequently, concrete actions are presented for application in physical education teaching that shows direct connections to specific targets of the SDGs.

This study presents practical implications for higher education leaders and educational policy designers at the national level, as it would help improve initial and ongoing training programs for physical education teachers, focusing on the development of key competencies for sustainability.

Physical education has the potential to contribute to the development of vulnerable schools and communities, especially to the health and well-being of children and young people and does not require large financial budgets. Therefore, the recommendations presented in this study can have a positive impact on the well-being of these groups.

This document invites reflection on how, through different teaching strategies, we can produce significant learning that contributes to the sustainability of the planet. All this, trying to mobilise critical and systemic thinking and consequently improving awareness for SD.

Some problems have been pointed out in the literature, regarding how the various critical approaches to pedagogy have failed to properly promote autonomy of thinking and to prevent the imposition of knowledge. The criticisms include the incapacity of some approaches to highlight and question subtle or tacit forms of knowledge, and the implicit active imposition of knowledge by some others. With the possible use of critical systems thinking in pedagogy in mind, here we examine how the forms of critique used by three different approaches within this strand can deal with these criticisms. We will argue that, as presently conceived, the critical use of the system idea is susceptible of being criticised in the same way.

Many corporate managers and researchers now frequently rank intellectual assets ahead of physical assets in developing a competitive edge, primarily due to such factors as shorter life cycles, frequent changes, adoption of advanced technologies and increasing global competition. Given the accounting literature’s inadequate attention to these important resources, this paper develops a systemic view called a “system of corporate knowledge”. This system includes the components, environment and structure of intellectual assets. Components include critical thinking, creative thinking and innovation. The environment includes organization climate and organization learning into which the system’s components operate and culminate through the integration of all applied thinking types. The system’s structure is shown mathematically by a dynamic equation. The mathematical model is a form of reductionism necessary to bring such a complex system of corporate knowledge to a manageable level. Controllers and managers can then use the system to explain the mechanism of the knowledge development or lack thereof. Since the system operates dynamically, spiral functions are applied to help controllers and managers graphically present the trends in the system.