Search results

Explains that many prestigious bodies, including the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business and the Accounting Change Commission, have asked accounting educators to improve their students’ critical thinking skills. Suggests that the literature contains few examples of how to apply such skills in an accounting environment and how to teach such skills as efficiently as possible. Explains and provides examples of such critical thinking skills. Shows how to incorporate such skills in the classroom.

In this chapter, we introduce the history of critical thinking briefly, starting from Socrates to contemporary contributions. Based on this history, we derive several modules for training in critical thinking via practical exercises in critical thinking. Three classic critical thinking models are introduced: Socratic questioning method, Cartesian doubting method, and Baconian empirical method. We discuss their potential for critical thinking as foundational methods. The material in this chapter is distributed in three parts. In Part I, we provide a brief history of critical thinking. In Part II, we design models of critical thinking based on its classic history. In Part III, we list some models of critical thinking based on its history, from the Renaissance period to the current times. In the last section, we also discuss critical thinking in the context of business ethics, by delineating its normative domain, assessing its characteristics, and reviewing its processes.

All of us seek truth via objective inquiry into various human and nonhuman phenomena that nature presents to us on a daily basis. We are empirical (or nonempirical) decision makers who hold that uncertainty is our discipline, and that understanding how to act under conditions of incomplete information is the highest and most urgent human pursuit (Karl Popper, as cited in Taleb, 2010, p. 57). We verify (prove something as right) or falsify (prove something as wrong), and this asymmetry of knowledge enables us to distinguish between science and nonscience. According to Karl Popper (1971), we should be an “open society,” one that relies on skepticism as a modus operandi, refusing and resisting definitive (dogmatic) truths. An open society, maintained Popper, is one in which no permanent truth is held to exist; this would allow counter-ideas to emerge. Hence, any idea of Utopia is necessarily closed since it chokes its own refutations. A good model for society that cannot be left open for falsification is totalitarian and epistemologically arrogant. The difference between an open and a closed society is that between an open and a closed mind (Taleb, 2004, p. 129). Popper accused Plato of closing our minds. Popper's idea was that science has problems of fallibility or falsifiability. In this chapter, we deal with fallibility and falsifiability of human thinking, reasoning, and inferencing as argued by various scholars, as well as the falsifiability of our knowledge and cherished cultures and traditions. Critical thinking helps us cope with both vulnerabilities. In general, we argue for supporting the theory of “open mind and open society” in order to pursue objective truth.

“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.

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.

This chapter presents a qualitative investigation of lecturers’ perceptions of critical thinking and how this influenced how they taught. All of the participants taught the same first-year university chemistry course. This case study provides insights about how there may need to be fundamental shifts in lecturers’ perceptions about learning and the development of critical thinking skills so that they can enhance knowledge and understanding of chemistry as well as advance the students’ critical thinking. Recommendations are made for professional learning for lecturers and for changing the “chemistry” of the design of learning experiences through valuing critical thinking in assessments and making critical thinking more explicit throughout the course. The authors argue that critical thinking must be treated as a developmental phenomenon.

Defines critical thinking as the art of examining an issue from numerous perspectives, questioning the validity of both the premisses and the conclusions. Critical thinking skills are essential to the internal auditor’s function. A recent update of the common body of knowledge (CBOK) reflects this expectation by the internal auditing profession. Respondents ranked reasoning skills, which essentially are critical thinking skills, as the most important subject area. Discusses several definitions and frameworks of critical thinking, including a critical thinking framework that is both comprehensive and useful in describing what the internal auditor does. This framework includes affective, cognitive, and behavioural components which basically describe the attitudes, thought processes and actions that are essential to the critical thinker and to the internal auditor. The internal auditing classroom is an appropriate setting for the internal auditor to begin honing the critical thinking skills demanded by the profession. Arguments are presented for the importance of teaching in a way that encourages critical thinking in the classroom, with the goal being transferability to the workplace. Describes two assignments that have proved useful in developing critical thinking skills.