Is There a Role for Adversariality in Teaching Critical Thinking?
- PDF / 671,122 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 11 Downloads / 228 Views
Is There a Role for Adversariality in Teaching Critical Thinking? Sharon Bailin1 · Mark Battersby2
© Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract There has been considerable recent debate regarding the possible epistemic benefits versus the potential risks of adversariality in argumentation. Nonetheless, this debate has rarely found its way into work on critical thinking theory and instruction. This paper focuses on the implications of the adversariality debate for teaching critical thinking. Is there a way to incorporate the benefits of adversarial argumentation while mitigating the problems? Our response is an approach based on dialectical inquiry which focuses on a confrontation of opposing views within a collaborative framework. Keywords Adversariality · Alternative views · Collaborative oppositionality · Dialectical inquiry · Epistemic orientation · Reasoned judgment
1 Introduction There has been considerable recent debate on the topic of adversariality in argumentation. On the one hand, it has been argued that argumentation is, by its nature, adversarial in that it involves a confrontation between arguers arguing opposing positions, and, further, that such a confrontation of opposing views is essential for arriving at the best judgments. On the other hand, some theorists have pointed out that such an adversarial framing can be problematic in terms of encouraging aggressive modes of discourse that can interfere with rational exchange. In addition, the imperative to win that is inherent in adversarial argumentation may well eclipse the goal of coming to a reasoned judgment, undermining co-operation, open-mindedness, and a willingness to concede to the strongest reasons. Although there has been a growing interest in adversariality in argumentation theory, this debate has rarely found its way into work on critical thinking theory and instruction.1 The issue addressed in this paper is: how does this debate * Sharon Bailin [email protected] Mark Battersby [email protected] 1
Faculty of Education (Emeritus), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
Department of Philosophy (Emeritus), Capilano University, North Vancouver, BC, Canada
2
apply to critical thinking? Is there a role for adversariality and adversarial argumentation in education for critical thinking?
2 The Educational Project In order to tackle the issue of the role of adversariality in critical thinking instruction, it is necessary, first, to establish the goals of critical thinking instruction. We have argued elsewhere (Bailin and Battersby 2016a) that a central goal of critical thinking instruction should be to develop in people the understandings, the capacities, and the habits of mind or virtues relevant to making reasoned judgments on significant issues, often of a complex nature, and to engage in reasoned interchange and dialogue. There are a number of contexts in which this goal is central: (i) Individual inquiry and decision-making: making judgments and decisions about issues and controversies which we encounter, for exa
Data Loading...
