Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    McPeck has not provided a convincing argument that there ... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    McPeck has not provided a convincing argument that there are no general thinking skills.

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ryle's distinction between 'knowing how' and 'knowing that' supports domain-general procedural skills transferable across fields.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If riding a bike and solving equations share the general skill of iterative error-correction, domain-general thinking skills exist by analogy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.McPeck never refutes Ryle's framework, leaving the conceptual ground for general skills intact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ennis's empirical research identifies critical thinking dispositions—like seeking reasons and suspending judgment—that operate across disciplines.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.McPeck's argument would need to show these documented cross-domain regularities are illusory, which he does not attempt.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.McPeck needs to explain how thinking differs from writing and speaking in a way that blocks useful abstraction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.McPeck has not provided such an explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Notable Defenders

    Alec FishercontemporaryFisher & Scriven 1997
    Ana ValenzuelacontemporaryNieto & Valenzuela 2012
    BailincontemporaryBailin et al. 1999a
    Benjamin HambycontemporaryHamby 2014
    Carlos NietocontemporaryNieto & Valenzuela 2012
    Cass SunsteincontemporaryKahneman, Sibony, & Sunstein 2021
    Daniel KahnemancontemporaryKahneman 2011; Kahneman, Sibony, & Sunstein 2021
    Diane HalperncontemporaryHalpern 1998: 452
    Diane HalperncontemporaryHalpern 1998
    Diane HalperncontemporaryHalpern 1998
    Edward GlasercontemporaryGlaser 1941: 6
    Elizabeth LoftuscontemporaryLoftus 2017
    EnniscontemporaryEnnis (2016)
    Gerd GigerenzercontemporaryGigerenzer 2001
    Guillaume BeaulaccontemporaryKenyon & Beaulac 2014
    Harvey SiegelcontemporarySiegel 1999
    John GrecocontemporaryTurri, Alfano, and Greco 2017
    John McPeckcontemporary
    John TurricontemporaryTurri, Alfano, and Greco 2017
    Linda EldercontemporaryPaul & Elder 2006
    Linda ZagzebskicontemporaryZagzebski 1996
    Mark AlfanocontemporaryTurri, Alfano, and Greco 2017
    Mark BattersbycontemporaryBailin & Battersby 2016a
    Michael ScrivencontemporaryFisher & Scriven 1997
    Olivier SibonycontemporaryKahneman, Sibony, & Sunstein 2021
    PaulcontemporaryPaul 1984
    Paulo FreirecontemporaryFreire 1968 [1970]: 71, 81, 100, 146
    Peter FacionecontemporaryFacione 1990a: 16
    Peter FacionecontemporaryFacione 1990a: 25
    Peter FacionecontemporaryFacione 1990a: 9
    Peter FacionecontemporaryFacione 1990a
    Peter FacionecontemporaryFacione 1990a: 9
    RawlscontemporaryRawls (1971)
    Raymond NickersoncontemporaryNickerson 1998
    Richard PaulcontemporaryPaul & Elder 2006
    Robert EnniscontemporaryEnnis (1989)
    Robert EnniscontemporaryEnnis 1962: 90; Ennis 1991: 9; Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005
    Robert EnniscontemporaryEnnis 1991: 8
    Robert EnniscontemporaryEnnis 1991: 9; Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005
    Robert EnniscontemporaryEnnis 1962, 1991
    Robert EnniscontemporaryEnnis 1962: 84; Ennis 1991: 9
    Robert KingcontemporaryNorris and King 1983, 1985, 1990a, 1990b
    Sharon BailincontemporaryBailin et al. 1999a
    Sharon BailincontemporaryBailin et al. 1999b: 291–293
    Sharon BailincontemporaryBailin & Battersby 2016a
    Stephen NorriscontemporaryNorris and King 1983, 1985, 1990a, 1990b
    Tim KenyoncontemporaryKenyon & Beaulac 2014
    Edward GlasermodernGlaser 1941: 25
    Edward GlasermodernGlaser 1941
    Edward GlasermodernGlaser 1941: 6
    GlasermodernGlaser 1941: 175
    Herbert SimonmodernSimon 1956
    John DeweymodernDewey 1910: 70–71; 1933: 93–94
    John DeweymodernDewey 1910: 72; Dewey 1916: 177; Dewey 1933: 106; Dewey 1938: 101–119
    John DeweymodernDewey 1910: 13, 108
    John DeweymodernHow We Think (1910; 1933)

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Ennis's empirical research identifies critical thinking dispositions—like seekin...If riding a bike and solving equations share the general skill of iterative erro...McPeck has not provided such an explanation.McPeck needs to explain how thinking differs from writing and speaking in a way ...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: critical-thinking
    View source passageHide passage
    McPeck (1981) attacked the thinking skills movement of the 1970s, including the critical thinking movement. He argued that there are no general thinking skills, since thinking is always thinking about some subject-matter. It is futile, he claimed, for schools and colleges to teach thinking as if it were a separate subject. Rather, teachers should lead their pupils to become autonomous thinkers by teaching school subjects in a way that brings out their cognitive structure and that encourages and
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    +3 moreShow less
    McPeck never refutes Ryle's framework, leaving the conceptual ground for general...McPeck's argument would need to show these documented cross-domain regularities ...Ryle's distinction between 'knowing how' and 'knowing that' supports domain-gene...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit