Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that McPeck has not provided a convincing argument that there are no general thinking skills.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
McPeck needs to explain how thinking differs from writing and speaking in a way that blocks useful abstraction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
McPeck has not provided such an explanation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
2 perspectives
Reason against 1 of 2
?
1.
Ryle's distinction between 'knowing how' and 'knowing that' supports domain-general procedural skills transferable across fields.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
McPeck never refutes Ryle's framework, leaving the conceptual ground for general skills intact.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason against 2 of 2
?
1.
Ennis's empirical research identifies critical thinking dispositions—like seeking reasons and suspending judgment—that operate across disciplines.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42