Having scrolled-through the responses to this question, I'm saddened (an emotional response!). I tend to think that many of the responses given, just might be coming from the end-results of the educational system, itself. In discussing this topic, I've noticed that there appears to be many who fall-into the "There's no right/wrong - just what works for you" philosophy. THERE IS, ABSOLUTELY, A RIGHT AND WRONG ANSWER !!! If there wasn't . . . science, math, grammar, physics, geology, medicine, law, AND, Ethics, to name a few, would not exist, or at least have no value, whatsoever . . . AND . . . no consequences. "Reasoning", tells me (based on the foundation of right and wrong) that if everyone does as he/she pleases, we can expect to live in fully-operational "Anarchy". We, as the instructors, should be using reasoning for its' appropriate role: To "Stimulate" thought-provoking scenarios, in order to sift through them, and weed out, the right from the wrong. If one of my students believes, that electricity won't kill them (based on the same - what works for you notion), I, must also reason, that I may possibly be attending a funeral in the near-future, because my "Knowledge...and Judgement" are telling me both, the right, AND, wrong answer. I submit that, a question . . . is an opportunity for discussion, and a discussion is a resource for reasoning . . . and reasoning, is a deliberation (and research) of the facts. They are either right or wrong... not, right/wrong for me.
Joseph,
I completely agree with you that right and wrong are not correctly identified as independent preferences on an individual basis. I also completely agree on the "predictable order of the universe" which provides consistency for things like reasoning, research, scientific method. I believe truth to be absolute (not relative) and independent of the perceiver.
However, I have often found myself in situations with two, three, four or five options for a decision (including - the option to not decide) and I was unable to determine the 'right answer' because the best options available each had something significantly wrong with them. Then it became a matter of choosing the least wrong, which often hinged on the dependence of "from which perspective" could the choice be viewed as least wrong.
This seems to me to not be evidence that truth is not absolute, but that we do not (yet) have the intellectual capability to understand it completely. So the best we can do is work with our imperfect understandings to get as close as possible to the right answer. The difficulty is that we all have shortcomings of reason, experience and intellect in uniquely different areas and proportions. We (as humans) know so little about reality (e.g. Dark matter and dark energy supposedly account for over 95% of the mass-energy of the 'known' universe.) So we reason, research, experiment and get as close as we can collaboratively and independently. Newtonian physics has a lot of 'correct' and practical answers, but it is still 'wrong' in comparison to the absolute truth (of, for instance, gravity). But it was the best we could do (and it did a lot) until Einstein came along and provided a better explanation (see orbit of Mercury), but there are still errors which require dark matter and dark energy to explain away 95% of the 'known' universe. I'd say we still have a very long way to go.
Your point is well taken and heartily agreed that our culture of relativism is a large part of the problem in our contemporary thinking (in schools and out).
Dr. S. David Vaillancourt
What role does reasoning play in the critical thinking problem solving process?
As we gain new experiences,the knowledge base that we create increases our ability to reason. This allows us in general to improve our problem solving skills. younger students on the other hand, have not had as much experience which may hinder their ability to find solutions.
