2022/02/20

Critical thinking - Wikipedia

Critical thinking - Wikipedia

Critical thinking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
For the American drama film, see Critical Thinking (film).

Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments to form a judgment.[1] The subject is complex; several different definitions exist, which generally include the rational, skeptical, and unbiased analysis or evaluation of factual evidence. Critical thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking.[2] It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem-solving abilities as well as a commitment to overcome native egocentrism[3][4] and sociocentrism.

History[edit]

Sculpture of Socrates

The earliest records of critical thinking are the teachings of Socrates recorded by Plato. These included a part in Plato's early dialogues, where Socrates engages with one or more interlocutors on the issue of ethics such as question whether it was right for Socrates to escape from prison.[5] The philosopher considered and reflected on this question and came to the conclusion that escape violates all the things that he holds higher than himself: the laws of Athens and the guiding voice that Socrates claims to hear.[5]

Socrates established the fact that one cannot depend upon those in "authority" to have sound knowledge and insight. He demonstrated that persons may have power and high position and yet be deeply confused and irrational. Socrates maintained that for an individual to have a good life or to have one that is worth living, he must be a critical questioner and possess an interrogative soul.[6] He established the importance of asking deep questions that probe profoundly into thinking before we accept ideas as worthy of belief.

Socrates established the importance of "seeking evidence, closely examining reasoning and assumptions, analyzing basic concepts, and tracing out implications not only of what is said but of what is done as well".[7] His method of questioning is now known as "Socratic questioning" and is the best known critical thinking teaching strategy. In his mode of questioning, Socrates highlighted the need for thinking for clarity and logical consistency. He asked people questions to reveal their irrational thinking or lack of reliable knowledge. Socrates demonstrated that having authority does not ensure accurate knowledge. He established the method of questioning beliefs, closely inspecting assumptions and relying on evidence and sound rationale. Plato recorded Socrates' teachings and carried on the tradition of critical thinking. Aristotle and subsequent Greek skeptics refined Socrates' teachings, using systematic thinking and asking questions to ascertain the true nature of reality beyond the way things appear from a glance.[8]

Socrates set the agenda for the tradition of critical thinking, namely, to reflectively question common beliefs and explanations, carefully distinguishing beliefs that are reasonable and logical from those that—however appealing to our native egocentrism, however much they serve our vested interests, however comfortable or comforting they may be—lack adequate evidence or rational foundation to warrant belief.

Critical thinking was described by Richard W. Paul as a movement in two waves (1994).[9] The "first wave" of critical thinking is often referred to as a 'critical analysis' that is clear, rational thinking involving critique. Its details vary amongst those who define it. According to Barry K. Beyer (1995), critical thinking means making clear, reasoned judgments. During the process of critical thinking, ideas should be reasoned, well thought out, and judged.[10] The U.S. National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking[11] defines critical thinking as the "intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action."[12]

Etymology and origin of critical thinking[edit]

In the term critical thinking, the word critical, (Grk. κριτικός = kritikos = "critic") derives from the word critic and implies a critique; it identifies the intellectual capacity and the means "of judging", "of judgement", "for judging", and of being "able to discern".[13] The intellectual roots of critical[14] thinking are as ancient as its etymology, traceable, ultimately, to the teaching practice and vision of Socrates[15] 2,500 years ago who discovered by a method of probing questioning that people could not rationally justify their confident claims to knowledge.

Definitions[edit]

Traditionally, critical thinking has been variously defined as follows:

  • "The intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action."[16]
  • "Disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence"[17]
  • "Purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based"[18]
  • "Includes a commitment to using reason in the formulation of our beliefs"[19]
  • The skill and propensity to engage in an activity with reflective scepticism (McPeck, 1981)[20]
  • Thinking about one's thinking in a manner designed to organize and clarify, raise the efficiency of, and recognize errors and biases in one's own thinking. Critical thinking is not 'hard' thinking nor is it directed at solving problems (other than 'improving' one's own thinking). Critical thinking is inward-directed with the intent of maximizing the rationality of the thinker. One does not use critical thinking to solve problems—one uses critical thinking to improve one's process of thinking.[21]
  • "An appraisal based on careful analytical evaluation"[22]
  • "Critical thinking is a type of thinking pattern that requires people to be reflective, and pay attention to decision-making which guides their beliefs and actions. Critical thinking allows people to deduct with more logic, to process sophisticated information and look at various sides of an issue so they can produce more solid conclusions."[23]
  • Critical thinking has seven critical features: being inquisitive and curious, being open-minded to different sides, being able to think systematically, being analytical, being persistent to truth, being confident about critical thinking itself, and lastly, being mature.[24]
  • Although critical thinking could be defined in several different ways, there is a general agreement in its key component—the desire to reach for a satisfactory result, and this should be achieved by rational thinking and result-driven manner. Halpern thinks that critical thinking firstly involves learned abilities such as problem-solving, calculation and successful probability application. It also includes a tendency to engage the thinking process. In recent times, Stanovich believed that modern IQ testing could hardly measure the ability of critical thinking.[25]
  • "Critical thinking is essentially a questioning, challenging approach to knowledge and perceived wisdom. It involves ideas and information from an objective position and then questioning this information in the light of our own values, attitudes and personal philosophy."[26]

Contemporary critical thinking scholars have expanded these traditional definitions to include qualities, concepts, and processes such as creativity, imagination, discovery, reflection, empathy, connecting knowing, feminist theory, subjectivity, ambiguity, and inconclusiveness. Some definitions of critical thinking exclude these subjective practices.[27][16]

  1. According to Ennis, "Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action."[28] This definition Ennis provided is highly agreed by Harvey Siegel,[29] Peter Facione,[24] and Deanna Kuhn.[30]
  2. According to Ennis' definition, critical thinking requires a lot of attention and brain function. When a critical thinking approach is applied to education, it helps the student's brain function better and understand texts differently.
  3. Different fields of study may require different types of critical thinking. Critical thinking provides more angles and perspectives upon the same material.

Logic and rationality[edit]

Main article: Logic and rationality

The study of logical argumentation is relevant to the study of critical thinking. Logic is concerned with the analysis of arguments, including the appraisal of their correctness or incorrectness.[31] In the field of epistemology, critical thinking is considered to be logically correct thinking, which allows for differentiation between logically true and logically false statements.[32]

In "First wave" logical thinking, the thinker is removed from the train of thought, and the analysis of connections between concepts or points in thought is ostensibly free of any bias. In his essay Beyond Logicism in Critical Thinking Kerry S. Walters describes this ideology thus: "A logistic approach to critical thinking conveys the message to students that thinking is legitimate only when it conforms to the procedures of informal (and, to a lesser extent, formal) logic and that the good thinker necessarily aims for styles of examination and appraisal that are analytical, abstract, universal, and objective. This model of thinking has become so entrenched in conventional academic wisdom that many educators accept it as canon".[33] Such principles are concomitant with the increasing dependence on a quantitative understanding of the world.[citation needed]

In the 'second wave' of critical thinking, authors consciously moved away from the logocentric mode of critical thinking characteristic of the 'first wave'. Although many scholars began to take a less exclusive view of what constitutes critical thinking, rationality and logic remain widely accepted as essential bases for critical thinking. Walters argues that exclusive logicism in the first wave sense is based on "the unwarranted assumption that good thinking is reducible to logical thinking".[33]

Deduction, abduction and induction[edit]

Argument terminology used in logic
Main article: logical reasoning

There are three types of logical reasoning. Informally, two kinds of logical reasoning can be distinguished in addition to formal deduction, which are induction and abduction.

Deduction[edit]

Induction[edit]

  • Induction is drawing a conclusion from a pattern that is guaranteed by the strictness of the structure to which it applies. For example: The sum of even integers is even. Let  then  are even by definition. , which is even; so summing two even numbers results in an even number.

Abduction[edit]

  • Abduction is drawing a conclusion using a heuristic that is likely, but not inevitable given some foreknowledge. For example: I observe sheep in a field, and they appear white from my viewing angle, so sheep are white. Contrast with the deductive statement: Some sheep are white on at least one side.

Critical thinking and rationality[edit]

Kerry S. Walters, an emeritus philosophy professor from Gettysburg College, argues that rationality demands more than just logical or traditional methods of problem solving and analysis or what he calls the "calculus of justification" but also considers "cognitive acts such as imagination, conceptual creativity, intuition and insight" (p. 63). These "functions" are focused on discovery, on more abstract processes instead of linear, rules-based approaches to problem-solving. The linear and non-sequential mind must both be engaged in the rational mind.[33]

The ability to critically analyze an argument—to dissect structure and components, thesis and reasons—is essential. But so is the ability to be flexible and consider non-traditional alternatives and perspectives. These complementary functions are what allow for critical thinking to be a practice encompassing imagination and intuition in cooperation with traditional modes of deductive inquiry.[33]

Functions[edit]

The list of core critical thinking skills includes observation, interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and metacognition. According to Reynolds (2011), an individual or group engaged in a strong way of critical thinking gives due consideration to establish for instance:[34]

  • Evidence through reality
  • Context skills to isolate the problem from context
  • Relevant criteria for making the judgment well
  • Applicable methods or techniques for forming the judgment
  • Applicable theoretical constructs for understanding the problem and the question at hand

In addition to possessing strong critical-thinking skills, one must be disposed to engage problems and decisions using those skills. Critical thinking employs not only logic but broad intellectual criteria such as clarity, credibility, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, significance, and fairness.[35]

Critical thinking calls for the ability to:

  • Recognize problems, to find workable means for meeting those problems
  • Understand the importance of prioritization and order of precedence in problem-solving
  • Gather and marshal pertinent (relevant) information
  • Recognize unstated assumptions and values
  • Comprehend and use language with accuracy, clarity, and discernment
  • Interpret data, to appraise evidence and evaluate arguments
  • Recognize the existence (or non-existence) of logical relationships between propositions
  • Draw warranted conclusions and generalizations
  • Put to test the conclusions and generalizations at which one arrives
  • Reconstruct one's patterns of beliefs on the basis of wider experience
  • Render accurate judgments about specific things and qualities in everyday life

In sum:

"A persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports or refutes it and the further conclusions to which it tends."[36]

Habits or traits of the mind[edit]

The habits of mind that characterize a person strongly disposed toward critical thinking include a desire to follow reason and evidence wherever they may lead, a systematic approach to problem solving, inquisitiveness, even-handedness, and confidence in reasoning.[37]

According to a definition analysis by Kompf & Bond (2001), critical thinking involves problem solving, decision making, metacognition,[38] rationality, rational thinking, reasoning, knowledge, intelligence and also a moral component such as reflective thinking. Critical thinkers therefore need to have reached a level of maturity in their development, possess a certain attitude as well as a set of taught skills.

There is a postulation by some writers that the tendencies from habits of mind should be thought as virtues to demonstrate the characteristics of a critical thinker.[39] These intellectual virtues are ethical qualities that encourage motivation to think in particular ways towards specific circumstances. However, these virtues have also been criticized by skeptics, who argue that there is lacking evidence for this specific mental basis that are causative to critical thinking.[40]

Research in critical thinking[edit]

Edward M. Glaser proposed that the ability to think critically involves three elements:[36]

  1. An attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one's experiences
  2. Knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning
  3. Some skill in applying those methods.

Educational programs aimed at developing critical thinking in children and adult learners, individually or in group problem solving and decision making contexts, continue to address these same three central elements.

The Critical Thinking project at Human Science Lab, London, is involved in the scientific study of all major educational systems in prevalence today to assess how the systems are working to promote or impede critical thinking.[41]

Contemporary cognitive psychology regards human reasoning as a complex process that is both reactive and reflective.[42] This presents a problem which is detailed as a division of a critical mind in juxtaposition to sensory data and memory.

The psychological theory disposes of the absolute nature of the rational mind, in reference to conditions, abstract problems and discursive limitations. Where the relationship between critical thinking skills and critical thinking dispositions is an empirical question, the ability to attain causal domination exists, for which Socrates was known to be largely disposed against as the practice of Sophistry. Accounting for a measure of "critical thinking dispositions" is the California Measure of Mental Motivation[43] and the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory.[44] The Critical Thinking Toolkit is an alternative measure that examines student beliefs and attitudes about critical thinking[45]

Education[edit]

John Dewey is one of many educational leaders who recognized that a curriculum aimed at building thinking skills would benefit the individual learner, the community, and the entire democracy.[46]

Critical thinking is significant in the learning process of internalization, in the construction of basic ideas, principles, and theories inherent in content. And critical thinking is significant in the learning process of application, whereby those ideas, principles, and theories are implemented effectively as they become relevant in learners' lives.[citation needed]

Each discipline adapts its use of critical thinking concepts and principles. The core concepts are always there, but they are embedded in subject-specific content.[citation needed] For students to learn content, intellectual engagement is crucial. All students must do their own thinking, their own construction of knowledge. Good teachers recognize this and therefore focus on the questions, readings, activities that stimulate the mind to take ownership of key concepts and principles underlying the subject.[citation needed]

Historically, the teaching of critical thinking focused only on logical procedures such as formal and informal logic.[citation needed] This emphasized to students that good thinking is equivalent to logical thinking. However, a second wave of critical thinking, urges educators to value conventional techniques, meanwhile expanding what it means to be a critical thinker. In 1994, Kerry Walters[47] compiled a conglomeration of sources surpassing this logical restriction to include many different authors' research regarding connected knowing, empathy, gender-sensitive ideals, collaboration, world views, intellectual autonomy, morality and enlightenment. These concepts invite students to incorporate their own perspectives and experiences into their thinking.

In the English and Welsh school systems, Critical Thinking is offered as a subject that 16- to 18-year-olds can take as an A-Level. Under the OCR exam board, students can sit two exam papers for the AS: "Credibility of Evidence" and "Assessing and Developing Argument". The full Advanced GCE is now available: in addition to the two AS units, candidates sit the two papers "Resolution of Dilemmas" and "Critical Reasoning". The A-level tests candidates on their ability to think critically about, and analyze, arguments on their deductive or inductive validity, as well as producing their own arguments. It also tests their ability to analyze certain related topics such as credibility and ethical decision-making. However, due to its comparative lack of subject content, many universities do not accept it as a main A-level for admissions.[48] Nevertheless, the AS is often useful in developing reasoning skills, and the full Advanced GCE is useful for degree courses in politics, philosophy, history or theology, providing the skills required for critical analysis that are useful, for example, in biblical study.

There used to also be an Advanced Extension Award offered in Critical Thinking in the UK, open to any A-level student regardless of whether they have the Critical Thinking A-level. Cambridge International Examinations have an A-level in Thinking Skills.[49]

From 2008, Assessment and Qualifications Alliance has also been offering an A-level Critical Thinking specification.[50] OCR exam board have also modified theirs for 2008. Many examinations for university entrance set by universities, on top of A-level examinations, also include a critical thinking component, such as the LNAT, the UKCAT, the BioMedical Admissions Test and the Thinking Skills Assessment.

In Qatar, critical thinking was offered by AL-Bairaq—an outreach, non-traditional educational program that targets high school students and focuses on a curriculum based on STEM fields. The idea behind AL-Bairaq is to offer high school students the opportunity to connect with the research environment in the Center for Advanced Materials (CAM) at Qatar University. Faculty members train and mentor the students and help develop and enhance their critical thinking, problem-solving, and teamwork skills.[51][failed verification]

Effectiveness[edit]

In 1995, a meta-analysis of the literature on teaching effectiveness in higher education was undertaken.[52] The study noted concerns from higher education, politicians, and business that higher education was failing to meet society's requirements for well-educated citizens. It concluded that although faculty may aspire to develop students' thinking skills, in practice they have tended to aim at facts and concepts utilizing lowest levels of cognition, rather than developing intellect or values.

In a more recent meta-analysis, researchers reviewed 341 quasi- or true-experimental studies, all of which used some form of standardized critical thinking measure to assess the outcome variable.[53] The authors describe the various methodological approaches and attempt to categorize the differing assessment tools, which include standardized tests (and second-source measures), tests developed by teachers, tests developed by researchers, and tests developed by teachers who also serve the role as the researcher. The results emphasized the need for exposing students to real-world problems and the importance of encouraging open dialogue within a supportive environment. Effective strategies for teaching critical thinking are thought to be possible in a wide variety of educational settings.[53] One attempt to assess the humanities' role in teaching critical thinking and reducing belief in pseudoscientific claims was made at North Carolina State University. Some success was noted and the researchers emphasized the value of the humanities in providing the skills to evaluate current events and qualitative data in context.[54]

Scott Lilienfeld notes that there is some evidence to suggest that basic critical thinking skills might be successfully taught to children at a younger age than previously thought.[55]

Importance in academics[edit]

Critical thinking is an important element of all professional fields and academic disciplines (by referencing their respective sets of permissible questions, evidence sources, criteria, etc.). Within the framework of scientific skepticism, the process of critical thinking involves the careful acquisition and interpretation of information and use of it to reach a well-justified conclusion. The concepts and principles of critical thinking can be applied to any context or case but only by reflecting upon the nature of that application. Critical thinking forms, therefore, a system of related, and overlapping, modes of thought such as anthropological thinking, sociological thinking, historical thinking, political thinking, psychological thinking, philosophical thinking, mathematical thinking, chemical thinking, biological thinking, ecological thinking, legal thinking, ethical thinking, musical thinking, thinking like a painter, sculptor, engineer, business person, etc. In other words, though critical thinking principles are universal, their application to disciplines requires a process of reflective contextualization. Psychology offerings, for example, have included courses such as Critical Thinking about the Paranormal, in which students are subjected to a series of cold readings and tested on their belief of the "psychic", who is eventually announced to be a fake.[56]

Critical thinking is considered important in the academic fields for enabling one to analyze, evaluate, explain, and restructure thinking, thereby ensuring the act of thinking without false belief. However, even with knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning, mistakes occur, and due to a thinker's inability to apply the methodology consistently, and because of overruling character traits such as egocentrism. Critical thinking includes identification of prejudice, bias, propaganda, self-deception, distortion, misinformation, etc.[57] Given research in cognitive psychology, some educators believe that schools should focus on teaching their students critical thinking skills and cultivation of intellectual traits.[58]

Critical thinking skills can be used to help nurses during the assessment process. Through the use of critical thinking, nurses can question, evaluate, and reconstruct the nursing care process by challenging the established theory and practice. Critical thinking skills can help nurses problem solve, reflect, and make a conclusive decision about the current situation they face. Critical thinking creates "new possibilities for the development of the nursing knowledge".[59] Due to the sociocultural, environmental, and political issues that are affecting healthcare delivery, it would be helpful to embody new techniques in nursing. Nurses can also engage their critical thinking skills through the Socratic method of dialogue and reflection. This practice standard is even part of some regulatory organizations such as the College of Nurses of Ontario's Professional Standards for Continuing Competencies (2006).[60] It requires nurses to engage in Reflective Practice and keep records of this continued professional development for possible review by the college.

Critical thinking is also considered important for human rights education for toleration. The Declaration of Principles on Tolerance adopted by UNESCO in 1995 affirms that "education for tolerance could aim at countering factors that lead to fear and exclusion of others, and could help young people to develop capacities for independent judgement, critical thinking and ethical reasoning".[61]

Online communication[edit]

The advent and rising popularity of online courses have prompted some to ask if computer-mediated communication (CMC) promotes, hinders, or has no effect on the amount and quality of critical thinking in a course (relative to face-to-face communication). There is some evidence to suggest a fourth, more nuanced possibility: that CMC may promote some aspects of critical thinking but hinder others. For example, Guiller et al. (2008)[62] found that, relative to face-to-face discourse, online discourse featured more justifications, while face-to-face discourse featured more instances of students expanding on what others had said. The increase in justifications may be due to the asynchronous nature of online discussions, while the increase in expanding comments may be due to the spontaneity of 'real-time' discussion. Newman et al. (1995)[63] showed similar differential effects. They found that while CMC boasted more important statements and linking of ideas, it lacked novelty. The authors suggest that this may be due to difficulties participating in a brainstorming-style activity in an asynchronous environment. Rather, the asynchrony may promote users to put forth "considered, thought out contributions".

Researchers assessing critical thinking in online discussion forums often employ a technique called Content Analysis,[63][62] where the text of online discourse (or the transcription of face-to-face discourse) is systematically coded for different kinds of statements relating to critical thinking. For example, a statement might be coded as "Discuss ambiguities to clear them up" or "Welcoming outside knowledge" as positive indicators of critical thinking. Conversely, statements reflecting poor critical thinking may be labeled as "Sticking to prejudice or assumptions" or "Squashing attempts to bring in outside knowledge". The frequency of these codes in CMC and face-to-face discourse can be compared to draw conclusions about the quality of critical thinking.

Searching for evidence of critical thinking in discourse has roots in a definition of critical thinking put forth by Kuhn (1991),[64] which emphasizes the social nature of discussion and knowledge construction. There is limited research on the role of social experience in critical thinking development, but there is some evidence to suggest it is an important factor. For example, research has shown that 3- to 4-year-old children can discern, to some extent, the differential creditability[65] and expertise[66] of individuals. Further evidence for the impact of social experience on the development of critical thinking skills comes from work that found that 6- to 7-year-olds from China have similar levels of skepticism to 10- and 11-year-olds in the United States.[67] If the development of critical thinking skills was solely due to maturation, it is unlikely we would see such dramatic differences across cultures.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Edward M. Glaser. "Defining Critical Thinking". The International Center for the Assessment of Higher Order Thinking (ICAT, US)/Critical Thinking Community. Retrieved 22 March 2017.
  2. ^ Clarke, John (2019). Critical Dialogues: Thinking Together in Turbulent Times. Bristol: Policy Press. p. 6. ISBN 978-1-4473-5097-2.
  3. ^ "Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development". www.telacommunications.com. Archived from the original on 9 May 2019. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  4. ^ "It's a Fine Line Between Narcissism and Egocentrism". Psychology Today. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  5. ^ Jump up to:a b Visser, Jan; Visser, Muriel (2019). Seeking Understanding: The Lifelong Pursuit to Build the Scientific Mind. Leiden: BRILL. p. 233. ISBN 978-90-04-41680-2.
  6. ^ Stanlick, Nancy A.; Strawser, Michael J. (2015). Asking Good Questions: Case Studies in Ethics and Critical Thinking. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing. p. 6. ISBN 978-1-58510-755-1.
  7. ^ Chiarini, Andrea; Found, Pauline; Rich, Nicholas (2015). Understanding the Lean Enterprise: Strategies, Methodologies, and Principles for a More Responsive Organization. Cham: Springer. p. 132. ISBN 978-3-319-19994-8.
  8. ^ "A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking". www.criticalthinking.org. Retrieved 14 March 2018.
  9. ^ Walters, Kerry (1994). Re-Thinking Reason. Albany: State University of New York Press. pp. 181–98.
  10. ^ Elkins, James R. "The Critical Thinking Movement: Alternating Currents in One Teacher's Thinking". myweb.wvnet.edu. Archived from the original on 13 June 2018. Retrieved 23 March 2014.
  11. ^ "Critical Thinking Index Page".
  12. ^ "Defining Critical Thinking".
  13. ^ Brown, Lesley. (ed.) The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993) p. 551.
  14. ^ "Lexical Investigations: Critical Thinking - Everything After Z by Dictionary.com". Everything After Z by Dictionary.com. 25 June 2013. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  15. ^ "Socrates". Biography. Archived from the original on 28 March 2019. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  16. ^ Jump up to:a b Scriven, Michael; Paul, Richard (1987). "Critical Thinking as Defined by the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking". www.criticalthinking.org. The Foundation for Critical Thinking. Retrieved 21 January 2022.
  17. ^ "critical thinking". Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House. Retrieved 21 January 2022.
  18. ^ Facione, Peter A. (2011). "Critical Thinking: What It is and Why It Counts". insightassessment.com. p. 26. Archived from the original on 29 July 2013. Retrieved 4 August 2012.
  19. ^ Mulnix, J. W. (2010). "Thinking critically about critical thinking". Educational Philosophy and Theory. 44 (5): 471. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x. S2CID 145168346.
  20. ^ Nieto, Ana M.; Saiz, Carlos (2010). "Critical Thinking: A Question of Aptitude and Attitude?". Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines. Philosophy Documentation Center. 25 (2): 19–26. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews20102524. ISSN 1093-1082.
  21. ^ Carmichael, Kirby; letter to Olivetti, Laguna Salada Union School District, May 1997.
  22. ^ "critical analysis". TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved 30 November 2016.
  23. ^ "Book Reviews and Notes : Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice. Joan Baron and Robert Sternberg. 1987. W.H. Freeman, & Co., New York. 275 pages. Index. ISBN 0-7167-1791-3. Paperback". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 8 (1): 101. February 1988. doi:10.1177/0270467688008001113. ISSN 0270-4676. S2CID 220913799.
  24. ^ Jump up to:a b Facione, Peter A.; Facione, Noreen C. (March 1993). "Profiling critical thinking dispositions". Assessment Update. 5 (2): 1–4. doi:10.1002/au.3650050202. ISSN 1041-6099.
  25. ^ Halpern, Diane F. (2006), "The Nature and Nurture of Critical Thinking", in Sternberg, Robert J; Roediger Iii, Henry L; Halpern, Diane F (eds.), Critical Thinking in Psychology, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–14, doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804632.002, ISBN 9780511804632
  26. ^ Judge, Brenda; McCreery, Elaine; Jones, Patrick (2009). Critical Thinking Skills for Education Students. SAGE. p. 9. ISBN 978-1-84445-556-0.
  27. ^ Walters, Kerry (1994). Re-Thinking Reason. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  28. ^ Ennis, Robert H. (2015), "Critical Thinking", The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education, Palgrave Macmillan, doi:10.1057/9781137378057.0005, ISBN 9781137378057
  29. ^ Siegel, Harvey (27 September 2013). Educating Reason. doi:10.4324/9781315001722. ISBN 9781315001722.
  30. ^ Kuhn, Deanna (January 2015). "Thinking Together and Alone". Educational Researcher. 44 (1): 46–53. doi:10.3102/0013189x15569530. ISSN 0013-189X. S2CID 145335117.
  31. ^ Salmon, Merrilee H. (2013). Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, Sixth Edition. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. p. 12. ISBN 978-1-133-04975-3.
  32. ^ Sherrie, Wisdom (2015). Handbook of Research on Advancing Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. p. 294. ISBN 978-1-4666-8412-6.
  33. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Kerry S. Walters (1994). Re-Thinking Reason: New Perspectives in Critical Thinking. SUNY Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-2095-9.
  34. ^ Reynolds, Martin (2011). Critical thinking and systems thinking: towards a critical literacy for systems thinking in practice. In: Horvath, Chrii. and Forte, James M. eds. Critical Thinking. New York: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 37–68.
  35. ^ Jones, Elizabeth A., & And Others (1995). National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identifying College Graduates' Essential Skills in Writing, Speech and Listening, and Critical Thinking. Final Project Report (NCES-95-001) (PDF). from National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, University Park, PA.; Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC.; U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328. PUB TYPE - Reports Research/Technical (143) pp. 14–15. ISBN 978-0-16-048051-5. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  36. ^ Jump up to:a b Edward M. Glaser (1941). An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking. New York, Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University. ISBN 978-0-404-55843-7.
  37. ^ The National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identification of the Skills to be Taught, Learned, and Assessed, NCES 94–286, US Dept of Education, Addison Greenwood (Ed), Sal Carrallo (PI). See also, Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. ERIC Document No. ED 315–423
  38. ^ "Teaching Metacognition". Metacognition. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  39. ^ Facione, Peter A.; Sánchez, Carol A.; Facione, Noreen C.; Gainen, Joanne (1995). "The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking". The Journal of General Education. 44 (1): 1–25. ISSN 0021-3667. JSTOR 27797240.
  40. ^ Bailin, Sharon; Case, Roland; Coombs, Jerrold R.; Daniels, Leroi B. (May 1999). "Common misconceptions of critical thinking". Journal of Curriculum Studies. 31 (3): 269–283. doi:10.1080/002202799183124. ISSN 0022-0272.
  41. ^ "Research at Human Science Lab". Human Science Lab. Retrieved 5 March 2017.
  42. ^ Solomon, S.A. (2002) "Two Systems of Reasoning", in Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, Govitch, Griffin, Kahneman (Eds), Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-79679-8; Thinking and Reasoning in Human Decision Making: The Method of Argument and Heuristic Analysis, Facione and Facione, 2007, California Academic Press. ISBN 978-1-891557-58-3
  43. ^ Research on Sociocultural Influences on Motivation and Learning, p. 46
  44. ^ Walsh, Catherine, M. (2007). "California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: Further Factor Analytic Examination". Perceptual and Motor Skills. 104 (1): 141–151. doi:10.2466/pms.104.1.141-151. PMID 17450973. S2CID 44863676.
  45. ^ Stupple, E. J. N., Maratos, F. A., Elander, J., Hunt, T. E., Cheung, K. Y., & Aubeeluck, A. V. (2017). Development of the Critical Thinking Toolkit (CriTT): A measure of student attitudes and beliefs about critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 23, 91-100.
  46. ^ Dewey, John. (1910). How we think. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath & Co.
  47. ^ Walters, Kerry. (1994). Re-Thinking Reason. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  48. ^ Critical Thinking FAQs from Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations Archived 11 April 2008 at the Wayback Machine
  49. ^ "Cambridge International AS and A Level subjects".
  50. ^ "New GCEs for 2008", Assessment and Qualifications Alliance Archived 17 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine
  51. ^ "Welcome to Al-Bairaq World". Archived from the original on 19 April 2014. Retrieved 5 July 2014.
  52. ^ Lion Gardiner, Redesigning Higher Education: Producing Dramatic Gains in Student Learning, in conjunction with: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, 1995
  53. ^ Jump up to:a b Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2014). Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 1–40
  54. ^ Frazier, Kendrick (2017). "Humanities, Too: In New Study, History Courses in Critical Thinking Reduce Pseudoscientific Beliefs". Skeptical Inquirer. 41 (4): 11.
  55. ^ Lilienfeld, Scott (2017). "Teaching Skepticism: How Early Can We Begin?". Skeptical Inquirer. 41 (5): 30–31. Archived from the original on 10 August 2018.
  56. ^ Baugher, Bob; Haldeman, Philip (July–August 2019). "Teaching College Students Critical Thinking Skills by Posing as a 'Registered Psychic'". Skeptical Inquirer. Vol. 43, no. 4. Center for Inquiry. pp. 50–52.
  57. ^ Lau, Joe; Chan, Jonathan. "[F08] Cognitive biases". Critical thinking web. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  58. ^ "Critical Thinking, Moral Integrity and Citizenship". Criticalthinking.org. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  59. ^ Boychuk Duchscher, Judy E. (1999). "Catching the wave: understanding the concept of critical thinking". Journal of Advanced Nursing. 29 (3): 577–583. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.00925.x. PMID 28796334.
  60. ^ College of Nurses of Ontario – Professional Standards for Continuing Competencies (2006) Archived 12 September 2014 at the Wayback Machine
  61. ^ "International Day for Tolerance . Declaration of Principles on Tolerance, Article 4, 3". UNESCO. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  62. ^ Jump up to:a b Guiller, Jane; Durndell, Alan; Ross, Anne (2008). "Peer interaction and critical thinking: Face-to-face or online discussion?". Learning and Instruction. 18 (2): 187–200. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.001.
  63. ^ Jump up to:a b Newman, D. R.; Webb, Brian; Cochrane, Clive (1995). "A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer-supported group learning". Interpersonal Computing and Technology. 3 (September 1993): 56–77. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x. PMID 18352969.
  64. ^ Kuhn, D (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  65. ^ Koenig, M A; Harris, P L (2005). "Preschoolers mistrust ignorant and inaccurate speakers". Child Development. 76 (6): 1261–77. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.501.253. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00849.x. PMID 16274439.
  66. ^ Lutz, D J; Keil, F C (2002). "Early understanding of the division of cognitive labor". Child Development. 73 (4): 1073–84. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00458. PMID 12146734.
  67. ^ Heyman, G D; Fu, G; Lee, K (2007). "Evaluating claims peoplemake about themselves: The development of skepticism". Child Development. 78 (2): 367–75. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01003.x. PMC 2570105. PMID 17381778.

Further reading[edit]

Library resources about
Critical thinking

Books[edit]

  • Cederblom, J B.; Paulsen, David (2012). Critical Reasoning: Understanding and Criticizing Arguments and Theories (7th ed.). Andover, Hampshire, UK: Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-0495808787.
  • Damer, T. Edward. (2005) Attacking Faulty Reasoning, 6th Edition, Wadsworth. ISBN 0-534-60516-8
  • Dauer, Francis Watanabe. Critical Thinking: An Introduction to Reasoning, 1989, ISBN 978-0-19-504884-1
  • Fisher, Alec and Scriven, Michael. (1997) Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment, Center for Research in Critical Thinking (UK) / Edgepress (US). ISBN 0-9531796-0-5
  • Hamby, B.W. (2007) The Philosophy of Anything: Critical Thinking in Context. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque Iowa. ISBN 978-0-7575-4724-9
  • Vincent F. Hendricks. (2005) Thought 2 Talk: A Crash Course in Reflection and Expression, New York: Automatic Press / VIP. ISBN 87-991013-7-8
  • Levitin, Daniel (2017). A Field Guide to Lies and Statistics. Viking. ISBN 978-0241239995. (a.k.a. Weaponized Lies: How to Think Critically in the Post-Truth Era)
  • Moore, Brooke Noel and Parker, Richard. (2012) Critical Thinking. 10th ed. Published by McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-803828-6.
  • Paul, Richard. (1995) Critical Thinking: How to Prepare Students for a Rapidly Changing World. 4th ed. Foundation for Critical Thinking. ISBN 0-944583-09-1.
  • Paul, Richard and Elder, Linda. (2006) Critical Thinking Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Publishing. ISBN 0-13-114962-8.
  • Sagan, Carl. (1995) The Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark. Ballantine Books. ISBN 0-345-40946-9
  • Theodore Schick & Lewis Vaughn "How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age" (2010) ISBN 0-7674-2048-9
  • van den Brink-Budgen, R (2010) Critical Thinking for Students, How To Books. ISBN 978-1-84528-386-5
  • Whyte, J. (2003) Bad Thoughts – A Guide to Clear Thinking, Corvo. ISBN 0-9543255-3-2.
  • David Carl Wilson (2020) A Guide to Good Reasoning: Cultivating Intellectual Virtues (2nd edition) University of Minnesota Libraries Ebook ISBN 978-1-946135-66-7 Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International License, at https://open.lib.umn.edu/goodreasoning/
  • Zeigarnik, B.V. (1927). On finished and unfinished tasks. In English translation Edited by Willis D. Ellis; with an introduction by Kurt Koffka. (1997). A source book of gestalt psychology xiv, 403 p. : ill.; 22 cmHighland, N.Y: Gestalt Journal Press. "This Gestalt Journal Press edition is a verbatim reprint of the book as originally published in 1938" – T.p. verso. ISBN 9780939266302. OCLC 38755142

Articles[edit]

External links[edit]


===
Posted by at

알라딘: [전자책] 일의 격 - 성장하는 나, 성공하는 조직, 성숙한 삶 신수정

알라딘: [전자책] 일의 격
[eBook] 일의 격 - 성장하는 나, 성공하는 조직, 성숙한 삶 
신수정 (지은이)턴어라운드2022-01-24 
=
종이책 페이지수 365쪽,

책소개

페이스북에서 일과 삶에 대한 경험과 통찰로 수많은 직업인들에게 공감과 열광적 지지를 받으며 '선한 영향력'을 실천하는 KT 신수정 부사장의 글을 엮은 책이다. 오랜 시간 축적해온 다양한 현장 경험과 수 천권에 달하는 독서의 흔적으로 채워져 있다. 성장, 성공, 성숙이라는 세 가지 핵심 주제를 바탕으로 개인과 조직, 그리고 우리들의 삶을 더 가치있게 변화시킬 수 있는 실천적 해법을 제시한다.

목차
추천사: 288인의 추천, 그리고 응원의 말. (From. 페이스북)

들어가는 글

1장. 成長(성장) | 일의 성과를 극대화 시키는 기술
_ <성장>의 기쁨과 커리어를 위한 핵심단서

1. 보통 사람의 성공 비결은 과연 무엇일까?
2. 성공의 가장 큰 적은 실패가 아닌 지루함
3. 그냥 찾아가라
4. 연봉을 더 받으려면?
5. 하버드생보다 더 뛰어난 성과를 올리는 방법
6. 상대를 만족시키려면
7. 리더가 에너지를 너무 많이 쓰는 대상이 안되는 게 좋다
8. 평범해도 비범해지는 법
9. 커리어의 80%는 예기치 않은 우연으로 결정된다
10. 바쁜 사람은 항상 바쁘다
11. 유리를 내려칩니다.
12. 때로 뺀돌이가 되어라
13. 어려움과 고민이 들때 답을 찾는 질문
14. 피하는 쪽이 아니라 향하는 쪽으로 생각하라
15. 한 단계 넘으려면 다른 관점이 필요하다
16. 초보 코치가 아니라 코치다
17. 무언가 처음 배울 때 어떤 선생님을 찾아야 할까?
18. 집중력과 의지력의 명과 암
19. 과연 연주를 가장 잘 하는 연주자가 최고의 성공을 할까?
20. 테레사 수녀가 비행기 1등석을 탄 이유
21. 탁월한 사람과 경쟁하면 실력이 늘까?
22. 글로 쓰면 다룰 수 있다
23. 타인의 성공비결이 내게 얼마나 도움이 될까?
24. 주위에 나보다 잘하는 사람이 많다면
25. 나만이 할 수 있는 일에 집중하라
26. 배움의 기술
27. 두드려야 열린다
28. 강렬한 호기심, 그리고 지속하는 힘이 천재를 이긴다
29. 효과적으로 배우는 방법은 비효율적으로 배우는 것이다
30. '처음부터 제대로'가 '민첩함'의 발목을 잡는다
31. '짧게라도 여러번' 전략
32. 낮은 수준의 생각 전략
33. 재능을 발견하는 법
34. 안타를 맞는다는 것은 스트라이크를 던질 수 있다는 의미이다
35. 전략적 무능
36. 꼰대들의 말도 들을 필요가 있다
37. 그리 안 똑똑해도 엄청 똑똑하게 보이는 비결은?
38. 하워드 슐츠는 이태리 카페를 방문한 첫 번째 사람이 아니었다
39. 배움은 습관이다
40. '그때 그걸 했어야 했는데'를 지금 하라
41. 나이가 들어도 똑똑해지려면?
42. 제대로 망치를 두드려라
43. 가장 훌륭한 멘토는 당신이 돈을 지불한 멘토이다
44. 축적 후 발산
45. 빵을 굽는 것이 부끄러운 일이 아니라…
46. 이미 지고 들어가는 말들
47. 속독이냐? 정독이냐?
48. 의지력에 대한 미신타파, 비효율을 추구하라
49. 피드백을 회피하지 말자
50. '즐긴다'는 말의 허상
51. '정보 습득'이 아닌 '기법과 훈련'에 돈과 시간을 투자하라
52. 신뢰를 얻을 수 있는 소소한 비결들
53. 젊은이들에게 대한 가장 큰 조언은?
54. 포기해도 좋다
55. 약점이 강점이 된다
56. Yes는 Yes고 No는 No다
57. 편도체 바로 옆을 까치발로 살금살금 지나가라
58. 백종원의 코칭도 실패하는 이유
59. 성찰하는 사람이 계속 성찰하고, 공부하는 사람이 계속 공부한다
60. 전문가일수록 자신의 영역에서의 일상이 피곤하고 까칠하다
61. 자신이 전문가라면 더 말해야 한다
62. '을'이 되어야 실력이 는다
63. 가장 나쁜 핑계: 나보다 잘하는 사람이 얼마나 많은데요
64. 당신의 재능이 최고의 재산이다
65. 45세 때부터였다

2장. 成功(성공) | 조직을 성공으로 이끄는 리더십의 발견
_ <성공>하는 조직과 리더십 위한 조언

1. 당신은 누구를 발견했는가?
2. 운전자는 멀미하지 않는다
3. 리더는 체스 플레이어가 아니라 정원사다
4. 비판적인 의견을 들을 수 있는 것은 존경심이 있어야 한다
5. Yes맨은 안 좋은 것일까?
6. 상승 에스컬레이터를 타라
7. 중요한 자리의 사람을 쓰는 방법
8. 어떻게 조직의 실력을 급속히 향상 시킬까?
9. 평가에 관하여
10. 왜 훌륭한 목표와 전략이 실행에서 실패할까?
11. 철학, 핵심가치에 대하여
12. 또라이를 떠나보내야 하는 이유
13. 최고의 실행이 안먹히는 이유
14. 우리를 성공하게 한 비결이 우리를 실패하게 할 수 있다
15. 행복한 퇴사자 vs 불행한 퇴사자
16. 상사에게 직언을 어떻게 해야 하나?
17. 구성원들 신뢰에 대한 오해
18. 힘들게 하는 상사를 어떻게 대해야 하는가?
19. 10명의 파워풀한 팀을 만들 수 있다면 1천 명이 되어도 문제가 없다
20. 변화에 대하여
21. 새로운 일을 꺼리고 저항하는 이유는 싫어서가 아니라 몰라서이다
22. 이게 우리가 살 길
23. 리더가 되기 전까지는 자신을 성장시키지만, 리더가 된 후에는 타인을 성장시킨다
24. 어떻게 동기를 부여할 것인가?
25. 다른 사람들에게 영감을 주려면?
26. Learn it all은 Know it all을 이긴다
27. 일을 싫어하는 게 아니라 일을 시키는 방식을 싫어하는 것이다
28. 조직을 하나로 만드는 첫 번째 열쇠
29. 나쁜 팀은 없다. 나쁜 리더가 있을 뿐이다
30. 조직의 건강한 성장의 가장 큰 위험
31. 다름을 이해하고, 문제를 해결한다
32. 우리가 진실이라고 받아들이는 가정이 때로 우리를 한계 짓는다
33. 사람들은 '이득'이 되는 방향으로 움직일 뿐이다
34. 너 웃어? 장난해?
35. 비효율의 숙달화
36. 좋은 회사란 무엇인가?
37. 착한 리더는 호구가 될 수도 있다
38. 전문가는 자신이 움직이고, 리더는 타인을 움직인다
39. 모르는 걸 모른다고 말할 용기
40. 유능한 직원을 무능하게 만드는 간단한 방법
41. 내가 말하지 않으면 리더도 나를 잘 모른다
42. 리더가 상처받지 않고 직원 피드백 받은 법
43. 훌륭한 리더가 되려면 성격을 바꾸어야 할까?
44. 리더가 존경받기 어려운 17가지 이유
45. 비효율이 효과적인 때가 있다
46. 지휘자는 소리를 내지 않는다
47. 리더는 직원과 어느 정도 개인적 유대를 맺어야 할까?
48. '팀장'이 아니라 '리더'로서 소명 의식이 중요하다.
49. 사람에게서 해결책을 찾으려 하지 마라
50. 누구를 선택할 것인가?
51. 있는 게 아니라 만드는 것이다
52. 저 사람은 어떻게 저 자리에 올랐을까?
53. 창문을 열면 파리도 들어온다
54. 상대가 진짜 똑똑한지 허풍인지 구별하는 방법

3장. 成熟(성숙) | 일과 삶의 의미를 발견하는 방법
_ <성숙>한 삶을 위한 통찰

1. 나를 밀어내는 사람
2. 나답게 산다는 것은? 좋은 사람으로 사는 것을 포기함
3. 실패한 후의 태도가 그 다음을 결정한다
4. 너무 일희일비할 필요가 없다
5. 자신의 의자의 세 번째 다리는?
6. 소박하게 사는 게 좋을까? 사치스럽게 사는 게 좋을까?
7. 과제의 분리
8. 그만하자
9. 더 많이 행동하면 더 행복해진다
10. 조금은 빈둥거려도 괜찮다
11. 착한 척 하다보니 착하게 되었다
12. 자리가 사람을 만드는가? 사람이 자리를 만드는가?
13. 그게 다다
14. 동일한 일만 계속하면 인생이 통째로 사라진다
15. 시그널이 불필요한 삶
16. 내가 나를 좌절시키는 것이다
17. 너무 잘 될 때 조심하라
18. 결핍이 우리를 강하게 만든다
19. '업무의 신'이 집에 가서는 인정받지 못하는 이유
20. 쓸데없는 짓은 없다
21. 나는 나의 삶의 통제자요, 원인이요, 자유인인가?
22. 부란 자유와 독립에 관한 것이다
23. 다른 사람들의 인정과 칭찬을 구할 필요가 없는 이유
24. 정말 살고 싶은 삶은?
25. 자랑할 것, 자부심을 가질 것이 무엇인가?
26. I AM ENOUGH
27. 왜 착한 사람들이 더 힘들어 할까?
28. 생각만으로도 살 수 있다
29. '무거워서' 힘든 게 아니다
30. 스트레스는 나의 친구요 나의 도전이다
31. 잘 안돼도 괜찮아
32. '프로이트 vs 아들러', 선택은 당신의 몫
33. 가장 재미있는 스토리는 무엇일까?
34. 자신의 삶을 바꿀 수 있는 것은 오직 '나 자신' 뿐이다
35. 억누르지 말고 관점을 재해석 하라
36. 믿음의 힘
37. 인과관계와 우연이 삶에 미치는 영향
38. 자유, 불안 그리고 삶의 창조자
39. 좋아한다고 너무 퍼주지 마라
40. 두뇌에 가해지는 최악의 행동은 무엇일까?
41. 그깟 사소한 일 하나
42. 우리는 대부분의 시간을 같이 보내는 다섯 사람의 평균이다
43. 주위 평범한 할머니 할아버지가 귀인일 수도 있다
44. 수레가 있으면 길이 난다
45. 멘탈에 관하여
46. 자신의 약점과 트라우마를 명확히 아는 것이 좋다
47. 후퇴를 받아들임
48. Worker가 아니라 Player로 산다
49. 범선인가? 크루즈인가?
50. 노력이라는 미신에 대하여
51. 변화하지 못하는 것은 이득을 놓지 못해서다
52. 이 세계는 자신의 인식의 범위만큼 자신에게 존재한다
53. Be-Do-Have
54. 삶은 그 자체가 선물, 소소한 행복
55. 내게 주어진 인생은 선물이다

마치는 글

접기
책속에서
P. 49
“평범한 일을 비범하게 만드는 것은 남을 위한 것이 아니라 자신의 가치를 높인다. 또한 그런 사람은 절대 그 일만 계속하지 않는다. 더 큰일을 하게 되며, 그렇게 일하는 것이 몸에 익어 더 큰일을 맡거나 자기 사업을 해도 역시 비범하게 한다”
P. 142
“변화에는 고통이 있다. 축적 후 발산이 있다. 그 기간에 참지 못하고 뛰쳐나오고 원칙과 베스트 프랙티스를 버리면 영원히 그 나물, 그 밥에 사는 것이다. 사람들이 성공하지 못하는 이유는 성공의 법칙을 몰라서이기도 하지만, 배우고 알아도 그것을 완전한 변화의 임계점까지 새로운 법칙을 고수하지 못하기 때문이기도 하다. 특히 새로운 변화에 익숙해지기 전까지가 중요한데, 대개 이 기간 동안 견디지 못해 실패하고 원상태로 돌아간다”  접기
P. 200
“리더가 되기 전까지는 자신을 성장시키지만, 리더가 된 후에는 타인을 성장시킨다”
P. 229
“전문가와 리더의 차이는 무엇인가? 많은 차이가 있지만 내가 가장 큰 차이로 생각하는 것은 ‘전문가는 자신이 움직이고, 리더는 타인을 움직인다’는 것이다. 전문가들은 대개 자신이 스스로 뛰어난 아이디어를 내고 직접 구현하는데 익숙하다. 이는 혼자 움직이거나 작고 빠른 조직을 이끌거나 또는 조언을 하는 Staff, 컨설턴트, 코치나 강연자, 작가, 연구자로서는 매우 효과적이다. 그러나 작게는 수십, 많이는 수백, 수천 명의 큰 조직을 이끌거나 큰 사업을 맡는다는 것은 다르다. 이런 경우, 자신이 스스로 할 수 있는 것이 별로 없다. 여기에서의 핵심은 비전을 제시하며 다른 사람들을 움직여야 한다는 것이다. 조직의 구성원들이 움직이지 않으면 자신이 아무리 똑똑하고 전문성이 풍부하고 글로벌로 유명해도 별 효과를 발휘하기 어렵다”  접기
P. 267
“중요한 것은 나답게 사는 것이다. 나 답게 산다는 것은 남들의 기분에 맞추는 것이 아니라 나의 기준에 맞추는 것이다. 자신이 하기 싫은 일은 거절하기도 한다. 거절 당해도 다시 도전한다. 오지랖 넓게 내가 다 해주려 하는 것이 아니라 상대가 스스로 해결하도록 돕거나 내버려 둔다. 돈을 쉽게 빌려주지 않는다. 고민이 되면 혼자 고민하거나 죄책감에 시달리지 말고 상대에게 그냥 이야기한다. 하고 싶은 말을 한다. 때로 독한 인간이라는 소리 듣는 것을 즐겨라”  ==
저자 및 역자소개
신수정 (지은이) 
저자파일
 
신간알리미 신청
현재 KT의 Enterprise 부문장을 맡고 있다.
공학과 경영학을 전공하였고 글로벌 기업, 창업, 벤처, 중견기업, 삼성, SK 등 다양한 기업들을 거치며 일, 리더십, 경영 역량을 쌓았다. 인간을 이해하는 데 관심이 많아 다양한 코칭, 심리, 자기계발 코스를 수료하였다. 삶, 일, 경영과 리더십에 대한 통찰을 나누어 사람들에게 파워와 자유를 주고 한계를 뛰어넘는 비범한 성과를 만들도록 돕는 선한 영향력을 추구하는 것을 삶의 미션으로 삼는다. Inspiring coach이자 Leader로 스스로의 역할을 정의한다. 트위터에 ... 더보기
최근작 : <일의 격> … 총 2종 (모두보기)
출판사 제공
책소개


"삶을 춤추게 만드는 일의 철학"

★★ 페이스북 독자들의 거듭된 출간요청, 드디어 책으로!
★★ 일과 삶의 변화를 먼저 경험한 페이스북 277명의 추천사!

"통찰의 위대함! 행운을 잡을 준비가 되었는가?"_ 강태진
"내가 페이스북을 지우지 않았던 유일한 이유"_ 민현조
"나에게 집중과 성장의 힘이 되어준 글의 힘"_ 이영미

"평범한 일을 비범하게 만드는 것은
남을 위한 것이 아니라 자신의 가치를 높인다"

페이스북의 현인, 리더십 구루
신수정 부사장이 전하는 일과 삶의 통찰!

<일의 격>은 페이스북에서 일과 삶에 대한 경험과 통찰로 수많은 직업인들에게 공감과 열광적 지지를 받으며 '선한 영향력'을 실천하는 KT 신수정 부사장의 글을 엮은 책이다. 오랜 시간 축적해온 다양한 현장 경험과 수 천권에 달하는 독서의 흔적으로 채워져 있다. 성장, 성공, 성숙이라는 세 가지 핵심 주제를 바탕으로 개인과 조직, 그리고 우리들의 삶을 더 가치있게 변화시킬 수 있는 실천적 해법을 제시한다.

★★ "일과 삶을 향한 가장 진실한 형태의 위로"

일을 하다보면, 삶을 살다보면 어렵고 힘든 순간이 있습니다. 그 순간 우리는 누군가에게 그 마음을 털어놓는 것만으로도 큰 위로와 힘이 되곤합니다.

우리는 평소 수많은 사람들과 함께 일하고, 함께 먹고, 함께 웃고 떠들며 대화하는 수많은 관계에 둘러싸여 있습니다. 하지만 막상 누군가로부터 위로와 용기의 말을 듣고 싶은 순간, 의외로 속내를 허심탄회하게 털어놓을 한 사람이 쉽게 떠오르지 않습니다.

그럴 때 사람들은 책을 찾습니다. 차마 말 못했지만 내 마음을 알아주는 한 사람, 한번 듣지 못했지만 나에게 용기내라고 이야기해주는 한 사람, 정말 필요했지만 그동안 요구하지 못했던 공감을 보내주는 한 사람, 그 사람 대신 우리는 책을 들춰봅니다.

<일의 격>은 당신에게 그런 한 사람이 되어줄 것입니다. 단순히 눈물을 닦아주고 마음을 다독이는, 막연한 위로와 응원 대신 지금 흘리고 있는 땀과 눈물의 본질적 의미를 이해할 수 있도록 도와줄 것입니다. 스스로의 삶과 마음의 주인이 될 수 있는 방법과 지혜, 그리고 용기를 나눌 것입니다.

작가는 '선한 영향력'으로 조금이라도 더 살기좋은 세상을 만들고 싶다고 말합니다. 출판사는 '선한 영향력'이 당신의 일과 삶에 닿을 수 있도록 더 노력하고 싶습니다. 만약 누군가 이 글을 보게된다면 꼭 하고 싶은 이야기가 있습니다.

"정말 잘 찾아오셨습니다"

이 책이 당신의 일과 삶을 위한 작은 보탬이 될 수 있길 진심을 담아 소망합니다.

_ 턴어라운드 강민호 접기
=
평점 분포
    9.2=
     
고대하던 책이 나왔네요. 글을 소장해서 보게 되어 기쁩니다.  구매
세라 2021-07-01 공감 (0) 댓글 (0)
Thanks to
 
공감
마이리뷰
구매자 (2)
전체 (3)
리뷰쓰기
공감순 
     
일의 격 새창으로 보기 구매
독서모임 트레바리를 하면서 읽게 된 도서다. 



책의 구성자체는 옴니버스 식(? 맞나. 여하튼간 매우 짧은 단편의 글)으로 구성되어 있어 읽기에 매우 편했고, 술술 읽혔다. 책 자체도 원래는 페이스북에 저자가 짧게 쓰던 것들이 반응이 좋자 묶어서 내게 된 것이라고 한다. 



요새 너도 나도 '투자' , '투자' , '투자' 하는데, 투자라는 것을 잘하기 위해서는 주식의 경우는 기본적인 비즈니스에 대한 이해, 부동산의 경우는 입지와 수익성에 대한 판단력이 필요하다. 



그리고 직장생활은 종잣돈을 모으는 과정일 뿐 아니라, 주식투자자의 입장에서는 비즈니스를 돈 받으면서 배우고, 이해할 수 있는 과정인데, 그런 것들을 어떻게 하면 충실하게 이행할 수 있는지(?)에 대해서 다루고 있는 도서다. 



재미있게 읽어보실만한 도서였다. 


변화에는 고통이 있다. 축적 후 발산이 있다. 그 기간에 참지 못하고 뛰쳐나오고 원칙과 베스트 프랙티스를 버리면 영원히 그 나물, 그 밥에 사는 것이다. 사람들이 성공하지 못하는 이유는 성공의 법칙을 몰라서이기도 하지만, 배우고 알아도 그것을 완전한 변화의 임계점까지 새로운 법칙을 고수하지 못하기 때문이기도 하다.

세상은 꿈을 권고하는 사람을 따르는 게 아니라 자신의 꿈이 선명한 사람을 따른다. 자신의 꿈을 선택하고 그것을 선포하면 된다. 그것이 자신을 행복하게도 하고, 다른 사람들에게도 영감을 준다.

바보 같은 질문이다. 평범한 일을 비범하게 만드는 것은 남을 위한 것이 아니라 자신의 가치를 높인다. 또한 그런 사람은 절대 그 일만 계속하지 않는다. 더 큰일을 하게 되며, 그렇게 일하는 것이 몸에 익어 더 큰일을 맡거나 자기 사업을 해도 역시 비범하게 한다.

이후도 야생마 같은 임원을 발견하고 보호한 덕분에 고통스러운 변혁을 이루어낼 수 있었고, 숨어있는 보석 같은 사람들을 발견하여 역시 나는 폼만 잡고 멋진 말만 하면 되었다. 결국 리더의 성공의 비결은 감춰진 보석 같은 누군가를 발견하는 것이다. 당신이 발견한 사람들은 과연 누구인가?

그 이유는 ‘불안‘과 ‘두려움‘ 때문이다. ‘자유‘는 ‘불안‘과 ‘두려움‘을 동반한다. 권력자들 앞에서 다른 의견을 개진할 때 불이익을 받을 두려움, 현재의 위치를 떨치고 나올 때 무언가 잘 안 돌아가거나 실패할 두려움, 현재의 관계를 끊을 때 저항 받고 비난받을 두려움들이 자유를 제한한다. 사르트르는 심지어 ‘불안은 자유의 증거다‘라고 했다.
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)