Charles Ungerleider, Professor
Emeritus, The University of British Columbia
[permission to reproduce
granted if authorship is acknowledged]
Teaching
students to think critically about the information they encounter is among the
professed goals of education. In British Columbia, where I live, the idea is
enshrined in the provincial
regulation that defines intellectual
development as the prime goal of education. The regulation says that the goal
of education is “to develop the ability of students to analyze critically,
reason and think independently....”
While
critical and reflective thinking figure prominently in British Columbia’s curriculum, it does not explicitly address
the four concepts students must understand and be able to apply to think
critically: the difference between factual claims and value claims, and the
differences between a concept and a conception.
Factual
claims and value claims play a pivotal role in arguments, discussions, and decision-making.
There are two types of factual claims: empirical and analytical. Empirical claims
are statements that can be proven true or false through observation,
measurement, or other empirical methods. For example, "the Earth orbits
the sun" is a factual claim because it can be supported by astronomical
evidence. Empirical claims are the foundation of empirical research and are
crucial for building knowledge about the world.
A second
type of factual claim is analytical. Analytical claims are ones whose truth is
determined by getting clear about the meanings of the words in the statements. “There
are no four-sided triangles” is an analytical claim that is true because the
term triangle means “three-sided figure.” “Some brothers have no siblings
is false because the term brother means “a male who has the same parents
as another person.”
Value
claims are positive or negative judgments about worth, desirability, morality,
or faith. They express judgments based on ethics, aesthetics, or personal
beliefs. These claims are not empirically verifiable in the same way as factual
claims because they are based on individual or cultural values. For example,
"Democracy is the best form of government" is a value claim because
it expresses a judgment based on certain values about governance.
Analytical
claims are assertions that involve the analysis, interpretation, or evaluation
of information. They often involve examining relationships between concepts,
exploring causes and effects, or providing explanations. Analytical claims go
beyond mere observation to provide deeper insight into a subject. For example,
"The rise of social media has transformed communication practices" is
an analytical claim because it analyzes the impact of social media on
communication.
It
isn’t possible to think critically without understanding these distinctions.
For example, in debates on climate change, distinguishing between the factual
claim that "carbon dioxide levels have risen significantly in the
industrial era," the value claim that "we are morally obligated to
reduce carbon emissions," and the analytical claim that "implementing
renewable energy sources can reduce carbon emissions" is crucial for
clear, effective argumentation and communication.
Confusion
ensues when students fail to recognize the distinction between the types of
claims. Conflating facts and values makes it impossible to think critically
about issues. For example, in discussions about vaccination, conflating factual
claims about vaccine safety with value claims about community responsibility
can lead to misunderstandings and resistance based on misinterpretation rather
than informed judgment.
Fostering
critical thinking is essential for informed citizenship, personal development,
and meaningful engagement with the world. If teachers do not help students
understand and make those distinctions, students will not be able to think
critically.
The
same can be said about teaching the distinction between concepts and conceptions.
Concepts are mental building blocks representing a general idea or category
(for example, democracy). A conception is an individual’s interpretation or
understanding of that concept based upon the individual’s beliefs, experiences,
and knowledge. Failing to differentiate between these can lead to
miscommunication, misunderstanding, and impaired critical thinking. Individuals
may use the same words but mean different things. For example, conflating the
concept of evolution with one’s personal conceptions impedes acceptance of
empirical evidence. Similarly, a narrow or skewed understanding of democracy,
based on limited conceptions, can impede civic engagement and appreciation of
democratic principles and practices. Understanding the nature of claims and
concepts is key to debate, decision-making, and a more informed, empathetic,
and cohesive society.