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.