Critical Thinking in the Post-Truth Era as Understood by Diane Halpern: Epistemological and Methodological Aspects

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to analyze the understanding of the role of critical thinking in the post-truth era as understood by D. Halpern. To achieve this goal, the method of hermeneutical analysis is used to understand the philosophical ideas and texts of different thinkers and the method of comparative analysis in terms of comparing different definitions of terms, ideas and concepts of critical thinking.

The article establishes that D. Halpern considers critical thinking as purposeful, well-grounded, goal-oriented thinking based on the binary model of understanding information at a deep substantive level and the appropriate level of human use of information processing skills. In addition, the researcher actualizes in the modern philosophical paradigm the heuristic value of the concept of critical thinking as an effective means of solving urgent problems of human existence, in particular in the context of human adaptation to the course and overcoming the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

It has been proven that D. Halpern includes vocabulary, working memory, spatial skills, analogies, information processing speed, puzzle exercises, correlation between IQ and academic performance, etc. as criteria for determining the level of development of human intelligence and critical thinking. However, in her understanding, the application of these criteria does not fully protect a person from cognitive errors: blind spot bias, reactivity, anecdotal reasoning, one-sidedness of information sources, failure to take into account information that does not meet the preferences of the subject, and pressure on a person's opinion from the social environment. Instead, the researcher identifies important critical thinking skills as assessing the reliability of information sources, calculating costs and benefits, recognizing regression to the mean, understanding the limits of extrapolation, leveling out negative reactions, using analogies in reasoning, assessing the strength of arguments that support or deny conclusions, recognizing bias in reasoning, etc.