Newsroom Magazine USA Edition USA Edition Today Is Sunday, May 26, 2013

Contact Information

Newsroom Banner




The intellectual roots of critical thinking date back to the Greek philosophers.

Socrates discovered, by means of probing questions, that in the exchange of competing ideas, people sometimes make confident claims based on unreliable assumptions or failed logic.

Such arguments, he discovered, were either erroneous in fact, absent sufficient foundation, or failing in logic. Instead, most arguments were based on confused meanings, inadequate evidence, or contradictory beliefs.

Socrates' contributions to critical thinking were many -- for he established new ways to think about contentious issues in terms of the quality of assumptions, facts and logic.

Thus Socrates demonstrated that persons may have passion, or power or high position but yet be deeply confused and irrational.

Good journalism, like compelling debate, is based on a clear understanding of facts and the logical construction of one's argument. And that is what the Socratic Method and The Sophist Tradition is all about.

Evidentiary Approach

The Socratic Method is the preferred way to examine issues.

In the Socratic mode of questioning, postulations, ideas or arguments are examined for their clarity and logical consistency by systematic analysis of facts, assumptions and logical methodology to support a conclusion.

Socratic analysis is accomplished by means of a series of probing questions that systematically examine the quality of an argument or conclusion.

Understanding the quality of information, argument or one's conclusions, is fundamental to critical thinking -- and the goal of critical editing.

Historical Foundation

Socrates’ practice was followed by the critical thinking of Plato (who recorded Socrates’ thought), Aristotle, and the Greek skeptics, all of whom emphasized that things are often very different from what they appear to be.

Only the trained mind is prepared to see through the way things look to us on the surface (delusive appearances) to the way they really are beneath the surface (the deeper realities of life.)

From this ancient Greek tradition emerged the need, for anyone who aspired to understand the deeper realities, to think systematically, to trace implications broadly and deeply; for only thinking that is comprehensive, well-reasoned, and responsive to objections can take us beyond the surface.

Means Of Analysis

The common denominators of Critical Thinking requires, for example, the systematic monitoring of thought; that thinking, to be critical, must not be accepted at face value, but must be analyzed and assessed for its clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, and logical validity. All reasoning occurs within points of view and frames of reference.

All reasoning proceeds from some goals, objectives, and has an informational base. All data, when used in reasoning, must be interpreted. That interpretation involves concepts, that concepts entail assumptions, and that all basic inferences in thought have implications, and each of these dimensions of thinking need to be monitored where problems of thinking can occur.

Questioning Chain

The result of the collective contribution of the history of critical thought is that the basic questions of Socrates can now be much more powerfully and focally framed.

In every domain of human thought, and within every use of reasoning within any domain, it is now possible to question:

• ends and objectives
• the status and wording of questions
• the sources of information and fact
• the method and quality of information collection
• the mode of judgment and reasoning used
• the concepts that make that reasoning possible
• the assumptions that underlie concepts in use
• the implications that follow from their use
• the point of view or frame of reference within which reasoning takes place

Jeffrey Slee
Logician


Editorial Standards & Policies
Browse All Content
Browse
Defense Department Section
DOD Speaks To Sequestration’s Long Range Consequences On Intelligence

Published: Friday March 1, 2013 6:00 am EDT
Article Length: 860 Words
Reading Time: 4 Minutes

We cannot accomplish our mission without the men and women who serve this nation so well. The impact sequestration will have on an organization that depends on human resources for its capability is astoundingly complex and far-reaching.

Defense Intelligence Agency Director Army Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn

Washington

Department Of Defense

Officials: Cuts, Unstable Budget Threaten Intelligence Mission

February 28, 2013

By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 28, 2013 – Along with al-Qaida, nuclear proliferation and cyber threats, budget instability and the prospect of further deep spending cuts are among the nation’s most pressing national security challenges, top defense intelligence officials told a congressional panel yesterday.

Michael G. Vickers, undersecretary of defense for intelligence, and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Army Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn testified during the unclassified part of a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee’s intelligence, emerging threats and capabilities subcommittee.

Elements of the intelligence community that are part of DOD include DIA, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the National Reconnaissance Office, Vickers said. Nearly 60,000 civilians and 123,000 service members support DOD’s national and military intelligence missions at home and alongside combat forces worldwide.

Defense intelligence partners include counterparts in the broader intelligence community, he noted, including the director of national intelligence, the CIA, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI and many other elements.

President Barack Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget request seeks $19.2 billion for the military intelligence program, the undersecretary said, which funds intelligence, counterintelligence and intelligence-related programs, projects and activities that provide capabilities to meet warfighter operational and tactical requirements.

Vickers reviewed the top intelligence challenges for the Defense Department and the nation:

– Transitioning the mission in Afghanistan to Afghan leadership;

– Preparing for increased instability during the Arab world’s historic transition;

– Preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;

– Ensuring continued U.S. access to the global commons and critical regions such as East Asia; and

– Continuing to provide decisive intelligence to policymakers, operators and warfighters.

“Finally,” Vickers added, “we must ensure the continued economic leadership of the United States. This is the foundation upon which our long-term national security rests. At the same time as our intelligence and defense budgets are declining, the challenges … are increasing and becoming more complex.”

He described intelligence as a major source of U.S. advantage that “informs wise policy and enables precision operations. It is our front line of defense.” To maintain and bolster that front line, Vickers added, requires critical investment in a range of capabilities.

The war against al-Qaida and instability in the Middle East and North Africa make it necessary for DOD to continue enhancing its counterterrorism capabilities, he said.

“Our national security strategy in Asia will require significantly different investments over the next 15 years … to obtain the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities most appropriate to the unique challenges of ensuring access in the Pacific,” the undersecretary said.

Countering cyber threats and nuclear proliferation calls for new resources and new ways of operating, he added.

The department is improving its human intelligence capabilities by establishing the Defense Clandestine Service, he said, and critical intelligence capabilities like overhead and cryptologic architectures continue to need modernization and recapitalization.

“Budgetary instability and the prospect of further deep cuts,” Vickers said, “put these investments at risk.”

When Flynn addressed the panel, he noted that the nation is at a moment of transition and that the global security environment presents increasingly complex challenges and a growing list of threats and adversaries.

“Demands on the U.S. intelligence system have skyrocketed in recent years, and these demands are only expected to increase,” the general said. Noting that the DIA puts its people first, he added that sequestration — the deep and sudden budget cuts scheduled to begin tomorrow — will negatively affect the agency’s more than 16,000 employees in 262 locations worldwide, including 142 countries and 31 states.

“We cannot accomplish our mission without the men and women who serve this nation so well,” Flynn said. “The impact sequestration will have on an organization that depends on human resources for its capability is astoundingly complex and far-reaching.”

The director characterized a geometric impact that includes the cost of lost opportunity and the cost of rebuilding capability the agency stands to lose.

“What we cannot predict is the real impact on national security of that lost capability,” Flynn added.

“If we think that our adversaries will use this time to take a strategic pause, or that we will somehow manage to stay ahead of the most potentially catastrophic intelligence issues while opting to take cuts against the low threat areas, then we are deluding ourselves,” he observed.

“The real cost of this action is in public insecurity and potential strategic surprise,” the director said.

At best, Flynn added, “we may never know what key intelligence we have missed as a result of sequestration. At worst, I fear we may find ourselves rehashing another major intelligence failure.”

Source: Defense Department