gândirea critica petre bieltz

8/11/2019 Gndirea Critica Petre Bieltz

1/10

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 2/2008

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Series Letters and Social Sciences, No. 2/2008

179

Gndirea critic garant al

democraiei autentice

Petre Bieltz

Gndirea critic este un domeniuinterdisciplinar nscut pe fondul studiuluisistematic al raionrii (argumentrii). Lanaterea acestui domeniu interdiscipli-nar aucontribuit cu rezultate teoretice i practice omultitudine de preocupri aa cum ar fi

filosofia, psihologia raionrii, sociologia,retorica, logica i chiar cer-cetrile dindomeniul specializat al inteligenei artificiale.Printre principalele motive care au condus laapariia i dezvoltarea investigaiilor degndire critic s-au numrat nc dintrunceput o anume insatisfacie i o reinerelegate de re-levana rezultatelor obinuteseparat de cercetrile citate pentru ceea ceeste de fapt raionarea uman, indiferent dacaceasta este specific oamenilor lipsii de

competene avansate sau este propriesavanilor care dezvoltexplicaii sofisti-cate,elaboreaz ipoteze complexe i caut

justificri teoretice sau experimentale pentruacestea. Desigur, dintre principalele temeiuriimplicate n naterea i am-plificarea

preocuprilor de gndire critic nu putemneglija nici cerinele impuse logicii ca

principal cercetare asupra raionrii dedificultile teoretice sau practice cu care s-auconfruntat dezvoltarea economici politicasocietii actuale, aa cum ar fi decizia

juridic sau economic, cea managerial dinori-care domeniu, iar n ultimul rndncercrile de iniiere i de consolidare a uneiorganizri sociale fundamentat pe odemocraie autentic. S ne reamintim aicispusele celui de al treilea preedinte dinistoria Statelor Unite al Americii: ntr-onaiune republican, ai crei ceteni urmeaza fi guvernai cu ajutorul raiunii i al

Critical thought guarantor of

authentic democratic

Petre Bieltz

Critical thought is aninterdisciplinary field born on thesystematic study background of reason(argumentation). To the birth of thisinterdisciplinary field, with theoretical and

practical results have contributed many

concerns like philosophy, the psychologyof reason, sociology, oratory, logics andeven the researches in the specialized fieldof artificial intelligence. Among the mainreasons that have lead to the appearanceand development of critical thoughtinvestigations there are from the beginninga kind of dissatisfaction and refrainconnected to the relevance of the resultsseparately obtained by the aforementionedresearches for what it actually is human

reason, no matter whether is it specific topeople without advanced abilities or properto scholars with sophisticatedexplanations, complex hypotheses andtheoretical or experimental justificationsfor them. Of course, among the mainreasons involved in creating andamplifying the critical thought concerns,we cannot neglect the requirementsimposed to logics as the main requestupon reason the theoretical or practical

difficulties of the economic and politicaldevelopment of the current society, like

juridical or economical decision, themanagerial decision or in any other field,and last the trials to initiate and develop asocial organization grounded on anauthentic democracy. Lets remember thewords of the third president in the historyof the United States of America: In arepublican nation, whose citizens will be


2/10


3/10



181

este monotonic: dacpornim de la premiseledate, concluzia rezultcu necesi-tate i nimicnu o poate infirma sau rsturna. Dac la

premisele iniiale adugm informaii noi,vom obine, tot cu necesitate, nc o

concluzie, dar acest aspect nu schimb cunimic nici raionamentul i nici concluziainiiale. Mai exact, sconsiderm o operaiearitmetic elementar: din premisa 2+3rezult cu nece-sitate concluzia 5; acum,dac la premisa iniial adugm o nouinformaie, de pild, cea redatde numrul 4,vom obine o nco concluzie, respectiv, 9,dar din 2+3 rezulttot 5.

Cu totul altfel stau lucrurile n cazulraionrii nematematice, indiferent dac, aa

cum precizat, raionatorul este un om obinuitlipsit de competene lo-gice sau un savant cunaltspecializare. Astfel, chiar n situaia ncare el nu este dominat i nici mcarinfluenat hotrtor de triri pur subiectivesau de in-terese meschine, mai ales omulobinuit pune un accent prioritar i chiarabsolut pe coninutul ideilor cu care opereazsau vine n contact i nu pe formele iexigenele formale ale raionrii. S lumdrept exemplu un experiment propus n 1966de celebrul psiholog cognitivist Peter Wason.Fie patru cartonae care sunt inscripionate peambele faete, pe una din ele cu litere i pecealalt cu nu-mere ntregi, dar care sunt

prezentate diferit, mai exact, primele douapar cu faeta pe care sunt inscripionate litereiar ultimele dou cu faeta pe care suntnscrise cifre, adiccele patru cartonae suntdispuse dupcum urmeaz:

age they live in. Such a reason ismonotonic: is we start from the given

premises, the conclusion necessarily resultand nothing can deny or turn it. If to theinitial premises, we add another one, we

will necessarily obtain another conclusion,but this does not change the initial reasonor conclusion. More specifically, letsconsider an elementary arithmeticoperation: from the 2+3 premises 5conclusion necessarily results; now, if weadd a new information to the initial

premises, foe example the one given bynumber 4, we will get a new conclusion,respectively 9, but 2+3 results into 5also.

Things are different in the case ofnon-mathematic reason, no matter if, asstated before, the thinker is a common manwithout logical abilities or a highspecialized scholar. Therefore even if he isnot dominated or at least influenced by

purely subjective feelings or meaninterests, especially the common man putsthe accent and even on the content of ideashe operates with or comes into contactwith and not on the forms or formalrequirements of reason. Lets consider forexample, an experiment proposed in 1966

by the famous cognitivist psychologistPeter Wason. Lets consider four smallcards written on both sides, with letters onone side and number on the other, butdifferently presented, more exactly, thefirst two with the side with letter and thelast two with the side with numbers,meaning the four small cards are aligned as

follows:

E C 5 4

Experimentul ne cere s verificm dac ncazul acestor cartonae a fost sau nu respectatregula conform creia dacpe faeta vizibila

The experiment requires us to checkwhether in the case of these small cardsthe rule according to which if the visible


4/10



182

cartonaului apare o vocal, atunci pecealalt faet a aceluiai cartona esteinscripionat un nu-mr impar. Pentru averifica aceast regul, subiectul are voie sntoarc doar dou din cele patru

cartonae.Trebuie spus c un numrimpresionant dintre su-bieci, n fondmajoritatea covritoare a acestora, au oferitrezolvri greite ale sarcinii menionate.

n schimb rezultatul este mai bun, dacexperimentul este repetat cu exact aceiaisubieci crora li se prezinttot patru cartonae,dar altfel inscripionate. De aceast dat, cele

patru catonaele corespund unor consumatoriaezai la aceeai mas dintr-un restaurant. n

plus, fiecare dintre cartonae este acum alt-fel

inscripionat, respectiv, pe una din faetele salese afl numele buturii consu-mate, iar pecealalt faet a sa se afl vrstaconsumatorului. n sfrit, de acea-stcatonaele sunt dispuse n urmtoareasuccesiune:

Rom Cola

25

ani

14

ani

iar n aceast nou situaie se cere aceloraisubieci s rezolve exact aceeai sar-cin,adic s verifice respectarea unei reguliconform creia consumul buturi-loralcoolice este interzis minorilor. Mai mult,

pentru gsirea soluiei subiecii trebuie sprocedeze la fel ca n primul caz: ei au voie s

ntoarc dou i numai dou din cartonaeledate. De aceastdat, procentul cel mai marea revenit su-biecilor care au descoperit soluiacorect.

Diferena de performan dintresituaiile de decizie (alegere) analizate tre-

buie s dispun de o explicaie ce ine deaptitudinile decidenilor. Specialitii par a fide acord cu explicaia c rezultatele net maislabe din prima situaie n care maxim 25%

side of the small cars appears a vowel,

then on the other side of the same small

card there is an odd number appears is

valid. In order to check this rule, thesubject is allowed to turn only two of the

four small cards. We have to mention thata significant number of the subjects, mostof them have given wrong results for thetask.

In turn, the result is better, if theexperiment is repeated with exactly thesame subjects, who are presented foursmall cards written differently. This time,the four small cards correspond to someconsumers placed at the same table in arestaurant. More than that, each of the

small cards is written differently, on oneside there is the name of the drink, and onthe other side the age of the consumer.Finally these small cards are aligned asfollows:

Rum Cola

25

years

14

years

And in this new situation, the same subjectsare required to solve the same task, meaningto check whether the same rule is compliedwith, meaning drinking alcohol isforbidden to underage children. Morethan that, in order to find a solution,moreover, in order to find the solution, the

subjects have to proceed like in the firstcase: they are allowed to turn two of thesmall cards. This time, the high percentageis of the subjects that have discovered thecorrect solution.

The difference of performancebetween the decision situations (choice)have to have an explanation related to thedecision makers aptitudes. Experts seem toagree with the explanation that the net


5/10



183

dintre subieci au ales soluia corectpar a filegate de faptul c n aceast prim situaieraionatorii sunt obligai s aleag operndexclusiv cu abstracii dificil de manipulat, ntimp ce n cea de a doua situaie prezentat

ime-diat mai sus, n care peste 80% dintrerespondeni au ales corect, ei au operatprioritar cu informaii intuitive accesibile pebaza experienelor cotidiene proprii lor(vrste, buturi alcoolice sau nealcoolice).ntr-adevr procentul redus de so-luii corectedin prima situaie pare s fie efectul faptuluic raionatorii trebuie s lucreze cu literedespre care li se spune ca pot fi vocale sauconsoane i cu nume-re naturale despre care lise spune c pot fi pare sau impare. Astfel

gndite, lite-rele i numerele naturale nu suntdect simboluri, adic entiti abstracte frlegturcu aspecte pur intuitive. Ca atare, n

prima situaie decidentul este obli-gat saleag, adic s raioneze, s caute un temei

pentru alegerea sa doar cu aju-torul unorreguli i scheme de raionare mai greu deaccesat.

Pentru a clarifica cele de aici, slum nconsiderare un exemplu simplu. Estentrutotul firesc a spune Pe Pmnt exist 5continente locuite concret Europa, Asia,America, Africa i Australia n calitateaacestora de continente, adic, de teritoriigeografice individuale. Numrul natural 5coninut n acest enun nu introduce o

proprietate de teritoriu geograficindividualizabil, ci o pro-prietate de continentlocuit, care este, la rndul su, o proprietate deteritoriu geo-grafic individual. Aceastanseamn c, gndit ca proprietate, numrul

natural 5 este n fond o abstracie neintuitiv,n sensul cel reprezinto proprietate a uneiproprieti de individ, respectiv, a celei de a ficontinent locuit, unde continent locuit este

proprietate de individ, de ntindere geograficindividual; putem spune frteama de a greic exist 5 continente locuite, putem oferiexemple de astfel de continente, dar ar fi de-adreptul absurd s susinem c Europa sauAsia, luate separat, au fiecare n parte

weaker results in the first case wheremaximum 25% of the subjects have chosenthe correct solution, seem to be related tothe fact that in this first case thinkers do nothave to choose by exclusively operating

with difficult to manipulate abstracts, whilein the second case, where over 80% of therespondents chose correctly, they mainlyoperated with intuitive accessible operations

based on their personal usual experiences.(ages, alcoholic or non-alcoholic drinks).Indeed the low percentage of correctsolution in the first case seems to be theeffect of the fact that thinkers have to workwith letters of which they are said to bevowels or consonants and natural numbers

that can be odd or even. Thought like that,letter and natural numbers are only symbols,meaning abstract entities without anyconnection with purely intuitive aspects.Therefore, in the first case, the decisionmaker has to make a choice, reason, lookfor a ground for his choice only with thehelp of rules and reason schemes which aremore difficult to access.

In order to make these clear, letsconsider a simple example. It is natural tosay There are 5 inhabited continents on theEarth Europe, Asia, America, Africa andAustralia, respectively as continents,meaning geographic individual territories.The natural number 5 from this sentencedoes not introduce an individualisablegeographic territory, but on an inhabitedcontinent property, which, in its turn, is anindividual geographic territory property.This means that, considered as a property,

natural number 5 is actually a non-intuitiveabstraction, meaning a property ofindividual, respectively of that of being aninhabited continent, where the inhabitedcontinent is a property of individual; we cansay without mistake that there are 5inhabited continents, we can offer examplesfor such continents, but it would be absurdto claim that Europe or Asia, takenseparately, have the property of being 5.


6/10



184

proprietatea de a fi 5.Oare incapacitatea multor oameni de a

opera cu abstracii i tendina lor de a se limitala decizii bazate pe exemple intuitive, peinformaii direct accesibile ce provin din

experiena cotidiansau din auzite ne obligsrenunm la definiia anticconform creiaomul este fiinraional? Altfel spus, cei carese bazeaz doar pe informaii intuitive, pedatul experienei, oare nu raioneaz deloccnd iau decizii, cnd aleg sadopte o anumeatitudine, oare nu apeleazsub nici un aspecti la nici un fel de structuri logice? Pentru aclarifica i acest aspect, s considermurmtorul tabel de enunuri, care sunt perfectfireti i uor inteligi-bile:

Is the inability of many people ofoperating with abstractions and theirtendency to stop to intuitive examples, ondirectly accessible information coming fromcommon experience or from sayings, that

obliges us to give up to the ancientdefinition according to which man is arational being? To put it in other words,those who base only on intuitiveinformation, on experience, do not reason atall when making decisions, when choosing acertain attitude, dont they call any kind oflogical structures? In order to make thisaspect clearer, lets consider the followingtable of sentences, that are perfectly naturaland easily intelligible:

Limba /Language

Enunuri afirmative / Affirmativesentences

Enunuri negative / Negativesentences

Romn/Romanian

Orice expertiment tiinific presupuneobservaia

Unii liceniai n economie nulucreazn contabilitate

Francez/French

Beaucoup de gens vivent dans lesecteur urbain

Plusieurs dsordre psychologique nesont pas appropi au assistancemedical

German/German

Kognitive Verhaltenpsiholo-

gie ist neue Niederlassung vonPsychoterapy

Die Selbstbeobachtung ist nicht

moderne Methode innenpsychologische Untersuchungen

Englez/English

All psychological disorders involvecertain cognitive behavioural processes

No animal dreams

Italian/Italian

Gli psicologi sono molto im-portanti inadmministrazione dei servizi umani

La gente che soffre dalla depressionenon dovrebbe evitare presenza

psicologico

Spaniol/

Spanish

La psicologia est de gran in-ters paralos muchos de gente

La sicoanlisis no fueronfundades des cerca psicolgos

Portughez/Portuguese

A ansiedade un afeio psicologico A maioria de criaturas de mar no somamifero

Olandez/Dutch

Alle mensen houden van gokken Sommige psychologische wanvorde isniet permanent

Indiferent de adevrul sau falsitatea lor,cele 16 enunuri nscrise n acest ta-bel difer

No matter their truth or falsity, the 16sentences written in this table are


7/10



185

substanial sub cel puin trei aspecte:(1) Sunt exprimate n opt limbi naionale

diferite (doar enunurile aflate pe acelairnd sunt redate n aceiai limbnaional);

(2)

Ca structur gramatical acesteenunuri sunt diferite, structuragramatica-l a fiecrui enun fiindspecific limbii naionale n care esteformulat;

(3) Dei n majoritatea lor expriminformaii cu coninut psihologic, n tabelnu exist nici mcar dou enunuri caresredea exact aceiai informaie (care sereferla acelai aspect).

Cu toate acestea, 8 dintre enunurileaflate n tabel (cele aflate n coloana din stnga)sunt de forma A este B, iar celelalte 8 (celeaflate n coloana din dreapta) sunt de forma Anu este B. Iatcdei aparent este vorba de 16enunuri care in-tuitiv difer substanial ntreele, aceste 16 enunuri sunt construite, produse,gn-dite etc. pe fondul a numai dou structurilogice, ceea ce nseamncindiferent de limba

pe care o folosim i de gndurile pe care lentreinem sau le promovm, nu pot fi evitatestructurile logice necesare pentru a cldi pesuportul lor ideile (opiniile, prerile etc.) carese nasc n mintea noastr sau pe care letransmitem interlocutorilor notri.

O analiz sumar a rezultatelorexperimentului cartonaelor i a celor ce reiesdin discuia despre tabelul multilingvistic neconduce la ideea c oamenii angajai nraionare, n promovarea propriilor opinii sau nrespingerea celor propuse de alii, dei opereaz

prioritar cu coninuturi folosesc totui, contientsau nu, structuri logice care par a fi inerentefiinei umane, indiferent de felul n care auajuns s le dein. Tocmai prioritatea datconinuturilor informaionale pentru a ajunge laalegerea de soluii, pentru a-i justifica propriileidei, pentru a accepta sau respinge concluziiavansate de alii dovedete c n mod normaloamenii raioneaz non-monotonic. Acest tipde raionare nu nseamndeloc c raionatorul

substantially different in at least threeaspects:

(4) They are expressed in eightnational languages (only the sentencesfrom the same row are in the same

national language);(5) As a grammar structure thesesentences are different, their grammarstructure is specific to their nationallanguage;

(6) Although they mostly expressinformation with psychologicalcontent, the table does not includeeven two sentences with the sameinformation (referring to the sameaspect).

Still, 8 of the sentences from the table(the ones from the left column) are of theform A is B and the other 8 (the ones fromthe right column) are of the formA is not B.Therefore, although apparentlysubstantially different the 16 sentences,they are created, produced, thought basedon only two logical structures, which meansthat no matter the language we use and thethoughts we maintain and promote,necessary logical structures cannot beavoided for creating ideas on their support(opinions) created in our minds ortransmitted to our interlocutors.

A brief analysis of the small cards:experiments results and of the onesresulting from the discussion about themultilingual table leads us to the idea that

people engaged in reasoning, in promotingtheir own opinions or in rejecting the ones

proposed by others, although mainlyoperate with contents, still use consciouslyor not, with logical structures that areinherent to human being, no matter the waythey entered their possession. The prioritygiven to the informational contents forreaching to solutions, for justifying theirown ideas, for accepting or rejectingconclusions created by others proves thatnormally people reason non-monotonically.


8/10



186

savant sau om obinuit nu folosete sub niciun aspect raiona-mente evaluate de logicienica fiind valide, adic din cele prin care esteimposibil ca din premise adevrate sobinemconcluzii false. Ceea ce este specific raio-nrii

non-monotonice este nsfaptul cobinerea deinformaii noi care i-au fost disponibileraionatorului abia dup ce el a avansatargumentul l poate de-termina pe acesta srenune la concluzia iniial, so resping sauchiar s o n-locuiasc cu o alta. De pild, setie despre cini c percep ultrasunetele intru-ct Grivei este cine, printr-unraionament deductiv valid (silogism valid defigura I) din aceste premise se obine concluziaconform creia Grivei percepe ultrasunetele;

dac ns persoana care a produs acestraionament aflulterior cGrivei este surd dinnatere, ea va renuna automat la concluziainiial.

Gndirea critic acoper i acest fel deraionare pentru caceastdisciplincare veden structurile i exigenele raionrii promovatede logica tradiionaldoar un criteriu, un punctde plecare n evaluarea susinerilor diferitelor

persoane, corespunde mult mai bine felului ncare gndesc i raioneaz oamenii, crora lerecomand s nu accepte diferite preri sauopinii dect dupce le-au examinat atent pentruvedea care este temeiul lor, dac acest temei

justificrealmente opi-nia avansatpe baza luii care ar fi consecinele ce decurg dinacceptarea lor.

Prin urmare, gndirea critic estepreocupat i de deosebirea dintre raiona-reamonotonic i cea non-monotonic, de analizai evaluarea procedurilor in-spirate de logic,

de felul i msura n care acestea sunt implicaten construcia, formularea i promovareaopiniilor i prerilor proprii, dar nu neglijeaznici eva-luarea ndemnurilor, opiniilor,atitudinilor inspirate sau promovate de alii.Astfel neleas, gndirea critic seconcentreaz cu deosebire asupra diferitelortipuri de probe i dovezi folosite sau invocatecu scopul de a susine sau promova ase-meneaopinii i preri, pentru gndirea critic fiind

This type of reason does not mean that thethinker scholar or common man doesnot use reasons assessed by logicians asvalid, meaning of which it is impossiblethat from real premises we obtain false

conclusions. What is specific to non-monotonic reason is the fact that gettingnew information that have been availableto the thinker after advancing the argument

may cause him to give up the initialconclusion, reject it or even replace it withanother. For example, it is known aboutdogs that they perceive ultrasounds and

because Grivei is a dog, through a validdeductive reason (valid syllogism in figureI) this premises cause the conclusion

according to which Grivei perceivesultrasounds; but if the person producingthis reason later finds out that Grivei is dea

from birth, it will automatically give up theinitial conclusion.

Critical thought covers this type ofreason because this subject that sees onlyone criterion in the structures andexigencies promoted by traditional logics, astarting point in assessing the claims ofother persons, it better corresponds to theway in which people think and react, towhom they recommend not to acceptdifferent opinions before examining themcarefully to see their ground, whether thisground really justifies the opinion created

based on it, and which are the consequencescoming from their acceptance.

Consequently, critical thought isconcerned with the difference betweenmonotonic and non-monotonic reason, by

analyzing and assessing procedures inspiredby logics, the way and the extent in whichthey are involved in building, formulatingand promoting opinions, but they do notneglect the assessment of impulses,opinions, attitudes inspired or promoted byothers. Understood like this, critical thoughtfocuses mainly upon different types ofevidence and proofs used or claimed forsupporting and promoting such opinions, no


9/10



187

oarecum indiferent dacpen-tru susinerea saupromovarea lor raionatorul a recurs laraionamente deductive sau inductive.

Mai exact, indiferent dac este vorba denoi nine sau de altcineva, a lua poziie ntr-o

problem nseamn de fapt a afirma i apretinde ceva. A gndi cri-tic nseamn asupune unei evaluri atente, fr patim, nudoar raionamentele sau explicaiile n cauz, cii temeiurile care au stat la baza acestora,respectiv, ideile despre care se susine c lentemeiaz, le justific, le oferun suport de oanume trie. n acelai timp, a gndi criticnseamn a proceda calm, rezonabil, a nu nelsa influenai de nici un fel de factori externi,

pentru c, atunci cnd ac-ceptm sau respingem

o idee, o opinie sau o prere este important, pede o parte, sne bazm doar pe cunotine, peinformaii relevante referitoare la temeiurileinvocate n susinerea i promovarea lor i lavaloarea i fora acestora. Pe de alt parte,trebuie s evalum ct mai serios consecinele

pe care le-ar avea adoptarea sau respingereaacestor opinii sau preri.

Pe acest fond, gndirea criticurmretesstabileascce este i ce nu este justificat scredem, ea deschizndu-ne totodatperspectivaspre alte puncte de vedere, spre toleran fade prerile i ideile opuse, ctre o evaluarecorecta acestora, lipsitde prtinire i de oriceform de subiectivism. Aa cum subili-niazspecialiti de seam n domeniu, a nu gndicritic nseamnde fapt a nu fi liber, deoarece nacest caz ai adoptat tacit sau nu opiniile sau

prerile altora, care au ajuns acum ste dominei sdetermine propria ta via. n schimb, dacai selectat i ai reinut doar acele opinii i preri

pe care le-ai examinat critic i ai reuit sstabileti c se sprijin pe o bun raiune, csunt rezonabile, nseamn c ai dobnditdreptul de a le susine i de a le promova. S-adovedit c ntr-o asemenea situaie gndireacritic nu-i blocheaz creativitatea, cidimpotriv, o poteneazi i asigurlibertateade a aciona prudent i raional. Deprindereaaptitudinilor de gndire criticne permite snuconfundm libertatea cu arbitra-riul i ne

matter if the thinker has used deductive orinductive reasons.

More specifically, no matter if we talkabout ourselves or anyone else, to take astand in an issue means saying and claiming

something. Thinking critically meanscarefully assessing not just the reasons orexplanations but also the grounds that wereat their basis, the ideas about they claim toground, justify, offers support, respectively.At the same tome, thinking critically meansacting calmly, reasonably, not lettingourselves influenced by no kind of exteriorfactors, because when we accept or rejectan idea or an opinion, it is important, onone hand to support ourselves not just on

knowledge, relevant information regardingthe grounds claimed in supporting and

promoting them but also to their value andforce. On the other hand, we have toseriously evaluate the consequences that theadoption or rejection of such opinions couldhave.

On this background, critical thoughtseeks to establish what is and what is not

justified to believe, opening at the same theperspective towards other points of view,towards a tolerance for the opposedopinions, towards a correct assessment,without favours or any type of subjectivity.As underlined by experts in the field, notthinking critically means not being free,

because in this case you have adopted otherpeoples opinions, that have come todominate you and determine your entirelife. In return, if you have selected onlythose opinions that you have critically

examined and you have managed toestablish that they are based on a goodreason, that they are reasonable, it meansthat you have acquired the right to supportand promote them. It has been proved thatin such a case critical thought does not

block ones creativity, but on the contrary,it increases it and provides the freedom toact prudently and rationally. Aptitudesacquisition of critical thought allows us not


10/10



188

conduce inevitabil la concluzia c adevratalibertate a unui individ se oprete n faalibertii oricrui alt individ, iar fro astfel delibertate democra-ia este doar o simpliluzie.

no mistake the freedom with the arbitraryand inevitably leads us to the conclusionthat an individuals real freedom stops infront of another individuals freedom, andwithout such a freedom, democracy is just

an illusion.

gândirea critica petre bieltz

Documents