José Ángel Gascón
Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción, UCSC, Chile | jgascon@ucsc.cl
Received: 29-May-2019 | Accepted: 5-July-2019 | Published Online: 24-November-2019
Disputatio [Dec. 2019], Vol. 9, No. 13, pp. 00-00 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3567231
Article | [SP] | Full Text | Statistics | Copyright Notice [sp] | Vol. 9 No. 13
How to cite this article:
Gascón, José Ángel (2020). «Pensadores autónomos, pensadores irracionales». Disputatio. Philosophical Research Bulletin 9, no. 13: pp. 00–00.
Abstract | We are living, it is often said, in a time that is characterised by the rise of irrational beliefs and the disregard of scientific knowledge. However, our time is also characterised by the praise—at least in words—of critical thinking against unreflective gullibility. It is doubtless necessary to take various factors into account in order to explain this apparent paradox. In this paper I will focus on one factor that concerns our very conception of critical thinking and that, in my view, contributes to the escalation of irrationality: the exaltation of autonomy. I will argue that the emphasis of cognitive autonomy both by philosophy and by the divulgation of critical thinking turns out to be harmful in two respects. On the one hand, the praise of cognitive autonomy may cause the rejection of scientific knowledge that contradicts our personal experience. This is perhaps most clearly seen in the case of those who believe in pseudo-therapies. On the other hand, the emphasis on autonomous reflection contributes to the formation of a false confidence in biased reasoning. Against these two problems, I will defend the epistemic virtues of rational trust and argumentation.
Keywords | Argumentation · Autonomy · Experts · Reflection · Bias.
Pensadores autónomos, pensadores irracionales
Resumen | Vivimos, según se dice con frecuencia, en una época caracterizada por el auge de las creencias irracionales y la negación del conocimiento científico. Sin embargo, nuestro tiempo también se caracteriza por el ensalzamiento — al menos de palabra — del pensamiento crítico frente a la credulidad irreflexiva. Sin duda, es necesario tener en cuenta diversos factores para explicar esta aparente paradoja. En este artículo me centraré en uno que concierne a nuestra concepción misma del pensamiento crítico y que, en mi opinión, contribuye al recrudecimiento de la irracionalidad: la exaltación de la autonomía. Argumentaré que el énfasis en la autonomía cognitiva por parte tanto de la filosofía como de la divulgación del pensamiento crítico resulta perjudicial en dos aspectos. Por un lado, el ensalzamiento de la autonomía cognitiva puede provocar un rechazo del conocimiento científico que contradiga nuestras experiencias personales. Esto puede verse quizá con mayor claridad en el caso de quienes creen en pseudoterapias. Por otro lado, el énfasis en la reflexión autónoma contribuye a la formación de una falsa seguridad en un razonamiento sesgado. Frente a estos dos problemas, defenderé las virtudes epistémicas de la confianza racional y la argumentación.
Palabras Clave | Argumentación · Autonomía · Expertos · Reflexión · Sesgos.
References
Chabris, Christopher y Simons, Daniel (2010). The invisible gorilla. New York: Crown Publishers.
Coady, C. A. J. (1992). Testimony: A philosophical study. New York: Oxford University Press.
Eemeren, Frans H. van y Grootendorst, Rob (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, Jonathan (2004). «Biases in deductive reasoning». En: Cognitive illusions, editado por Rüdiger F. Pohl. Hove, NY: Psychology Press, pp. 127–144.
FECYT. (2017). Percepción social de la ciencia y la tecnología 2016. Madrid: FECYT.
Fiedler, Klaus (2004). «Illusory correlation». En: Cognitive illusions, editado por Rüdiger F. Pohl. Hove, NY: Psychology Press, pp. 97–114.
Frankfurt, Harry G. (2005). On bullshit. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Greco, John (2012). «Recent work on testimonial knowledge». American Philosophical Quarterly 49(1): pp. 15–28.
Hamblin, Charles L. (2016). Falacias. Trad. de Hubert Marraud. Lima: Palestra.
Harambam, Jaron y Aupers, Stef (2017). «‘I Am Not a Conspiracy Theorist’: Relational Identifications in the Dutch Conspiracy Milieu». Cultural Sociology, 11(1): pp. 113–129.
Hitchcock, David (2018). «Critical Thinking», The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, editado por Edward N. Zalta, URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/critical-thinking/>.
Janis, Irving Lester (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes. 2ª ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kahneman, Daniel (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Koertge, Noretta (2013). «Belief buddies versus critical communities: The social organization of pseudoscience». En Philosophy of pseudoscience: Reconsidering the demarcation problem, editado por Massimo Pigliucci y Maarten Boudry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 165–180.
Kornblith, Hilary (2002). Knowledge and its place in nature. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, Deanna (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mercier, Hugo y Sperber, Dan (2017). The enigma of reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nickerson, Raymond S. (1998). «Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises». Review of General Psychology 2(2): pp. 175–220.
Nisbett, Richard E. y Wilson, Timothy D. (1977). «Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes». Psychological Review 84(3): pp. 231–259.
Paul, Richard (1993). «Critical thinking, moral integrity and citizenship: Teaching for the intellectual virtues». En: Critical thinking. How to prepare students for a rapidly changing world. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, pp. 255–267.
Pronin, Emily (2007). «Perception and misperception of bias in human judgment». Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11(1): pp. 37–43.
Sagan, Carl (1997). The demon-haunted world. London: Headline Book Publishing.
Sloman, Steven y Fernbach, Philip (2017). The knowledge illusion: Why we never think alone. New York: Riverhead Books.
Stanovich, Keith E., West, Richard F. y Toplak, Maggie E. (2013). «Myside bias, rational thinking, and intelligence». Current Directions in Psychological Science 22(4): pp. 259–264.
Sterelny, Kim (2012). The evolved apprentice: How evolution made humans unique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Thompson, Suzanne C. (1999). «Illusions of control: How we overestimate our personal influence». Current Directions in Psychological Science 8(6): pp. 187–190.
Tomasello, Michael (2014). A natural history of human thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Trouche, Emmanuel; Sander, Emmanuel y Mercier, Hugo (2014). «Arguments, more than confidence, explain the good performance of reasoning groups». Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 143(5): pp. 1958–1971.
UNESCO (2011). Teaching Philosophy in Europe and North America. Paris: UNESCO.
Vega Reñón, Luis (2017). Lógica para ciudadanos. Saarbrücken: Editorial Académica Española.
© The author(s) 2020. This work, published by Disputatio [www.disputatio.eu], is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License [BY–NC–ND]. The copy, distribution and public communication of this work will be according to the copyright notice. For inquiries and permissions, please email: boletin@disputatio.eu.