critical thinking thought experiments

Newest Articles

Exploring Naturalistic, Immanent and Transcendental Aesthetics
The Art of Rhetoric by Cicero: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring the Philosophy of Immanuel Kant
Exploring Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
Metaphysics
Theory of Forms
Epistemology
Materialism
Moral relativism
Utilitarianism
Virtue ethics
Normative ethics
Applied ethics
Moral Psychology
Philosophy of art
Philosophy of language
Philosophy of beauty
Nature of Art
Philosophy of Film
Philosophy of Music
Deductive reasoning
Inductive reasoning
Justification
Perception and Knowledge
Beliefs and Truth
Modern philosophy
Romanticism
Analytic philosophy
Enlightenment philosophy
Existentialism
Enlightenment
Ancient philosophy
Classical Greek philosophy
Renaissance philosophy
Medieval philosophy
Pre-Socratic philosophy
Hellenistic philosophy
Presocratic philosophy
Rationalism
Scholasticism
Jewish philosophy
Early Islamic philosophy
Reasoning and Argumentation
Seeking Justice After a Tractor-Trailer Accident: Why You Need an Experienced Lawyer
Critical Thinking
Fallacies and logical errors
Skepticism and doubt
Creative Thinking
Lateral thinking
Thought experiments
Argumentation and Logic
Syllogisms and Deductive Reasoning
Fallacies and Rebuttals
Inductive Reasoning and Analogy
Reasoning and Problem-Solving
Critical Thinking and Decision Making
Creative Thinking and Problem Solving
Analytical Thinking and Reasoning
Philosophical Writing and Analysis
Argumentative Writing and Analysis
Interpreting Philosophical Texts
Writing Essays and Articles on Philosophy
Philosophical Research Methods
Qualitative Research Methods in Philosophy
Quantitative Research Methods in Philosophy
Research Design and Methodology
Ethics and Morality
Aesthetics and Beauty
Metaphysical terms
Ontological argument
Ethical terms
Aesthetic terms
Metaphysical theories
Kant's Categorical Imperative
Aristotle's Four Causes
Plato's Theory of Forms
Hegel's Dialectic
Ethical theories
Aesthetic theories
John Dewey's aesthetic theory
Immanuel Kant's aesthetic theory
Modern philosophical texts
Foucault's The Order of Things
Descartes' Meditations
Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil
Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Ancient philosophical texts
Kant's Critique of Pure Reason
Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
Plato's Republic
Ancient philosophers
Modern philosophers
Modern philosophical schools
German Idealism
British Empiricism
Ancient philosophical schools
The Skeptic school
The Cynic school
The Stoic school
The Epicurean school
The Socratic school
Philosophy of Language
Semantics and Pragmatics of Language Usage
Analytic-Synthetic Distinction
Meaning of Words and Phrases
Philosophy of Science
Scientific Realism and Rationalism
Induction and the Hypothetico-Deductive Model
Theory-Ladenness and Underdetermination
Philosophy of Mind
Mind-Body Dualism and Emergentism
Materialism and Physicalism
Identity Theory and Personal Identity
Philosophy of Religion
Religious Pluralism and Exclusivism
The Problem of Evil and Suffering
Religious Experience and Faith
Metaphysical Theories
Idealism and Realism
Determinism, Fatalism, and Libertarianism
Phenomenalism and Nominalism
Epistemological Theories
Intuitionism, Skepticism, and Agnosticism
Rationalism and Empiricism
Foundationalism and Coherentism
Aesthetic Theories
Formalist Aesthetics, Emotional Aesthetics, Experiential Aesthetics
Relational Aesthetics, Sociological Aesthetics, Historical Aesthetics
Naturalistic Aesthetics, Immanent Aesthetics, Transcendental Aesthetics
Ethical Theories
Virtue Ethics, Utilitarianism, Deontology
Subjectivism, Egoism, Hedonism
Social Contract Theory, Natural Law Theory, Care Ethics
Metaphysical Terms
Cause, Necessity, Possibility, Impossibility
Identity, Persistence, Time, Space
Substance, Attribute, Essence, Accident
Logic and Argumentation Terms
Analogy, Syllogism, Deduction, Induction
Inference, Validity, Soundness, Refutation
Premise, Conclusion, Entailment, Contradiction
Epistemological Terms
Perception and Knowledge Claims
Infallibility, Verifiability, Coherence Theory of Truth
Justification, Beliefs and Truths
Ethical Terms
Modern Texts
A Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft
Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche
The Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant
Medieval Texts
The Guide for the Perplexed by Moses Maimonides
The Summa Theologiae by Thomas Aquinas
The Incoherence of the Incoherence by Averroes
Ancient Texts
The Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle
The Art of Rhetoric by Cicero
The Republic by Plato
Thought Experiments: Exploring Creative and Philosophical Thinking
Philosophical thinking

Thought experiments have been a source of creative and philosophical thinking since the days of ancient philosophers. From the Socratic method to Descartes' wax analogy, thought experiments have been used to explore the boundaries of our understanding and push the limits of our imagination. This article explores the use of thought experiments in both creative and philosophical thinking, offering insights into how they can be used to expand our horizons and challenge our preconceived notions. Thought experiments are a powerful tool for making connections between different disciplines and exploring the complexity of human thought. By using them to examine our assumptions and beliefs, we can gain valuable insights into ourselves and the world around us.

Thought experiments can also provide us with the opportunity to break free from our traditional methods of reasoning and engage in imaginative exploration. Through this process, we can uncover new perspectives, develop innovative ideas, and explore new possibilities. This article will provide an overview of thought experiments, exploring their history, principles, and uses. We will discuss how thought experiments can help us to think more creatively and analyze philosophical problems. We will also explore how thought experiments can be used to generate new ideas and challenge existing assumptions.

This experiment explored whether or not a computer could possess genuine understanding or intelligence. The experiment consisted of a person sitting in a room with no knowledge of Chinese language or culture. The person was presented with slips of paper containing Chinese symbols, and instructed to put together responses based on a set of rules they had been given. The question posed by the experiment was whether or not this person truly understood the Chinese symbols, or if they were merely following instructions.

The Chinese Room experiment has been widely discussed in philosophical circles since it was first proposed. It has been used to explore questions about artificial intelligence, the limits of computers, and the nature of understanding. Thought experiments can also be used to explore creative ideas. Artists often use them as a way of sparking new ideas and exploring creative solutions to problems. One example is the “Ladder of Inference” thought experiment proposed by Chris Argyris in 1974. This experiment explores how we make assumptions about the world based on our experiences.

How Can I Get Started With Thought Experiments?

What are the benefits of thought experiments.

They provide an opportunity to explore different ideas and concepts in a safe environment without any negative consequences. They also allow us to gain greater insight into our own thinking processes and develop better strategies for dealing with difficult situations. Additionally, they can help us develop new ways of looking at the world and become more creative thinkers. Thought experiments offer an invaluable opportunity to explore the boundaries of our knowledge, creativity, and philosophical thinking. By engaging in thought experiments, we can gain a better understanding of how our thoughts shape our lives and the world around us.

By taking the time to reflect on our experiences, think outside the box, and explore different scenarios, we can become more creative and develop new perspectives. Thought experiments are a powerful tool for expanding our horizons and pushing the boundaries of our thinking.

Exploring the Philosophy of Beauty

Exploring Inference: A Philosophical Thinking Primer
Lateral Thinking: An Overview
Exploring the Principles of Virtue Ethics
Exploring Skepticism and Doubt: A Philosophical and Critical Thinking Perspective
Exploring Hellenistic Philosophy: An Introduction
A Comprehensive Look at Causality
Exploring the Ontological Argument
Exploring Egoism: What It Is and What It Means
Altruism: Exploring the Power of Selflessness
Exploring the Ethical Theory of Utilitarianism
Exploring Aristotle's Four Causes
Exploring Plato's Theory of Forms
Deontology: An Introduction to an Ethical Theory
Exploring Virtue Ethics: The Philosophical Theory
Hegel's Dialectic: A Comprehensive Overview
A Comprehensive Overview of Foucault's The Order of Things
Socrates: An In-Depth Exploration of the Ancient Philosopher
Exploring Immanuel Kant's Aesthetic Theory
Descartes' Meditations: An Introduction for None

Exploring Kant's Critique of Pure Reason

Aristotle: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit
Exploring the Life and Legacy of Cicero: An Introduction
Exploring Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil
Exploring Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
Epicurus - An Introduction to His Philosophy
Descartes: A Comprehensive Overview
Sublime: An Introduction to Aesthetic and Philosophical Terms
Exploring Plato's Republic
Exploring Pragmatism: A Modern Philosophical School
Exploring Humanism: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring the Life and Works of David Hume
Exploring the Skeptic School of Ancient Philosophy
The Cynic School: An In-depth Look
The Stoic School: An Overview
German Idealism: A Comprehensive Overview
Analytic Philosophy: A Primer
A Comprehensive Overview of Presocratic Philosophy
Exploring British Empiricism
Justification: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring the Nature of Art
Understanding Normative Ethics
Exploring Beliefs and Truth: A Philosophical Guide
Exploring Syllogisms and Deductive Reasoning
Exploring Cosmology: What We Know and What We Don't
Understanding Fallacies and Rebuttals
Exploring Critical Thinking and Decision Making
Exploring Theology: A Comprehensive Overview
Philosophy of Film: Exploring Aesthetics and Types of Philosophy

Philosophy of Music: Exploring the Aesthetics of Sound

Exploring the Semantics and Pragmatics of Language Usage
Materialism and Physicalism: Exploring the Philosophical Concepts
Exploring Identity Theory and Personal Identity
Exploring Quantitative Research Methods in Philosophy
Understanding the Meaning of Words and Phrases
The Problem of Evil and Suffering: A Philosophical Exploration
Exploring Theory-Ladenness and Underdetermination
Exploring the Interplay between Religious Experience and Faith
Exploring the Concepts of Cause, Necessity, Possibility, and Impossibility
Intuitionism, Skepticism, and Agnosticism: A Comprehensive Overview
Perception and Knowledge Claims: Understanding Epistemological Terms
Exploring Rationalism and Empiricism
Exploring Identity, Persistence, Time, and Space
Understanding Virtue Ethics, Utilitarianism and Deontology
Exploring Phenomenalism and Nominalism
Exploring Subjectivism, Egoism, and Hedonism
Exploring Infallibility, Verifiability, and the Coherence Theory of Truth
Understanding Social Contract Theory, Natural Law Theory, and Care Ethics
Exploring Subjectivism, Egoism and Hedonism
The Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring 'The Summa Theologiae' by Thomas Aquinas

New Articles

Exploring Kant's Critique of Pure Reason

Which cookies do you want to accept?

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1: Introduction to Critical Thinking, Reasoning, and Logic

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 29580

Golden West College via NGE Far Press

$ \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } $

$ \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} $

$ \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$ $ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) $ \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$

$ \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$ $ \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$

$ \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$ $ \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}$

$ \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}$

$ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$

$ \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}$

$ \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}$

$ \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}$

$ \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}$

$ \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}$

$ \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}$

$ \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}$

$ \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}$ $ \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}$

$ \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow$

$ \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow$

$ \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } $

$ \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} $

$ \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} $

$ \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} $

$ \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} $

What is thinking? It may seem strange to begin a logic textbook with this question. ‘Thinking’ is perhaps the most intimate and personal thing that people do. Yet the more you ‘think’ about thinking, the more mysterious it can appear. It is the sort of thing that one intuitively or naturally understands, and yet cannot describe to others without great difficulty. Many people believe that logic is very abstract, dispassionate, complicated, and even cold. But in fact the study of logic is nothing more intimidating or obscure than this: the study of good thinking.

1.1: Prelude to Chapter
1.2: Introduction and Thought Experiments- The Trolley Problem
1.3: Truth and Its Role in Argumentation - Certainty, Probability, and Monty Hall Only certain sorts of sentences can be used in arguments. We call these sentences propositions, statements or claims.
1.4: Distinction of Proof from Verification; Our Biases and the Forer Effect
1.5: The Scientific Method The procedure that scientists use is also a standard form of argument. Its conclusions only give you the likelihood or the probability that something is true (if your theory or hypothesis is confirmed), and not the certainty that it’s true. But when it is done correctly, the conclusions it reaches are very well-grounded in experimental evidence.
1.6: Diagramming Thoughts and Arguments - Analyzing News Media
1.7: Creating a Philosophical Outline

Subject List
Take a Tour
For Authors
Subscriber Services
Publications
African American Studies
African Studies
American Literature
Anthropology
Architecture Planning and Preservation
Art History
Atlantic History
Biblical Studies
British and Irish Literature
Childhood Studies
Chinese Studies
Cinema and Media Studies
Communication
Criminology
Environmental Science
Evolutionary Biology
International Law
International Relations
Islamic Studies
Jewish Studies
Latin American Studies
Latino Studies
Linguistics
Literary and Critical Theory
Medieval Studies
Military History
Political Science
Public Health
Renaissance and Reformation
Social Work
Urban Studies
Victorian Literature
Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Thought Experiments

Introduction, general overviews.

Textbooks and Popular Works
Anthologies
Special Journal Issues
Historical Analyses
Mathematics
(Meta)Philosophy
Thought Experiments as Arguments
Thought Experiments as Explorations of Conceptual Frameworks
Thought Experiments as Mental Models
Thought Experiments as Experiments
Kantian Accounts
Phenomenological Accounts
Rationalist Accounts
Fictionalist Accounts
Additional Alternatives and Special Points of View
Other Epistemological Aims: Understanding and Pedagogy
Computer Simulations
Imagination and Literary Fiction
Skepticism about the Epistemological Efficacy of Thought Experiments
Experimental Philosophy
Miscellaneous and Amusing Pieces

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

Alfred North Whitehead
Feminist Aesthetics
Find more forthcoming articles...
Export Citations
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Thought Experiments by James Robert Brown , Michael T. Stuart LAST REVIEWED: 29 July 2020 LAST MODIFIED: 29 July 2020 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195396577-0143

Thought experiments are performed in the imagination. We set up some situation, we observe what happens, then we try to draw appropriate conclusions. In this way, thought experiments resemble real experiments, except that they are experiments in the mind. The terms “thought experiment,” “imaginary experiment,” and “Gedankenexperiment” are used interchangeably. There is no consensus on a definition, but there is widespread agreement on which are standard examples. It is also widely agreed that they play a central role in a number of fields, especially physics and philosophy. There are several important questions about thought experiments that naturally arise, including what kinds of thought experiments there are, what roles they play, and how, if at all, they work. This last question has been the focus of much of the literature: How can we learn something new about the world just by thinking? Answers range from “We don’t really learn anything new” to “We have some sort of a priori insight into how nature works.” In between there are a great variety of rival alternative accounts. There is still no consensus; debate is wide open on almost every question pertaining to thought experiments.

There has always been some interest in the nature of thought experiments, but it is only in recent years that it has become a popular topic of philosophical interest. Arcangeli 2017 and Stuart, et al. 2018 provide recent overviews of the issues. Brown and Fehige 2019 offers a periodically updated survey of thought experiments and the literature on it. Otherwise, the early works from the current period may be the best place to start, since they provide lots of examples and have tended to set the agenda for subsequent discussion. Horowitz and Massey 1991 is one of the first works stimulating the current interest in thought experiments. Brown 2011 (originally published in 1991) is an early work with many examples. For German readers, Cohnitz 2006 and Kühne 2005 both offer extensive coverage of many topics. Häggqvist 1996 is a critical survey, with an emphasis on modal considerations. Rescher 2005 and Sorensen 1992 both cover a variety of issues and provide many examples.

Arcangeli, Margherita. “Thought Experiments in Model-Based Reasoning.” In Springer Handbook of Model-Based Science . Edited by Lorenzo Magnani and Tommaso Bertolotti, 463–495. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2017.

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-30526-4_21

An overview of the recent literature on thought experiments, with a focus on model-based reasoning.

Brown, James Robert. Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences . 2d ed. New York: Routledge, 2011.

DOI: 10.4324/9780203847794

An early work with several standard examples and a taxonomy classifying the different forms that thought experiments take. The author argues for a rationalistic, or Platonistic account of thought experiments, claiming that in some (but not all) we gain a priori access to the abstract realm of laws of nature. Originally published in 1991.

Brown, James Robert, and Yiftach Fehige. “Thought Experiments.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Edited by Edward N. Zalta. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 2019.

A survey of the major issues with a comprehensive bibliography, periodically updated.

Cohnitz, Daniel. Gendankenexperimente in der Philosophie . Paderborn, Germany: Mentis, 2006.

Presents an argument for the usefulness of thought experiments in philosophy. Extensive discussion of different theories of modality to defend thought experiments in philosophy for different purposes, much like conceptual analysis.

Gendler, Tamar S. Thought Experiment: On the Powers and Limits of Imaginary Cases . Abingdon, UK, and New York: Routledge, 2000.

A revised version of Gendler’s PhD thesis, which discusses the role of imagination in thought experiments that use “exceptional cases” to generate new knowledge. Focuses on three case studies: Galileo’s falling bodies, Theseus’s Ship, and Parfit’s fission thought experiment concerning personal identity. Provides four separate and useful bibliographies.

Häggqvist, Sören. Thought Experiments in Philosophy . Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1996.

A critical discussion of the early rival accounts of thought experiments. Especially concerned with the relation between thought experiments and modal notions (necessity and possibility).

Horowitz, T., and G. Massey, eds. Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy . Proceedings of a conference held at the Center for Philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh, 18–20 April 1986. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1991.

Stems from a conference at the University of Pittsburgh in 1986 and contains several excellent and influential articles on a wide range of topics. It is currently out of print, but fortunately, a PDF of the whole book is available online .

Kühne, Ulrich. Die Methode des Gedankenexperiments . Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2005.

Comprehensive study of the history of inquiry into thought experiments from Kant to the Brown-Norton debate. Noteworthy are the chapters on Ørsted and Einstein. Argues that Ørsted’s notion of thought experiment is hopelessly confusing and that Einstein, contrary to widespread belief, did not approve of the method of thought experiments.

Rescher, Nicholas. What If? Thought Experimentation in Philosophy . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 2005.

A general and less specialized discussion of thought experiments, includes several historically famous examples. Explores the distinctions between thought experiments and real experiments.

Sorensen, Roy. Thought Experiments . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Very wide-ranging. Covers a great many topics in both philosophy and the sciences, and provides a great many examples and deep insights on many issues. One of the author’s central claims is that thought experiments are experiments that merely have not been performed. Develops a theory of the epistemic power of thought experiments in terms of Darwinian evolution.

Stuart, Michael T., Yiftach Fehige, and James R. Brown. “Thought Experiments: State of the Art.” In The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments . Edited by Michael T. Stuart, Yiftach Fehige, and James R. Brown, 1–28. Abingdon, UK, and New York: Routledge, 2018.

Provides an overview of the literature with examples, and a brief history of the philosophy of thought experiments.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

About Philosophy »
Meet the Editorial Board »
Abduction and Explanatory Reasoning
Abstract Objects
Addams, Jane
Adorno, Theodor
Aesthetic Hedonism
Aesthetics, Analytic Approaches to
Aesthetics, Continental
Aesthetics, Environmental
Aesthetics, History of
African Philosophy, Contemporary
Alexander, Samuel
Analytic/Synthetic Distinction
Anarchism, Philosophical
Animal Rights
Anscombe, G. E. M.
Anthropic Principle, The
Anti-Natalism
Applied Ethics
Aquinas, Thomas
Argument Mapping
Art and Emotion
Art and Knowledge
Art and Morality
Astell, Mary
Aurelius, Marcus
Austin, J. L.
Bacon, Francis
Bayesianism
Bergson, Henri
Berkeley, George
Biology, Philosophy of
Bolzano, Bernard
Boredom, Philosophy of
British Idealism
Buber, Martin
Buddhist Philosophy
Burge, Tyler
Business Ethics
Camus, Albert
Canterbury, Anselm of
Carnap, Rudolf
Cavendish, Margaret
Chemistry, Philosophy of
Childhood, Philosophy of
Chinese Philosophy
Cognitive Ability
Cognitive Phenomenology
Cognitive Science, Philosophy of
Coherentism
Communitarianism
Computational Science
Computer Science, Philosophy of
Comte, Auguste
Conceptual Role Semantics
Conditionals
Confirmation
Connectionism
Consciousness
Constructive Empiricism
Contemporary Hylomorphism
Contextualism
Contrastivism
Cook Wilson, John
Cosmology, Philosophy of
Critical Theory
Culture and Cognition
Daoism and Philosophy
Davidson, Donald
de Beauvoir, Simone
de Montaigne, Michel
Decision Theory
Deleuze, Gilles
Derrida, Jacques
Descartes, René
Descartes, René: Sensory Representations
Descriptions
Dewey, John
Dialetheism
Disagreement, Epistemology of
Disjunctivism
Dispositions
Divine Command Theory
Doing and Allowing
du Châtelet, Emilie
Dummett, Michael
Dutch Book Arguments
Early Modern Philosophy, 1600-1750
Eastern Orthodox Philosophical Thought
Education, Philosophy of
Engineering, Philosophy and Ethics of
Environmental Philosophy
Epistemic Basing Relation
Epistemic Defeat
Epistemic Injustice
Epistemic Justification
Epistemic Philosophy of Logic
Epistemology
Epistemology and Active Externalism
Epistemology, Bayesian
Epistemology, Feminist
Epistemology, Internalism and Externalism in
Epistemology, Moral
Epistemology of Education
Ethical Consequentialism
Ethical Deontology
Ethical Intuitionism
Eugenics and Philosophy
Events, The Philosophy of
Evidence-Based Medicine, Philosophy of
Evidential Support Relation In Epistemology, The
Evolutionary Debunking Arguments in Ethics
Evolutionary Epistemology
Explanations of Religion
Extended Mind Thesis, The
Externalism and Internalism in the Philosophy of Mind
Faith, Conceptions of
Feminist Philosophy
Feyerabend, Paul
Fichte, Johann Gottlieb
Fictionalism
Fictionalism in the Philosophy of Mathematics
Film, Philosophy of
Foot, Philippa
Foreknowledge
Forgiveness
Formal Epistemology
Foucault, Michel
Frege, Gottlob
Gadamer, Hans-Georg
Geometry, Epistemology of
God and Possible Worlds
God, Arguments for the Existence of
God, The Existence and Attributes of
Grice, Paul
Habermas, Jürgen
Hart, H. L. A.
Heaven and Hell
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich: Aesthetics
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich: Metaphysics
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich: Philosophy of History
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich: Philosophy of Politics
Heidegger, Martin: Early Works
Hermeneutics
Higher Education, Philosophy of
History, Philosophy of
Hobbes, Thomas
Horkheimer, Max
Human Rights
Hume, David: Aesthetics
Hume, David: Moral and Political Philosophy
Husserl, Edmund
Idealizations in Science
Identity in Physics
Imagination
Imagination and Belief
Immanuel Kant: Political and Legal Philosophy
Impossible Worlds
Incommensurability in Science
Indian Philosophy
Indispensability of Mathematics
Inductive Reasoning
Instruments in Science
Intellectual Humility
Intentionality, Collective
James, William
Japanese Philosophy
Kant and the Laws of Nature
Kant, Immanuel: Aesthetics and Teleology
Kant, Immanuel: Ethics
Kant, Immanuel: Theoretical Philosophy
Kierkegaard, Søren
Knowledge-first Epistemology
Knowledge-How
Kristeva, Julia
Kuhn, Thomas S.
Lacan, Jacques
Lakatos, Imre
Langer, Susanne
Language of Thought
Language, Philosophy of
Latin American Philosophy
Laws of Nature
Legal Epistemology
Legal Philosophy
Legal Positivism
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm
Levinas, Emmanuel
Lewis, C. I.
Literature, Philosophy of
Locke, John
Locke, John: Identity, Persons, and Personal Identity
Lottery and Preface Paradoxes, The
Machiavelli, Niccolò
Martin Heidegger: Later Works
Martin Heidegger: Middle Works
Material Constitution
Mathematical Explanation
Mathematical Pluralism
Mathematical Structuralism
Mathematics, Ontology of
Mathematics, Philosophy of
Mathematics, Visual Thinking in
McDowell, John
McTaggart, John
Meaning of Life, The
Mechanisms in Science
Medically Assisted Dying
Medicine, Contemporary Philosophy of
Medieval Logic
Medieval Philosophy
Mental Causation
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice
Meta-epistemological Skepticism
Metaepistemology
Metametaphysics
Metaphysical Grounding
Metaphysics, Contemporary
Metaphysics, Feminist
Midgley, Mary
Mill, John Stuart
Mind, Metaphysics of
Modal Epistemology
Models and Theories in Science
Montesquieu
Moore, G. E.
Moral Contractualism
Moral Naturalism and Nonnaturalism
Moral Responsibility
Multiculturalism
Murdoch, Iris
Music, Analytic Philosophy of
Nationalism
Natural Kinds
Naturalism in the Philosophy of Mathematics
Naïve Realism
Neo-Confucianism
Neuroscience, Philosophy of
Nietzsche, Friedrich
Nonexistent Objects
Normative Ethics
Normative Foundations, Philosophy of Law:
Normativity and Social Explanation
Objectivity
Occasionalism
Ontological Dependence
Ontology of Art
Ordinary Objects
Other Minds
Panpsychism
Particularism in Ethics
Pascal, Blaise
Paternalism
Peirce, Charles Sanders
Perception, Cognition, Action
Perception, The Problem of
Perfectionism
Persistence
Personal Identity
Phenomenal Concepts
Phenomenal Conservatism
Phenomenology
Philosophy for Children
Photography, Analytic Philosophy of
Physicalism
Physicalism and Metaphysical Naturalism
Physics, Experiments in
Political Epistemology
Political Obligation
Political Philosophy
Popper, Karl
Pornography and Objectification, Analytic Approaches to
Practical Knowledge
Practical Moral Skepticism
Practical Reason
Probabilistic Representations of Belief
Probability, Interpretations of
Problem of Divine Hiddenness, The
Problem of Evil, The
Propositions
Psychology, Philosophy of
Quine, W. V. O.
Racist Jokes
Rationalism
Rationality
Rawls, John: Moral and Political Philosophy
Realism and Anti-Realism
Realization
Reasons in Epistemology
Reductionism in Biology
Reference, Theory of
Reid, Thomas
Reliabilism
Religion, Philosophy of
Religious Belief, Epistemology of
Religious Experience
Religious Pluralism
Ricoeur, Paul
Risk, Philosophy of
Rorty, Richard
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques
Rule-Following
Russell, Bertrand
Ryle, Gilbert
Sartre, Jean-Paul
Schopenhauer, Arthur
Science and Religion
Science, Theoretical Virtues in
Scientific Explanation
Scientific Progress
Scientific Realism
Scientific Representation
Scientific Revolutions
Scotus, Duns
Self-Knowledge
Sellars, Wilfrid
Semantic Externalism
Semantic Minimalism
Senses, The
Sensitivity Principle in Epistemology
Shepherd, Mary
Singular Thought
Situated Cognition
Situationism and Virtue Theory
Skepticism, Contemporary
Skepticism, History of
Slurs, Pejoratives, and Hate Speech
Smith, Adam: Moral and Political Philosophy
Social Aspects of Scientific Knowledge
Social Epistemology
Social Identity
Sounds and Auditory Perception
Space and Time
Speech Acts
Spinoza, Baruch
Stebbing, Susan
Strawson, P. F.
Structural Realism
Supererogation
Supervenience
Tarski, Alfred
Technology, Philosophy of
Testimony, Epistemology of
Theoretical Terms in Science
Thomas Aquinas' Philosophy of Religion
Thought Experiments
Time and Tense
Time Travel
Transcendental Arguments
Truth and the Aim of Belief
Truthmaking
Turing Test
Two-Dimensional Semantics
Understanding
Uniqueness and Permissiveness in Epistemology
Utilitarianism
Value of Knowledge
Vienna Circle
Virtue Epistemology
Virtue Ethics
Virtues, Epistemic
Virtues, Intellectual
Voluntarism, Doxastic
Weakness of Will
Weil, Simone
William of Ockham
Williams, Bernard
Wittgenstein, Ludwig: Early Works
Wittgenstein, Ludwig: Later Works
Wittgenstein, Ludwig: Middle Works
Wollstonecraft, Mary
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility

[66.249.64.20|91.193.111.216]
91.193.111.216

Thought experiments: the films that turn us into philosophers

Lecturer in Philosophy and Ethics, University of Notre Dame Australia

Disclosure statement

Laura D'Olimpio is a member of the Cinematic Thinking Network ( http://cinematicthinkingnetwork.org/members/ ).

The University of Notre Dame Australia provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

Showbusiness is about entertainment, right? Film-going should be fun. We want to laugh or squeal or sigh as emotion arises in us when the music swells and the camera zooms in for an extreme close up … but do we also want to think?

Marketers might wish the only thing viewers think about on leaving the cinema is where they can buy the product placement that was endorsed on the big screen. But many of us – contemporary philosophers included – have much higher hopes.

Some films do get us thinking, and there are a new breed of philosophers who are excited about the possibility that film can convey philosophical ideas. Michael Levine and Damian Cox claim The Matrix (1999) invites viewers to consider philosophical ideas such as “What is real?”

Neo (Keanu Reeves) has a choice between a red and a green pill. One allows him to continue living the life he has always known, which is an illusion, and the other wakes him up to the fact that a computer known as the matrix has been controlling all of his experiences up until this point. Which pill would you choose?

In telling Neo’s story, we see film can be the perfect medium to screen “ thought experiments ”, the traditional fictional examples used by philosophers to explore ideas.

In Ancient Greece, philosophers such as Plato (429-47 BCE) discussed the classical thought experiment known as the allegory of the cave in order to consider whether we could trust our knowledge of the world that is gained through our senses. The philosophical question “Is the world as it appears to be?” is convincingly explored in films such as The Matrix and Inception (2010).

Those films are screening philosophical ideas studied in epistemology that ask what we can know and whether we have reasonable grounds for trusting the world really is as it appears to us.

The classical thought experiment comes alive and is even more convincing when depicted on the big screen; and philosophers such Thomas Wartenberg claim “film is able to give philosophical concepts and ideas a human garb that allows their consequences to be perceived more clearly”.

For the philosophers who are celebrating films, there is much to celebrate. Films can introduce large audiences to philosophical ideas and make these concepts far more accessible and interesting than a technical article published in an academic journal. (Don’t get me wrong, there’s a place for those as well of course.)

Wartenberg gives the example of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004), which plays out what could happen if people were able to erase their memories of failed relationships which caused them grief. Yet, unless the viewers are then thinking about or reflecting upon those ideas, are they really “doing” philosophy at all?

Claiming that films can be philosophical doesn’t mean that the majority of films are or that most audience members critically engage with the films they watch. Perhaps this is why not all philosophers have always been excited by the idea that films could encourage critical viewers to reflect on life, truth and morality.

Writing in the 1930s, theorists such as T. W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer feared the advent of the Hollywood Studio film as akin to Nazi propaganda. As Jewish academics working in America at the time of the Studio System , Adorno’s concern was that mass produced and distributed artworks portrayed social norms as immutable reality.

If the viewer’s imagination cannot enter and engage with messages depicted through the filmic medium, then viewers cannot critique the moral and social status quo as screened; instead, they simply receive it, and the depicted stereotypes are reinforced.

While Adorno may have overstated this concern, we have to admit Hollywood and Bollywood films still rely heavily on stereotypes. Consider the popularity of formulaic rom-coms or the endless car chase sequels.

Should we worry that viewers ingest these stories and the stereotypes therein passively without reflection? Those images convey values. Do they adversely affect how we relate to others and see men, women, cultures, or the trajectory of romantic relationships?

That’s not an easy question to answer and generally people worry more about – say – the effect of graphic depictions of violence. While there have been empirical studies on this, psychologists do not conclusively agree. Meanwhile, even theorists such as Adorno admit that films reflect society and will only change when society changes.

Therefore, it seems to me that critical thinking needs to be encouraged early on . By the time you’re selecting which films to see, you’re either likely to reflect critically on what you watch or not.

Films can certainly offer new and diverse perspectives, giving audiences the opportunity to imaginatively engage with stories and characters they may otherwise never encounter in real life. Tom Hanks starred in Philadelphia , widely credited with raising awareness about HIV and AIDS in the 1990s.

Yet, unfortunately, most popular films that are digested in large quantities promote stereotypes with dubious moral value, such as the classic rom-com with its pining heroine, commitment-phobic hero and the predictable final scene full of flowers, smiles and a white dress.

Even Katherine Heigl admits she starred in too many romantic comedies and they became rote and unchallenging.

Hollywood blockbuster films are screened ubiquitously and many simply do not encourage active, intelligent, imaginative participation with the stereotypes they depict. While this does not defeat claims that films can “do” philosophy, I believe it highlights the need to focus not just on the film itself, but also on the critical (or passive) viewer watching the film.

Thought experiments

Head of School, School of Arts & Social Sciences, Monash University Malaysia

Chief Operating Officer (COO)

Clinical Teaching Fellow

Data Manager

Director, Social Policy

Thought Experiments: A Powerful Tool for Problem Solving

Introduction

As a means of problem-solving , thought experiments have gained recognition as a powerful tool. By engaging our imagination and intellectual faculties, these mental exercises enable us to explore hypothetical scenarios, challenge conventional thinking, and gain fresh perspectives. In this comprehensive guide, we will delve into the various dimensions of thought experiments, their purpose, who can benefit from using them, when and where to apply them, and how to utilize them effectively in problem-solving endeavors.

What is a Thought Experiment?

Why use thought experiments, who can benefit from thought experiments, when and where to use thought experiments, how to use thought experiments effectively.

A thought experiment is a mental exercise that poses hypothetical scenarios and encourages individuals to contemplate their implications. It involves creating an imagined situation that reflects a particular problem or challenge, allowing us to explore possible outcomes and uncover insights that may not be immediately apparent in real-life situations. While thought experiments do not involve physical experimentation, they can simulate and analyze complex scenarios.

Let’s consider a thought experiment designed to explore the concept of moral dilemmas:

Imagine you are a doctor during a war, and your medical tent is crowded with injured soldiers. You have limited resources and must make a decision: treat the soldiers with minor injuries or focus on the gravely wounded soldiers with a higher chance of survival. What do you do?

This thought experiment, known as the “Triage Dilemma,” prompts individuals to grapple with ethical choices and consider the allocation of scarce resources. It highlights the difficult decisions faced by healthcare professionals during wartime and encourages reflection on the principles guiding such decisions.

Thought experiments offer a range of benefits that make them invaluable tools in problem solving:

1. Expanding Imagination and Creativity: By creating imaginary scenarios, thought experiments unlock the potential of our imagination and encourage innovative thinking. They enable us to consider possibilities beyond the constraints of reality, leading to fresh perspectives and novel solutions.

2. Challenging Assumptions and Conventional Wisdom: Thought experiments help challenge established assumptions and break free from conventional ways of thinking. By questioning what is taken for granted, they open doors to new ideas and alternative approaches to problem solving.

3. Exploring Complex Issues and Concepts: Thought experiments provide a safe space to explore complex issues and concepts without real-life consequences. They allow us to investigate intricate problems from various angles, teasing out underlying factors and relationships that may not be immediately apparent.

4. Promoting Critical Thinking and Analysis: Engaging in thought experiments sharpens critical thinking skills and enhances analytical abilities. By dissecting intricate hypothetical scenarios, we develop a habit of examining problems deeply, considering multiple variables, and evaluating potential outcomes.

Suppose you are a software developer faced with the challenge of optimizing a webpage to increase user engagement. By using a thought experiment, you could explore potential solutions:

Imagine you are a user visiting the webpage. What would make you stay longer and engage more with the content? What elements or features would enhance your experience?

Through this thought experiment, you can generate innovative ideas to improve the webpage, taking into account user experience and engagement. It pushes you to think beyond the technical aspects and consider the human perspective.

Thought experiments can benefit individuals from a wide range of professions and fields. Whether you are an engineer, a scientist, an artist, a philosopher, or simply someone looking to expand their problem-solving abilities, thought experiments offer a valuable toolset for intellectual growth and creative problem solving.

Scientists and Researchers: Thought experiments are a crucial part of scientific exploration. Scientists often employ these mental exercises to explore the implications of new theories, question established paradigms, and develop new hypotheses.
Entrepreneurs and Innovators: Thought experiments can help entrepreneurs and innovators explore uncharted territories, test potential business models, and consider the consequences of various decisions. They enable better risk assessment and informed decision-making.
Ethicists and Philosophers: Thought experiments frequently find their home in ethical and philosophical discourse. From exploring moral dilemmas to questioning metaphysical concepts, thought experiments help thinkers delve into abstract ideas and critically analyze ethical frameworks.

Thought experiments can be employed in various situations to effectively dissect and solve problems. Here are a few scenarios where thought experiments can be immensely valuable:

1. In Academia: Thought experiments are a staple in academic settings, particularly in fields such as physics, philosophy, and social sciences. They foster intellectual curiosity, facilitate theoretical exploration, and aid in constructing robust arguments.

2. In Innovation and Design Processes: Thought experiments can be employed during the ideation and design stages of product development. By exploring diverse hypothetical scenarios, design teams can identify potential pitfalls, refine ideas, and create user-centric solutions.

3. In Personal and Professional Growth: Engaging in thought experiments as part of self-reflection or personal development exercises can help individuals expand their perspectives, challenge cognitive biases, and cultivate critical thinking skills.

Imagine you are a marketing strategist tasked with developing a campaign for a new product launch. Applying a thought experiment could guide you towards a successful strategy:

Envision a scenario where the target audience has never heard of the product. How would you create awareness, generate interest, and convince them to try it?

By imagining such a scenario, you can generate creative ideas for an effective marketing campaign that addresses the challenge of introducing a new product to a receptive audience.

To harness the full potential of thought experiments in problem solving, consider the following guidelines:

1. Define the Problem: Clearly articulate the problem or challenge you wish to address. This will provide focus and structure to your thought experiment.

2. Imagine Scenarios: Create hypothetical scenarios related to the problem at hand. These scenarios should embody the essence of the problem and offer space for exploration.

3. Engage in Introspection: Dive deep into your thoughts and engage in reflective introspection. Question assumptions, probe complexities, and challenge preconceived notions.

4. Explore Multiple Perspectives: Consider various viewpoints and explore the problem from different angles. This can reveal new insights and unveil aspects that may have been overlooked.

5. Seek Real-World Applications: Translate the insights gained from thought experiments into actionable steps. These steps should address the problem effectively and create tangible outcomes.

Thought experiments provide a unique and powerful approach to problem solving. By incorporating these mental exercises into your problem-solving toolkit, you can unlock new possibilities, challenge conventional thinking, and arrive at innovative solutions. Whether you are a scientist, an entrepreneur, or someone seeking personal growth and development, thought experiments hold immense potential for expanding your intellectual horizons and conquering complex challenges.

Thought Experiments

Reference work entry
First Online: 01 January 2023
pp 1644–1654
Cite this reference work entry

Michael T. Stuart 2

30 Accesses

Thought experiments – like Schrödinger’s cat and the trolley problem – are a way for inquirers to focus the power of the imagination. What makes a thought experiment different from fantasies and daydreams is that they aim to produce new knowledge, wisdom, understanding, illumination, or something like that. They typically also have a narrative structure, with a beginning, middle, and end. Usually there are several phases in a thought experiment: one in which we set up some imaginary scenario, another in which we “see” what happens in that scenario, and, finally, one in which we draw some conclusions. At this level of description, thought experiments are like laboratory experiments, except they are carried out in the imagination.

This entry will consider what thought experiments are, who performs them, how they have been investigated, what they aim to do, how they work, and how they connect to the possible.

What is it to be happy? Perhaps being happy is just feeling pleasure,...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Durable hardcover edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar notions (under different names) were in circulation before Ørsted. For example, we find some of these in the work of Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, Novalis, and Immanuel Kant (see Schildknecht 1990 ; Daiber 2001 ; Fehige and Stuart 2014 ).

Did all of these people really conduct thought experiments? As James McAllister ( 2018 ) argues, the term “thought experiment” includes the modern Western concept of scientific experiment, which arguably did not exist before Galileo. When it is legitimate to attribute a thought experiment to a historical figure? This is an open question.

Gendler’s definition takes elements from John D. Norton's earlier definition (see Norton 1991 , 129).

According to Plutarch, Theseus returned to Athens on a ship. This famous ship became a tourist attraction, and had its planks replaced, one by one, as they decayed. The question is, if all the parts are replaced with new ones, is this still Theseus’s ship? If not, at what point does it cease to be the same ship? This thought experiment has developed over time, and there are now many more elaborate versions.

Something like this distinction was first made by Hans Radder ( 1996 ) when discussing laboratory experiments. It was then applied to thought experiments by Sören Häggqvist ( 1996 ) and Tim De Mey ( 2003 ).

Arthur, R. (1999). On thought experiments as a priori science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 13 , 215–229.

Article Google Scholar

Arthur, R. (2018). Thought experiments in Newton and Leibniz. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 425–438). London: Routledge.

Google Scholar

Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Kim, R., Schulz, J., Henrich, J., Shariff, A., Bonnefon, J.-F., & Rahwan, I. (2018). The moral machine experiment. Nature, 563 , 59–64.

Becker, A. (2018). Thought Experiments in Plato. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 44–56). London: Routledge.

Beebe, J. R., & Buckwalter, W. (2010). The epistemic side-effect effect. Mind and Language, 25 , 474–498.

Bokulich, A. (2001). Rethinking thought experiments. Perspectives on Science, 9 , 285–307.

Boniolo, G. (1997). On a unified theory of models and thought experiments in natural sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 11 , 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698599708573558 .

Brendel, E. (2004). Intuition pumps and the proper use of thought experiments. Dialectica, 58 , 89–108.

Brown, J. R. (1986). Thought experiments since the scientific revolution. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 1 , 1–15.

Brown, J. R. (1991a [2011]). The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought experiments in the natural sciences . London: Routledge.

Brown, J. R. (1991b) Thought experiments: A Platonic account. In T. Horowitz & G. Massey (eds). Thought experiments in science and philosophy . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Brown, J. R. (1992). Why empiricism won’t work. Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association, 2 , 271–279.

Brown, J. R. (2004). Why thought experiments do transcend empiricism. In C. Hitchcock (Ed.), Contemporary debates in the philosophy of science . Malden: Blackwell.

Brown, J. R. (2007). Counter thought experiments. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 61 (82), 155–177.

Brun, G. (2018). Thought experiments in ethics. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 195–210). London: Routledge.

Buzzoni, M. (2008). Thought experiment in the natural sciences . Würzburg: Königshausen and Neumann.

Buzzoni, M. (2018a). Pierre Duhem and Ernst Mach on thought experiments. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 8 , 1–27.

Buzzoni, M. (2018b). Kantian accounts of thought experiments. In M. Stuart et al. (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 327–341). London: Routledge.

Camilleri, K. (2007). Indeterminacy and the limits of classical concepts: The transformation of Heisenberg’s thought. Perspectives on Science, 15 , 178–201.

Cohnitz, D. & Häggqvist, S. (2018). Thought Experiments in Current Metaphilosophical Debates. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 406–424). London: Routledge.

Corcilius, K. (2018). Aristotle and Thought Experiments. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 57–76). London: Routledge.

Daiber, J. (2001). Experimentalphysik des Geistes: Novalis und das romantische Experiment . Göttingen: Vadenhoeck and Ruprecht.

Dancy, J. (1985). The role of imaginary cases in ethics. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 66 , 141–153.

De Mey, T. (2003). The dual nature view of thought experiments. Philosophica, 72 , 61–78.

Del Mar, M. (Ed.). (Forthcoming). Artefacts of Legal Inquiry: The Value of Imagination in Adjudication . Hart/Bloomsbury.

Dennett, D. (2013). Intuition pumps and other tools for thinking . New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

Dohrn, D. (2018). ‘Mais la fantaisie est-elle un privilège des seuls poètes?’ Schlick on a ‘Sinn kriterium’ for Thought Experiments. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 18 , 87–99.

Duhem, P. (1914/1954). The aim and structure of physical theory, translated by P. Weiner . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Elgin, C. Z. (2014). Fiction as thought experiment. Perspectives on Science, 22 , 221–241.

Fehige, Y. (2018). Theology and Thought Experiments. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 183–194). London: Routledge.

Fehige, Y. (2020). The Annus Mirabilis of 1986: Thought experiments & scientific pluralism. HOPOS, 10 (2).

Fehige, Y., & Stuart, M. T. (2014). On the origins of the philosophy of thought experiments: The forerun. Perspectives on Science, 22 , 179–220.

Frappier, M., Meynell, L., & Brown, J. R. (2013). Thought experiments in science, philosophy, and the arts . London: Routledge.

Gendler, T. S. (2000). Thought experiment: On the powers and limits of imaginary cases . London: Routledge.

Gendler, T. S. (2004). Thought experiments rethought – And reperceived. Philosophy of Science, 71 , 1152–1163.

Gendler, T. S., & Hawthorne, J. (2002). Conceivability and possibility . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gilbert, J., & Reiner, M. (2004). The symbiotic roles of empirical experimentation and thought experimentation in the learning of physics. International Journal of Science Education, 26 , 1819–1834.

Glăveanu, V. P. (2018). The possible as a field of inquiry. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 14 (3), 519–530.

Gooding, D. (1992) What is experimental about thought experments? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 1992, Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers, 280–290.

Guglielmo, S., & Malle, B. F. (2010). Can unintended side effects be intentional? resolving a controversy over intentionality and morality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 36 , 1635–1647.

Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2016). Imaginative science education: The central role of Imagination in science education . Dordrecht: Springer.

Book Google Scholar

Häggqvist, S. (1996). Thought experiments in philosophy . Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International.

Häggqvist, S. (2009). A model for thought experiments. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 39 , 55–76.

Helm, H., Gilbert, J., & Watts, D. M. (1985). Thought experiments and physics education, Part II. Physics Education, 20 , 211–217.

Herfeld, C. (2019) Imagination rather than observation in econometrics: Ragnar Frisch’s hypothetical experiments as thought experiments. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 9 (1), 35–74.

Hindriks, F., & Douven, I. (2018). Nozick’s experience machine: An empirical study. Philosophical Psychology, 31 , 278–298.

Horowitz, T., & Massey, G. (Eds.). (1991). Thought experiments in science and philosophy . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Ierodiakonou, K. (2005). Ancient thought experiments: A first approach. Ancient Philosophy, 25 , 125–140.

Ierodiakonou, K. (2011). Remarks on the history of an ancient thought experiment. In K. Ierodiakonou & S. Roux (Eds.), Thought experiments in methodological and historical contexts . Leiden: Brill.

Chapter Google Scholar

Ierodiakonou, K. (2018). The Triple life of ancient thought experiments. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 31–43). London: Routledge.

Ierodiakonou, K., & Roux, S. (2011). Thought experiments in methodological and historical contexts . Leiden: Brill.

Kind, A. (2018). How Imagination gives rise to knowledge. In F. Macpherson & F. Dorsch (Eds.), Perceptual memory and perceptual imagination (pp. 227–246). New York: Oxford University Press.

Knobe, J. (2003). Intentional action and side effects in ordinary language. Analysis, 63 , 190–193.

Knobe, J. & Nichols, S. (2017). Experimental philosophy. Stanford online encyclopedia of philosophy .

Kösem, S. D., & Özdemir, Ö. F. (2014). The nature and role of thought experiments in solving conceptual physics problems. Science & Education, 23 , 865–895.

Koyré, A. (1968). Metaphysics and measurement . London: Chapman and Hall.

Krimsky, S. (1973). The use and misuse of critical Gedankenexperimente. Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie, 4 , 323–334.

Kuhn, T. S. (1977). A function for thought experiments. In The Essential tension . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kühne, U. (2005). Die Methode des Gedankenexperiments . Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ludwig, K. (2007). The epistemology of thought experiments: First person versus third person approaches. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 31 , 128–159.

Ludwig, K (2018). Thought Experiments and Experimental Philosophy. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 385–405). London: Routledge.

Mach, E. (1905) On thought experiments. In Knowledge and Error: Sketches on the psychology of enquiry (T. J. McCormack, Trans.). Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

Machery, E. (2017). Philosophy within its proper bounds . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Machery, E., Stich, S., Rose, D., Chatterjee, A., Karasawa, K., Struchiner, N., Sirker, S., Usui, N., & Hashimoto, T. (2015). Gettier across cultures. Noûs, 51 , 645–664.

Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science . New York: Routledge.

McAllister, J. (2018). Historicism and Cross-Cultural Comparison. In M. Stuart et al (eds).

McComb, G. (2013). Thought experiment, definition, and literary fiction. In M. Frappier, L. Meynell, & J. R. Brown (Eds.), Thought experiments in science, philosophy, and the arts . London: Routledge.

McGinnis, J. (2018). Experimental thoughts on thought experiments in medieval Islam. In M. Stuart et al eds.

Meinong, A. (1907/1973). Das Gedankenexperiment. In R. Haller & R. Kindinger (Eds.), Über die Stellung der Gegenstandstheorie im System der Wissenschaften . Graz: Akademische Druck und Verlagsanstalt.

Meynell, L. (2014). Imagination and insight: A new account of the content of thought experiments. Synthese, 191 , 4149–4168.

Meynell, L. (2018). Images and Imagination in Thought Experiments. In M. Stuart et al (eds).

Miščević, N. (1992). Mental models and thought experiments. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 6 , 215–226.

Miščević, N. (2018) Thought Experiments in political philosophy. In M. Stuart et al (eds).

Myrvold, W. (2011). Statistical mechanics and thermodynamics: A Maxwellian view. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B, 42 , 237–243.

Nersessian, N. J. (1992). In the theoretician’s laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association, 2 , 291–301.

Nersessian, N. J. (2018) Cognitive science, mental modeling, and thought experiments. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 309–326). London: Routledge.

Norton, J. D. (1991). Thought experiments in Einstein’s work. In T. Horowitz & G. Massey (Eds.), Thought experiments in science and philosophy . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Norton, J. D. (1993). Einstein and Nordstrom: Some lesser-known thought experiments in gravitation. In J. Earman et al. (eds). The Attraction of Gravitation: New Studies in the History of General Relativity (pp. 3–28). Boston: Birkhauser.

Norton, J. D. (1996). Are thought experiments just what you thought? Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 26 , 333–366.

Norton, J. D. (2004a). On thought experiments: Is there more to the argument? Philosophy of Science, 71 , 1139–1151.

Norton, J. D. (2004b). Why thought experiments do not transcend empiricism. In C. Hitchcock (Ed.), Contemporary debates in the philosophy of science . Malden: Blackwell.

Norton, J. D. (2013). Chasing the light: Einstein’s Most famous thought experiment. In M. Frappier, L. Meynell, & J. R. Brown (Eds.), Thought experiments in philosophy, science and the arts (pp. 123–140). New York: Routledge.

Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, utopia, and the state . New York: Basic Books.

Ørsted, H. C. (1811/1920). Første Indledning til den almindelige Naturlaere. In K. Meier (Ed.), Naturvidenskabelige Skrifter: Samlet Udgave me to Afhandlinger om Hans Virke (Vol. 3). Kopenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høst and Søn.

Palmerino, C. R. (2011). Galileo’s use of medieval thought experiments. In K. Ierodiakonou & S. Roux (Eds.), Thought experiments in methodological and historical contexts . Leiden: Brill.

Palmieri, P. (2003). Mental models in Galileo’s early mathematization of nature. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 34 , 229–264.

Palmieri, P. (2018). Galileo’s thought experiments: Projective participation and the integration of paradoxes. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 92–110). London: Routledge.

Peacock, K. (2018). Happiest thoughts: Great thought experiments of modern physics. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 211–242). London: Routledge.

Pettit, D., & Knobe, J. (2009). The pervasive impact of moral judgment. Mind and Language 24 , 586–604.

Popper, K. (1959). On the use and misuse of imaginary experiments, especially in quantum theory. In The logic of scientific discovery (pp. 442–456). London: Hutchinson.

Radder, H. (1996). In and about the world: Philosophical studies of science and technology . Albany: State University of New York Press.

Reiner, M., & Burko, L. (2003). On the limitations of thought experiments in physics and the consequences for physics education. Science & Education, 12 , 365–385.

Reiner, M., & Gilbert, J. (2000). Epistemological resources for thought experimentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 22 , 489–506.

Rescher, N. (2005). What if? Thought experimentation in philosophy . New York: Routledge.

Salis, F., & Frigg, R. (forthcoming). Capturing the scientific imagination. In P. Godfrey-Smith & A. Levy (Eds.), The Scientific Imagination . New York: Oxford University Press.

Schabas, M. (2018) Thought Experiments in Economics. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 171–182). London: Routledge.

Schildknecht, C. (1990) P hilosophische masken: Literarische Formen der Philosophie bei Platon, Descartes, Wolff und Lichtenberg . Stuttgart: Metzler.

Schlaepfer, G. & Weber, M. (2018). Thought Experiments in Biology. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 243–256). London: Routledge.

Schlesinger, G. N. (1996) The power of thought experiments. Foundations of Physics, 26 (4), 467–482.

Schulz, E., Cokely, E. T., & Feltz, A. (2011). Persistent Bias in expert judgments about free will and moral responsibility: A test of the expertise Defense. Consciousness and Cognition, 20 , 1722–1731.

Schwitzgebel, E., & Cushman, F. (2015). Philosophers’ biased judgments persist despite training, expertise and reflection. Cognition, 141 , 127–137.

Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2008). Framing moral intuitions. In W. Sinnott-Armstrong (Ed.), Moral psychology, vol. 2, The cognitive science of morality: Intuition and diversity . Cambridge: MIT Press.

Snooks, R. J. (2006). Another scientific practice separating chemistry from physics. Foundations of Chemistry, 8 , 255–270.

Sorensen, R. (1992). Thought experiments . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Starikova, I. and Giaquinto, M. (2018). Thought experiments in mathematics. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 257–278). London: Routledge.

Stevin, S. (1586/1955). The principal works of Simon Stevin. In E. Crone, E. J. Dijksterhuis, R. J. Forbes, M. G. J. Minnaert & A. Pannekoek (eds). Amsterdam: C. V. Swets & Zeitlinger.

Stich, S. and Tobia, K. (2018). Intuition and its critics. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 369–384). London: Routledge.

Stuart, M. T. (2014). Cognitive science and thought experiments: A refutation of Paul Thagard. Perspectives on Science, 22 , 98–121.

Stuart, M. T. (2016a). Taming theory with thought experiments: Understanding and scientific progress. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 58 , 24–33.

Stuart, M. T. (2016b). Norton and the logic of thought experiments. Axiomathes, 26 , 451–466.

Stuart, M. T. (2020). Telling stories in science: Feyerabend and thought experiments. HOPOS, 10 (2).

Stuart, M. T. (forthcoming). The Productive Anarchy of Scientific Imagination. Philosophy of Science .

Stuart, M. T. manuscript. The Rise of Chemical Thought Experiments.

Swirski, P. (2007). Of literature and knowledge: Explorations in narrative thought experiments, evolution, and game theory . London/New York: Routledge.

Sytsma, J., & Buckwalter, W. (Eds.). (2016). A companion to experimental philosophy . Somerset: Wiley-Blackwell.

Thagard, P. (2010). The brain and the meaning of life . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Thagard, P. (2014) Thought Experiments Considered Harmful. Perspectives on Science, 22 (2), 288–305.

Tobia, K., Buckwalter, W., & Stich, S. (2013). Moral intuitions: Are philosophers experts? Philosophical Psychology, 26 , 629–638.

Van Dyck, M. (2003). The roles of one thought experiment in interpreting quantum mechanics: Werner Heisenberg meets Thomas Kuhn. Philosophica, 72 , 79–103.

Westphal, K. (2018). Thought experiments and our cognitive (In)Capacities. In M. Stuart et al (eds). The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments (pp. 128–150). London: Routledge.

Wilkes, K. (1988). Real people: Personal identity without thought experiments . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Williamson, T. (2007). The philosophy of philosophy . Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Williamson, T. (2016). Knowing by imagining. In Kind and Kung (eds), 113–23.

Yablo, S. (1993). Is conceivability a guide to possibility? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 53 , 1–42.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Philosophy, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Michael T. Stuart

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael T. Stuart .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Vlad Petre Glăveanu

Section Editor information

Kingston University, Kingston, UK

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Stuart, M.T. (2022). Thought Experiments. In: Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_59

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_59

Published : 26 January 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-90912-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-90913-0

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Back to Entry
Entry Contents
Entry Bibliography
Academic Tools
Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Supplement to Critical Thinking

Educational methods.

Experiments have shown that educational interventions can improve critical thinking abilities and dispositions, as measured by standardized tests. Glaser (1941) developed teaching materials suitable for senior primary school, high school and college students. To test their effectiveness, he developed with his sponsor Goodwin Watson the Watson-Glaser Tests of Critical Thinking, whose descendants are in widespread global use under the name “Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal” (Watson & Glaser 1980a, 1980b, 1994). He found that senior secondary school students receiving 10 weeks of instruction using these materials improved their scores on these tests more than other such students receiving the standard English curriculum during the 10 weeks, to a degree that was statistically significant (i.e., probably not due to chance). More recently, Abrami et al. (2015) summarized in a meta-analysis the best available evidence on the effectiveness of various strategies for teaching students to think critically. The meta-analysis used as a measure of effectiveness a modified version of a statistical measure known as “Cohen’s d”: the ratio of a difference in mean score to the statistical deviation (SD) of the scores in a reference group. A difference of 0.2 SD is a small effect, a difference of 0.5 SD is a moderate effect, and a difference of 0.8 is a large effect (Cohen 1988: 25–27). Abrami et al. (2015) found a weighted mean effect size of 0.30 among 341 effect sizes, with effect sizes ranging from −1 to +2. This methodologically careful meta-analysis provides strong statistical evidence that explicit instruction for critical thinking can improve critical thinking abilities and dispositions, as measured by standardized tests.

Although contemporary meta-analysis provides a more justified verdict on claims of causal effectiveness than other methods of investigation, it does not give the reader an intuitive grasp of what difference a particular intervention makes to the lives of those who receive it. To get an appreciation of this difference, it helps to read the testimony of the teachers and students in the Laboratory School of Chicago where Dewey’s ideas obtained concreteness. The history of the school, written by two of its former teachers in collaboration with Dewey, makes the following claim for the effects of its approach:

As a result of this guarding and direction of their freedom, the children retained the power of initiative naturally present in young children through their inquisitive interests. This spirit of inquiry was given plenty of opportunity and developed with most of the children into the habit of trying a thing out for themselves. Thus, they gradually became familiar with, and to varying degrees skilled in, the use of the experimental method to solve problems in all areas of their experience. (Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 402–403)

A science teacher in the school wrote:

I think the children did get the scientific attitude of mind. They found out things for themselves. They worked out the simplest problems that may have involved a most commonplace and everyday fact in the manner that a really scientific investigator goes to work. (Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 403)

An alumna of the school summed up the character of its former students as follows:

It is difficult for me to be restrained about the character building results of the Dewey School. As the years have passed and as I have watched the lives of many Dewey School children, I have always been astonished at the ease which fits them into all sorts and conditions of emergencies. They do not vacillate and flounder under unstable emotions; they go ahead and work out the problem in hand, guided by their positively formed working habits. Discouragement to them is non-existent, almost ad absurdum. For that very fact, accomplishment in daily living is inevitable. Whoever has been given the working pattern of tackling problems has a courage born of self-confidence and achieves. (Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 406–407)

In the absence of control groups, of standardized tests, and of statistical methods of controlling for confounding variables, such testimonies are weak evidence of the effectiveness of educational interventions in developing the abilities and dispositions of a critical thinker—in Dewey’s conception, a scientific attitude. But they give a vivid impression of what might be accomplished in an educational system that takes the development of critical thinking as a goal.

Dewey established the Laboratory School explicitly as an experiment to test his theory of knowledge, which

emphasized the part in the development of thought of problems which originated in active situations and also the necessity of testing thought by action if thought was to pass over into knowledge. (Dewey 1936: 464)

Hence the curriculum of the school started from situations familiar to children from their home life (such as preparing food and making clothing) and posed problems that the children were to solve by doing things and noting the consequences. This curriculum was adjusted in the light of its observed results in the classroom.

The school’s continued experimentation with the subject matter of the elementary curriculum proved that classroom results were best when activities were in accord with the child’s changing interests, his growing consciousness of the relation of means and ends, and his increasing willingness to perfect means and to postpone satisfactions in order to arrive at better ends…. The important question for those guiding this process of growth, and of promoting the alignment and cooperation of interest and effort, is this. What specific subject-matter or mode of skill has such a vital connection with the child’s interest, existing powers, and capabilities as will extend the one [the interest–DH] and stimulate, exercise, and carry forward the others [the powers and capabilities–DH] in a progressive course of action? (Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 420–421)

In an appendix to the history of the Laboratory School, Dewey (1936: 468–469) acknowledges that the school did not solve the problem of finding things in the child’s present experience out of which would grow more elaborate, technical and organized knowledge. Passmore (1980: 91) notes one difficulty of starting from children’s out-of-school experiences: they differ a lot from one child to another. More fundamentally, the everyday out-of-school experiences of a child provide few links to the systematic knowledge of nature and of human history that humanity has developed and that schools should pass on to the next generation. If children are to acquire such knowledge through investigation of problems, teachers must first provide information as a basis for formulating problems that interest them (Passmore 1980: 93–94).

More than a century has passed since Dewey’s experiment. In the interim, researchers have refined the methodology of experimenting with human subjects, in educational research and elsewhere. They have also developed the methodology of meta-analysis for combining the results of various experiments to form a comprehensive picture of what has been discovered. Abrami et al. (2015) report the results of such a meta-analysis of all the experimental and quasi-experimental studies published or archived before 2010 that used as outcome variables standardized measures of critical thinking abilities or dispositions of the sort enumerated in Facione 1990a and described in sections 8 and 9 of the main entry. By an experimental study, they mean one in which participants are divided randomly into two groups, one of which receives the educational intervention designed to improve critical thinking and the other of which serves as a control; they found few such experiments, because of the difficulty of achieving randomization in the classrooms where the studies were conducted. By a quasi-experiment, they mean a study with an intervention group that receives an educational intervention designed to improve critical thinking and a control group, but without random allocation to the two groups. Initially, they included also what they called “pre-experiments”, with single-group pretest-posttest designs, but decided at the analysis stage not to include these studies. By a standardized measure, they mean a test with norms derived from previous administration of the test, as set out in the test’s manual, such as the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (Watson & Glaser 1980a, 1980b, 1994), the Cornell Critical Thinking Tests (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985; 2005), the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione 1990b, 1992) and the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (Facione & Facione 1992; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001). They included all such studies in which the educational intervention lasted at least three hours and the participants were at least six years old.

In these studies they found 341 effect sizes. They rated each educational intervention according to the degree to which it involved dialogue, anchored instruction, and mentoring. They found that each of these factors increased the effectiveness of the educational intervention, and that they were most effective when combined. They explained the three factors as follows.

Dialogue : In critical dialogue, which historically goes back to Socrates, individuals discuss a problem together. The dialogue can be oral or written, and cooperative or adversarial. It can take the form of asking questions, discussion, or debate. Some curricula designed to promote critical thinking establish “communities of inquiry” among the students. Such communities were a prominent feature of Dewey’s Laboratory School, incorporated as a means of promoting the primary moral objective of fostering a spirit of social cooperation among the children.

An important aspect of this conditioning process by means of the school’s daily practices was to aid each child in forming a habit of thinking before doing in all of his various enterprises. The daily classroom procedure began with a face-to-face discussion of the work of the day and its relation to that of the previous period. The new problem was then faced, analyzed, and possible plans and resources for its solution suggested by members of the group. The children soon grew to like this method. It gave both individual and group a sense of power to be intelligent, to know what they wanted to do before they did it, and to realize the reasons why one plan was preferred to another. It also enlisted their best effort to prove the validity of their judgment by testing the plan in action. Each member of the group thus acquired a habit of observing, criticizing, and integrating values in thought, in order that they should guide the action that would integrate them in fact. The value of thus previsioning consequences of action before they became fixed as fact was emphasized in the school’s philosophy. The social implication is evident. The conscious direction of his actions toward considered social ends became an unfailing index of the child’s progress toward maturity. (Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 423–424)

Communities of inquiry are also a feature of the Montessori method described by Thayer-Bacon (2000) and of the Philosophy for Children program developed by Matthew Lipman (Splitter 1987). Lipman (2003) examines theoretically what is involved in creating communities of inquiry. Hitchcock (2021) argues that the most obvious way for schools to develop critical thinking is to foster development of communities of inquiry.

Anchored instruction : In anchored instruction, whose advocacy goes back to Rousseau (1762) and Dewey (1910), there is an effort to present students with problems that make sense to them, engage them, and stimulate them to inquire. Simulations, role-playing and presentation of ethical or medical dilemmas are methods of anchoring.

Mentoring : Mentoring is a one-on-one relationship in which someone with more relevant expertise (the mentor) interacts with someone with less (the mentee). The mentor acts as a model and as a critic correcting errors by the mentee. Examples of mentoring are an advisor talking to a student, a physician modeling a procedure for a medical student, and an employee correcting an intern. Abrami et al. (2015) identified three kinds of mentoring in the studies that they analyzed: one-on-one teacher-student interaction, peer-led dyads, and internships.

Abrami et al. (2015) also compared educational interventions with respect to whether they were part of subject-matter instruction. For this purpose, they used a distinction among four types of intervention articulated by Ennis (1989). A general approach tries to teach critical thinking separately from subject-matter instruction. An infusion approach combines deep subject-matter instruction in which students are encouraged to think critically with explicit reference to critical thinking principles. An immersion approach provides deep subject-matter instruction with encouragement to think critically, but without explicit reference to critical thinking principles. A mixed approach combines the general approach with either the infusion or the immersion approach; students combine a separate thread or course aimed at teaching general critical thinking principles with deep subject-matter instruction in which they are encouraged to think critically about the subject-matter. Although the average effect size in the studies using a mixed intervention (+0.38) was greater than the average effect sizes in the studies using general (+0.26), infusion (+0.29) and immersion (+0.23) interventions, the difference was not statistically significant; in other words, it might have been due to chance.

Cleghorn (2021), Makaiau (2021), and Hiner (2021) make specific suggestions for fostering critical thinking respectively in elementary, secondary and post-secondary education. Vincent-Lancrin et al. (2019) report the results of a project of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to develop with teachers and schools in 11 countries resources for fostering creativity and critical thinking in elementary and secondary schools.

Ennis (2013, 2018) has made a detailed proposal for a mixed approach to teaching critical thinking across the curriculum of undergraduate education. Attempts at implementing such an approach have faced difficulties. Weinstein (2013: 209–213) describes the attempt at Montclair State University in Montclair, New Jersey, from 1987 through the 1990s. He reports that the university’s requirement to include critical thinking in all general education courses led to the use of the concept in identifying topics and tasks in course syllabi, but without a unifying theoretical basis. The committee that approved courses as satisfying a general education requirement ignored the relation of curricular outcomes to critical thinking, and focused instead on work requirements with a prima facie relation to reflective thought: term papers, projects, group work, and dialogue. Sheffield (2018) reports similar difficulties encountered in his position from 2012 to 2015 as the inaugural Eugene H. Fram Chair in Applied Critical Thinking at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) in Rochester, New York. A cross-disciplinary faculty advisory group was not ready to accept RIT’s approved definition of critical thinking, but never reached a consensus on an alternative. Payette and Ross (2016), on the other hand, report widespread acceptance of the Paul-Elder framework, which involves elements of thought, intellectual standards, and intellectual virtues (Paul & Elder 2006). Sheffield (2018) reports that many colleges and universities in the United States have received funding for so-called “Quality Enhancement Plans” (QEPs) devoted to critical thinking, many of them written by Paul and Elder or developed in consultation with them. He faults the plans for having a typical time frame of five years, which he argues is probably too short for meaningful results, since lasting institutional change is often extremely slow.

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Educationise

11 Activities That Promote Critical Thinking In The Class

52 Critical Thinking Flashcards for Problem Solving

Critical thinking activities encourage individuals to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information to develop informed opinions and make reasoned decisions. Engaging in such exercises cultivates intellectual agility, fostering a deeper understanding of complex issues and honing problem-solving skills for navigating an increasingly intricate world. Through critical thinking, individuals empower themselves to challenge assumptions, uncover biases, and constructively contribute to discourse, thereby enriching both personal growth and societal progress.

Critical thinking serves as the cornerstone of effective problem-solving, enabling individuals to dissect challenges, explore diverse perspectives, and devise innovative solutions grounded in logic and evidence. For engaging problem solving activities, read our article problem solving activities that enhance student’s interest.

What is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is a 21st-century skill that enables a person to think rationally and logically in order to reach a plausible conclusion. A critical thinker assesses facts and figures and data objectively and determines what to believe and what not to believe. Critical thinking skills empower a person to decipher complex problems and make impartial and better decisions based on effective information.

Importance of Acquiring Critical Thinking Skills

Acquiring critical thinking skills was never as valuable as it is today because of the prevalence of the modern knowledge economy. Today, information and technology are the driving forces behind the global economy. To keep pace with ever-changing technology and new inventions, one has to be flexible enough to embrace changes swiftly.

Read our article: How to Foster Critical Thinking Skills in Students? Creative Strategies and Real-World Examples

Today critical thinking skills are one of the most sought-after skills by the companies. In fact, critical thinking skills are paramount not only for active learning and academic achievement but also for the professional career of the students. The lack of critical thinking skills catalyzes memorization of the topics without a deeper insight, egocentrism, closed-mindedness, reduced student interest in the classroom and not being able to make timely and better decisions.

Benefits of Critical Thinking Skills in Education

Certain strategies are more eloquent than others in teaching students how to think critically. Encouraging critical thinking in the class is indispensable for the learning and growth of the students. In this way, we can raise a generation of innovators and thinkers rather than followers. Some of the benefits offered by thinking critically in the classroom are given below:

It allows a student to decipher problems and think through the situations in a disciplined and systematic manner
Through a critical thinking ability, a student can comprehend the logical correlation between distinct ideas
The student is able to rethink and re-justify his beliefs and ideas based on facts and figures
Critical thinking skills make the students curious about things around them
A student who is a critical thinker is creative and always strives to come up with out of the box solutions to intricate problems
Critical thinking skills assist in the enhanced student learning experience in the classroom and prepares the students for lifelong learning and success
The critical thinking process is the foundation of new discoveries and inventions in the world of science and technology
The ability to think critically allows the students to think intellectually and enhances their presentation skills, hence they can convey their ideas and thoughts in a logical and convincing manner
Critical thinking skills make students a terrific communicator because they have logical reasons behind their ideas

Critical Thinking Lessons and Activities

11 Activities that Promote Critical Thinking in the Class

We have compiled a list of 11 activities that will facilitate you to promote critical thinking abilities in the students. We have also covered problem solving activities that enhance student’s interest in our another article. Click here to read it.

1. Worst Case Scenario

Divide students into teams and introduce each team with a hypothetical challenging scenario. Allocate minimum resources and time to each team and ask them to reach a viable conclusion using those resources. The scenarios can include situations like stranded on an island or stuck in a forest. Students will come up with creative solutions to come out from the imaginary problematic situation they are encountering. Besides encouraging students to think critically, this activity will enhance teamwork, communication and problem-solving skills of the students.

Read our article: 10 Innovative Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking in the Classroom

2. If You Build It

It is a very flexible game that allows students to think creatively. To start this activity, divide students into groups. Give each group a limited amount of resources such as pipe cleaners, blocks, and marshmallows etc. Every group is supposed to use these resources and construct a certain item such as building, tower or a bridge in a limited time. You can use a variety of materials in the classroom to challenge the students. This activity is helpful in promoting teamwork and creative skills among the students.

It is also one of the classics which can be used in the classroom to encourage critical thinking. Print pictures of objects, animals or concepts and start by telling a unique story about the printed picture. The next student is supposed to continue the story and pass the picture to the other student and so on.

4. Keeping it Real

In this activity, you can ask students to identify a real-world problem in their schools, community or city. After the problem is recognized, students should work in teams to come up with the best possible outcome of that problem.

5. Save the Egg

Make groups of three or four in the class. Ask them to drop an egg from a certain height and think of creative ideas to save the egg from breaking. Students can come up with diverse ideas to conserve the egg like a soft-landing material or any other device. Remember that this activity can get chaotic, so select the area in the school that can be cleaned easily afterward and where there are no chances of damaging the school property.

6. Start a Debate

In this activity, the teacher can act as a facilitator and spark an interesting conversation in the class on any given topic. Give a small introductory speech on an open-ended topic. The topic can be related to current affairs, technological development or a new discovery in the field of science. Encourage students to participate in the debate by expressing their views and ideas on the topic. Conclude the debate with a viable solution or fresh ideas generated during the activity through brainstorming.

7. Create and Invent

This project-based learning activity is best for teaching in the engineering class. Divide students into groups. Present a problem to the students and ask them to build a model or simulate a product using computer animations or graphics that will solve the problem. After students are done with building models, each group is supposed to explain their proposed product to the rest of the class. The primary objective of this activity is to promote creative thinking and problem-solving skills among the students.

8. Select from Alternatives

This activity can be used in computer science, engineering or any of the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) classes. Introduce a variety of alternatives such as different formulas for solving the same problem, different computer codes, product designs or distinct explanations of the same topic.

Form groups in the class and ask them to select the best alternative. Each group will then explain its chosen alternative to the rest of the class with reasonable justification of its preference. During the process, the rest of the class can participate by asking questions from the group. This activity is very helpful in nurturing logical thinking and analytical skills among the students.

9. Reading and Critiquing

Present an article from a journal related to any topic that you are teaching. Ask the students to read the article critically and evaluate strengths and weaknesses in the article. Students can write about what they think about the article, any misleading statement or biases of the author and critique it by using their own judgments.

In this way, students can challenge the fallacies and rationality of judgments in the article. Hence, they can use their own thinking to come up with novel ideas pertaining to the topic.

10. Think Pair Share

In this activity, students will come up with their own questions. Make pairs or groups in the class and ask the students to discuss the questions together. The activity will be useful if the teacher gives students a topic on which the question should be based.

For example, if the teacher is teaching biology, the questions of the students can be based on reverse osmosis, human heart, respiratory system and so on. This activity drives student engagement and supports higher-order thinking skills among students.

11. Big Paper – Silent Conversation

Silence is a great way to slow down thinking and promote deep reflection on any subject. Present a driving question to the students and divide them into groups. The students will discuss the question with their teammates and brainstorm their ideas on a big paper. After reflection and discussion, students can write their findings in silence. This is a great learning activity for students who are introverts and love to ruminate silently rather than thinking aloud.

Finally, for students with critical thinking, you can go to GS-JJ.co m to customize exclusive rewards, which not only enlivens the classroom, but also promotes the development and training of students for critical thinking.

Read our next article: 10 Innovative Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking in the Classroom

9 Philosophical Thought Experiments That Will Keep You Up at Night

Sometimes, the best way to illustrate a complicated philosophical concept is by framing it as a story or situation. Here are nine such thought experiments with downright disturbing implications.

Top image : Isaac Gutiérrez Pascual ; published with permission.

1. prisoner’s dilemma.

This is the classic game theory problem in which a suspect is confronted with a rather difficult decision: Stay silent or confess to the crime. Trouble is, the suspect doesn’t know how their accomplice will respond.

2. Mary the Colorblind Neuroscientist

Sometimes referred to as the Inverted Spectrum Problem or the Knowledge Argument, this thought experiment is meant to stimulate discussions against a purely physicalist view of the universe, namely the suggestion that the universe, including mental processes, is entirely physical. This thought experiment tries to show that there are indeed non-physical properties — and attainable knowledge — that can only be learned through conscious experience.

The originator of the concept, Frank Jackson, explains it this way :

Mary is a brilliant scientist who is, for whatever reason, forced to investigate the world from a black and white room via a black and white television monitor. She specializes in the neurophysiology of vision and acquires, let us suppose, all the physical information there is to obtain about what goes on when we see ripe tomatoes, or the sky, and use terms like ‘red’, ‘blue’, and so on. She discovers, for example, just which wavelength combinations from the sky stimulate the retina, and exactly how this produces via the central nervous system the contraction of the vocal cords and expulsion of air from the lungs that results in the uttering of the sentence ‘The sky is blue’...What will happen when Mary is released from her black and white room or is given a color television monitor? Will she learn anything or not?

Put another way, Mary knows everything there is to know about color except for one crucial thing: She’s never actually experienced color consciously. Her first experience of color was something that she couldn’t possibly have anticipated; there’s a world of difference between academically knowing something versus having actual experience of that thing.

This thought experiment teaches us that there will always be more to our perception of reality, including consciousness itself, than objective observation. It essentially shows us that we don’t know what we don’t know. The thought experiment also gives us hope for the future; should we augment our sensory capabilities and find ways to expand conscious awareness, we could open up entirely new avenues of psychological and subjective exploration.

3. The Beetle in the Box

This one’s also known as the Private Language Argument and it’s somewhat similar to Mary the Neuroscientist. In Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations, he proposed a thought experiment that challenged the way we look at introspection and how it informs the language we use to describe sensations.

For the thought experiment, Wittgenstein asks us to imagine a group of individuals, each of whom has a box containing something called a “beetle.” No one can see into anyone else’s box. Everyone is asked to describe their beetle — but each person only knows their own beetle. But each person can only talk about their own beetle, as there might be different things in each person’s box. Consequently, Wittgenstein says the subsequent descriptions cannot have a part in the “language game.” Over time, people will talk about what is in their boxes, but the word “beetle” simply ends up meaning “that thing that is in a person’s box.”

Why is this bizarre thought experiment disturbing? The mental experiment points out that the beetle is like our minds, and that we can’t know exactly what it is like in another individual’s mind. We can’t know exactly what other people are experiencing, or the uniqueness of their perspective. It’s an issue that’s very much related to the so-called hard problem of consciousness and the phenomenon of qualia .

4. The Chinese Room

Philosopher John Searle asks us to imagine someone who knows only English, and they’re sitting alone in a room following English instructions for manipulating strings of Chinese characters. So, for those outside of the room, it appears that the person inside the room understands Chinese.

(Credit: Elysium )

The argument is supposed to show that, while advanced computers may appear to understand and converse in natural language, they are not capable of understanding language. This is because computers are strictly limited to the exchange of symbolic strings. The Chinese Room was meant to be a killer argument against artificial intelligence , but it’s a rather simplistic view of AI and where it’s likely headed, including the advent of generalized, learning intelligence, (AGI) and the potential for artificial consciousness.

That said, Searle is right in his suggestion that there is the potential for an AI to act and behave as if there’s conscious awareness and understanding. This is problematic because it may be convincing to us humans that true comprehension is going on where there is none. We best be careful, therefore, around seemingly “smart” machine minds.

5. The Experience Machine

Philosopher Robert Nozick’s Experience Machine is a strong hint that we should probably just plug ourselves into a kind of hedonistic version of The Matrix .

From his book, Anarchy, State and Utopia (1974):

Suppose there were an experience machine that would give you any experience you desired. Superduper neuropsychologists could stimulate your brain so that you would think and feel you were writing a great novel, or making a friend, or reading an interesting book. All the time you would be floating in a tank, with electrodes attached to your brain. Should you plug into this machine for life, preprogramming your life experiences?...Of course, while in the tank you won't know that you're there; you'll think that it's all actually happening...Would you plug in?"

The basic idea, here, is that we have very good reasons to plug ourselves into such a machine. Because we live in a universe with no apparent purpose, and because our lives are often characterized by less-than-ideal conditions, like toil and suffering , we have no good reason to not opt for something substantially better — even if it is “artificial.” But what about human dignity? And the satisfaction of our “true” desires? Nozick’s thought experiment may appear easily dismissible, but it’s one that’s challenged philosophers for decades .

6. The Trolley Problem

Here’s one for the ethicists — and you can blame the renowned moral philosopher Philippa Foot for this one. This thought experiment, of which there are now many variations, first appeared in Foot’s 1967 paper, “Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect.”

Imagine that you’re at the controls of a railway switch and there’s an out-of-control trolley coming. The tracks branch into two, one track that leads to a group of five people, and the other to one person. If you do nothing, the trolley will smash into the five people. But if you flip the switch, it’ll change tracks and strike the lone person. What do you do?

(Credit: We Love Philosophy )

Utilitarians, who seek to maximize happiness, say that the single person should be killed. Kantians, because they see people as ends and not means, would argue that you can’t treat the single person as a means for the benefit of the five. So you should do nothing.

A second variation of the problem involves a “fat man” and no second track — a man so large that, if you were to push him onto the tracks, his body would prevent the trolley from smashing into the group of five. So what do you do? Nothing? Or push him onto the tracks?

This thought experiment reveals the complexity of morality by distinguishing between killing a person and letting them die — a problem with implications to our laws, behavior, science, policing, and war. “Right” and “wrong” is not as simple as it’s often made out to be.

7. The Spider in the Urinal

This one’s reminiscent of Plato’s Cave, another classic (and disturbing) thought experiment. Proposed by Thomas Nagel in his essay, “Birth, Death, and the Meaning of Life,” it addresses issues of non-interference and the meaningfulness of life. He got the idea when he noticed a sad little spider living in a urinal in the men’s bathroom at Princeton where he was teaching. The spider appeared to have an awful life, constantly getting peed on, and “he didn’t seem to like it.” He continues:

Gradually our encounters began to oppress me. Of course it might be his natural habitat, but because he was trapped by the smooth porcelain overhang, there was no way for him to get out even if he wanted to, and no way to tell whether he wanted to...So one day toward the end of the term I took a paper towel from the wall dispenser and extended it to him. His legs grasped the end of the towel and I lifted him out and deposited him on the tile floor. He just sat there, not moving a muscle. I nudged him slightly with the towel, but nothing happened . . . . I left, but when I came back two hours later he hadn't moved. The next day I found him in the same place, his legs shriveled in that way characteristic of dead spiders. His corpse stayed there for a week, until they finally swept the floor.

Nagel acted out of empathy, assuming that the spider would fare better — and perhaps even enjoy life — outside of its normal existence. But the exact opposite happened. In the end, he did the spider no good.

This thought experiment forces us to consider the quality and meaningfulness of not just animal lives, but our own as well. How can we ever know what anyone really wants? And do our lives actually do us any good? It also forces us to question our policies of intervention . Despite our best intentions, interference can sometimes inflict unanticipated harm. It’s a lesson embedded within Star Trek ’s Prime Directive — but as the Trolley Problem illustrated, sometimes inaction can be morally problematic.

8. The Replacement Argument

In this thought experiment, we are asked to imagine a world in which humans don’t care for the taste of meat. In such a scenario, there would be no animals raised as livestock. And by consequence, there would be a dramatic decrease in the number of animal lives, like pigs, cows, and chickens. As Virginia Woolf once wrote, “Of all the arguments for Vegetarianism none is so weak as the argument from humanity. The pig has a stronger interest than anyone in the demand for bacon. If all the world were Jewish, there would be no pigs at all.”

This line of reasoning can lead to some bizarre, and even repugnant conclusions. For example, is it better to have 20 billion people on the planet in a poor standard of living than 10 billion in a higher standard of living? If the latter, then what about the 10 billion lives that never happened? But how can we feel bad about lives that never occurred?

9. Original Position

This thought experiment is why I’m a complete fanboy of John Rawls. He asks us to imagine ourselves in a situation in which we know nothing of our true lives — we are behind a “veil of ignorance” that prevents us from knowing the political system under which we live or the laws that are in place. Nor do we know anything about psychology, economics, biology, and other sciences. But along with a group of similarly situation-blind people, we are asked, in this original position, to review a comprehensive list of classic forms of justice drawn from various traditions of social and political philosophy. We are then given the task of selecting which system of justice we feel would best suit our needs in the absence of any information about our true selves and the situation we may actually be in in the real world.

So, for example, what if you came back to “real life” to find out that you live in a shanty town in India? Or a middle class neighborhood in Norway? What if you’re a developmentally disabled person? A millionaire? (Or as I proposed in my paper, “ All Together Now ,” a different species?)

According to Rawls, we would likely end up picking something that guarantees equal basic rights and liberties to secure our interests as free and equal citizens, and to pursue a wide range of conceptions for the good. He also speculated that we’d likely choose a system that ensures fair educational and employment opportunities.

3 Famous Thought Experiments, or The Art of Counterfactuals

While “Gedankenexperiment” (literally “thought experiment”) was a term initially coined by the 19 th century Danish physicist and chemist Hans Christian Ørsted, many claim that the common mental technique can be traced all the way back to Galileo and before that the ancient Greeks .

But what explains this long and storied history? Why have thought experiments been so valuable to some of history’s greatest minds? And what value do they hold for today’s lifelong learners?

How to Define Thought Experiment

According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy , thought experiments are essentially a tool of the imagination used for “entertainment, education, conceptual analysis, exploration, hypothesizing, theory selection, theory implementation, etc.” While academic debates have raged on for years as to the exact parameters, some scholars have defined a thought experience as the ability to generate a mental model of a situation.

For example, the cognitive scientist Nancy Nersessian recently defined the mental strategy as “the construction of a model of a kind of situation [in which] manipulating that model through simulation affords epistemic access to certain features of current representations in a way that manipulating propositional representations using logical rules cannot.”

In other words: our ability to visualize or play out a scenario in our head allows us to discover things about the scenario otherwise unavailable to us through formal logic or abstract reasoning. Fundamentally, it is an approach to learning .

Another slightly more concise definition comes from the philosopher George Schlesinger, who took stock of the technique in his 1995 essay “The Power of Thought Experiments” in order to distill the technique’s true value. “[T]he great usefulness of thought experiments,” he writes, “derives from the remarkable pliability of counterfactuals.”

What Schlesinger is getting at here revolves around what he means by a “counterfactual,” which is just a fancy word for our ability to imagine scenarios contrary to reality. It’s a habit many of us use in our day to day life. Just recall anytime you’ve begun a sentence with “If only…” or “What if…” This kind of self-reflection is what we call a counterfactual, and by extension is a rather simple yet pervasive kind of thought experiment.

Taking this into consideration, we can see what Schlesinger’s getting at when he talks about the “remarkable pliability of counterfactuals.” Namely, that the true value of thought experiments comes from the human ability to play with hypotheticals using our wild imagination.

And it’s this imagination that has made possible some of the greatest discoveries by some of humanity’s greatest minds, including Einstein himself .

In order to truly illustrate how powerful this technique can be, especially for lifelong learners, let’s take a look at some examples. As I hope you’ll see, not only is this technique a crucial skill for those grappling with complex subject matter, but it is also an indispensable habit and learning tool for those looking to strengthen their critical thinking skills .

3 Famous Thought Experiments by Contemporary Thinkers

The list of well-known thought experiments is a long one, but here a few examples that have caught the attention of recent scholars.

1. Mary’s Room Thought Experiment

The philosopher Frank Jackson posed in 1982 the thought experiment most commonly known as Mary’s Room , or Mary the super-scientist. The scenario involves Mary, a scientist living in an entirely black and white world who has detailed, scientifically-accurate descriptions of color and yet no first-hand experience of color. From here, Jackson poses the question: if Mary has complete knowledge of the physical properties of color, will she gain any new knowledge upon exiting the black and white world and observing color herself?

As one might imagine, such a thought experiment highlights the gap between physical description and experiential knowledge. To Jackson, it seems quite plausible that upon exiting the black and white world Mary’s experience of observing color may fall entirely outside her previous wealth of knowledge concerning color and its physical properties, leading us to believe that there is a worthwhile distinction between scientific fact and our experience of those facts.

2. Chinese Room Thought Experiment

Another well-known thought experiment comes from the philosopher John Searle. This hypothetical imagines that we are alone in a room, with someone outside slipping sheets of paper under the door with Chinese characters on them. Because we do not understand Chinese, we follow instructions from a computer program for how to manipulate the symbols, which we then slip back out under the door.

From the perspective of those outside the room, it seems as though we understand Chinese. To us, it seems that we are merely following arbitrary instructions that are completely disconnected from any form of understanding or language fluency.

In this way, Searle’s thought experiment is intended to reveal that computers often use specific rules to manipulate symbols without arriving at any real understanding of grammar, semantics, or meaning themselves. Thus, for Searle, the lesson of the thought experiment is that our tendency to compare the human brain to a computer is misguided given that computers—at least in their current form—are only able to simulate the process of full understanding.

3. Drowning Child Thought Experiment

Our final example comes from the philosopher Peter Singer, who has garnered a reputation for his work on morality and politics. The thought experiment he proposes is a hypothetical he’s presented to many of his students in order to reveal pressing modern day ethical concerns. In his words:

“To challenge my students to think about the ethics of what we owe to people in need, I ask them to imagine that their route to the university takes them past a shallow pond. One morning, I say to them, you notice a child has fallen in and appears to be drowning. To wade in and pull the child out would be easy but it will mean that you get your clothes wet and muddy, and by the time you go home and change you will have missed your first class.

I then ask the students: do you have any obligation to rescue the child? Unanimously, the students say they do. The importance of saving a child so far outweighs the cost of getting one’s clothes muddy and missing a class, that they refuse to consider it any kind of excuse for not saving the child. Does it make a difference, I ask, that there are other people walking past the pond who would equally be able to rescue the child but are not doing so? No, the students reply, the fact that others are not doing what they ought to do is no reason why I should not do what I ought to do.”

From here, Singer emphasizes that such a situation already exists today, particularly from the point of view of wealthier countries where your average citizen enjoys relative peace and affluence, meanwhile exploitation, starvation, and other forms of suffering remain prevalent elsewhere. Thus, the philosopher wants to ask: Why does our behavior not line up with our professed values? What action should we be taking that we aren’t?

As you can see, such thought experiments have been posed in a diverse set of contexts and range widely in their implications—be it in the realm of epistemology , technology, or ethics.

So, next time you’re contemplating something important or diving into some difficult learning material, consider what kind of counterfactuals might help you think more critically about the situation.

By Gabe Kahan for Mission to Learn

Woman doing yoga with ocean in background

Health and Learning: What the Science Says

Navigating Controversial Topics: How Policy Wonks Do It

person sitting at open laptop - only arms visible - holding cell phone

5 Top Minimalist Productivity Apps for Lifelong Learners

200+ Award-Winning Educational Textbooks, Activity Books, & Printable eBooks!

Compare Products

Reading, Writing, Math, Science, Social Studies

Search by Book Series
Algebra I & II Gr. 7-12+
Algebra Magic Tricks Gr. 2-12+
Algebra Word Problems Gr. 7-12+
Balance Benders Gr. 2-12+
Balance Math & More! Gr. 2-12+
Basics of Critical Thinking Gr. 4-7
Brain Stretchers Gr. 5-12+
Building Thinking Skills Gr. Toddler-12+
Building Writing Skills Gr. 3-7
Bundles - Critical Thinking Gr. PreK-9
Bundles - Language Arts Gr. K-8
Bundles - Mathematics Gr. PreK-9
Bundles - Multi-Subject Curriculum Gr. PreK-12+
Bundles - Test Prep Gr. Toddler-12+
Can You Find Me? Gr. PreK-1
Complete the Picture Math Gr. 1-3
Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Gr. 5-12+
Cranium Crackers Gr. 3-12+
Creative Problem Solving Gr. PreK-2
Critical Thinking Activities to Improve Writing Gr. 4-12+
Critical Thinking Coloring Gr. PreK-2
Critical Thinking Detective Gr. 3-12+
Critical Thinking Tests Gr. PreK-6
Critical Thinking for Reading Comprehension Gr. 1-5
Critical Thinking in United States History Gr. 6-12+
CrossNumber Math Puzzles Gr. 4-10
Crypt-O-Words Gr. 2-7
Crypto Mind Benders Gr. 3-12+
Daily Mind Builders Gr. 5-12+
Dare to Compare Math Gr. 2-7
Developing Critical Thinking through Science Gr. 1-8
Dr. DooRiddles Gr. PreK-12+
Dr. Funster's Gr. 2-12+
Editor in Chief Gr. 2-12+
Fun-Time Phonics! Gr. PreK-2
Half 'n Half Animals Gr. K-4
Hands-On Thinking Skills Gr. K-1
Inference Jones Gr. 1-6
James Madison Gr. 10-12+
Jumbles Gr. 3-5
Language Mechanic Gr. 4-7
Language Smarts Gr. 1-4
Mastering Logic & Math Problem Solving Gr. 6-9
Math Analogies Gr. K-9
Math Detective Gr. 3-8
Math Games Gr. 3-8
Math Mind Benders Gr. 5-12+
Math Ties Gr. 4-8
Math Word Problems Gr. 4-10
Mathematical Reasoning Gr. Toddler-11
Middle School Science Gr. 6-8
Mind Benders Gr. PreK-12+
Mind Building Math Gr. K-1
Mind Building Reading Gr. K-1
Novel Thinking Gr. 3-6
OLSAT® Test Prep Gr. PreK-K
Organizing Thinking Gr. 2-8
Pattern Explorer Gr. 3-9
Practical Critical Thinking Gr. 8-12+
Punctuation Puzzler Gr. 3-8
Reading Detective Gr. 3-12+
Red Herring Mysteries Gr. 4-12+
Red Herrings Science Mysteries Gr. 4-9
Science Detective Gr. 3-6
Science Mind Benders Gr. PreK-3
Science Vocabulary Crossword Puzzles Gr. 4-6
Sciencewise Gr. 4-12+
Scratch Your Brain Gr. 2-12+
Sentence Diagramming Gr. 3-12+
Smarty Pants Puzzles Gr. 3-12+
Snailopolis Gr. K-4
Something's Fishy at Lake Iwannafisha Gr. 5-9
Teaching Technology Gr. 3-12+
Tell Me a Story Gr. PreK-1
Think Analogies Gr. 3-12+
Think and Write Gr. 3-8
Think-A-Grams Gr. 4-12+
Thinking About Time Gr. 3-6
Thinking Connections Gr. 4-12+
Thinking Directionally Gr. 2-6
Thinking Skills & Key Concepts Gr. PreK-2
Thinking Skills for Tests Gr. PreK-5
U.S. History Detective Gr. 8-12+
Understanding Fractions Gr. 2-6
Visual Perceptual Skill Building Gr. PreK-3
Vocabulary Riddles Gr. 4-8
Vocabulary Smarts Gr. 2-5
Vocabulary Virtuoso Gr. 2-12+
What Would You Do? Gr. 2-12+
Who Is This Kid? Colleges Want to Know! Gr. 9-12+
Word Explorer Gr. 6-8
Word Roots Gr. 3-12+
World History Detective Gr. 6-12+
Writing Detective Gr. 3-6
You Decide! Gr. 6-12+

Developing Critical Thinking through Science

Hands-on physical science.

Grades: 1-8

Award Winner

The fun, hands-on physical science lessons/experiments in these books teach science principles found in state and national science standards. Students also learn and practice critical thinking through the application of the scientific method of investigation. Each activity is a 10- to 30-minute guided experiment in which students are prompted to verbalize their step-by-step observations, predictions, and conclusions. Reproducible pictures or charts are included when needed, but the focus is inquiry-based, hands-on science. Preparation time is short, and most materials can be found around the classroom. Step-by-step procedures, questions, answer guidelines, and clear illustrations are provided. Practical applications at the end of each activity relate science concepts to real-life experiences. These activities can be used successfully with a minimum of science knowledge, preparation time, and science equipment. The lessons/experiments teach science following these four important educational themes:

Science can and should motivate students toward learning and toward developing curiosity about the world in which they live.
Science is viewed as an active process of developing ideas, or "storybuilding," rather than as static bodies of already-existing knowledge to be passed on to students. Instead of merely describing what is taking place, the teacher guides the students through an inquiry process by asking pertinent, open-ended questions and by encouraging investigative process through demonstration, hands-on opportunities, and extension of experiments.
Students are encouraged to observe and describe their observations accurately and completely using scientific terminology. Scientific terms are defined, demonstrated with concrete examples, then applied and reinforced throughout the activities.
An open, interactive atmosphere in the classroom is essential. Students and their teacher actively investigate ideas together (compared to a passive learning situation in which students are merely told the problem, given the answers, and expected to memorize the information.) Through observation, hands-on participation, and verbalization of the physical and thought processes, students build a more concrete understanding of the concepts taught in the activities. With the teacher's help, students can learn to apply these same analytic and problem-solving skills to their other studies and to any classroom or social problems that might arise.

Book 1 (Grades 1-3) Units: • Observing • Water • Buoyancy and Surface Tension • Air • Moving Air—Air Pressure • Force • Space, Light, and Shadows Book 2 (Grades 4-8) Units: • Process Skills • Force, Movement, Work, Systems, and Weight • States of Matter • Mass, Volume, and Density • Air Pressure & Pressure of the Atmosphere • Heat, Expansion, and the Movement of Molecules • Transfer of Heat • Flight and Aerodynamics • The Speed of Falling Bodies • Variables • The Flight of Rockets • Inertia and the Flight of Satellites • Surface Tension and Bubbles • Sound • Reflection and Refraction of Light • Magnetism and Electricity

Description and Features

All products in this series.

• Our eBooks digital, electronic versions of the book pages that you may print to any paper printer. • You can open the PDF eBook from any device or computer that has a PDF reader such as Adobe® Reader®. • Licensee can legally keep a copy of this eBook on three different devices. View our eBook license agreement details here . • You can immediately download your eBook from "My Account" under the "My Downloadable Product" section after you place your order.

Add to Cart Add to Cart Remove This Item
Special of the Month
Sign Up for our Best Offers
Bundles = Greatest Savings!
Sign Up for Free Puzzles
Sign Up for Free Activities
Toddler (Ages 0-3)
PreK (Ages 3-5)
Kindergarten (Ages 5-6)
1st Grade (Ages 6-7)
2nd Grade (Ages 7-8)
3rd Grade (Ages 8-9)
4th Grade (Ages 9-10)
5th Grade (Ages 10-11)
6th Grade (Ages 11-12)
7th Grade (Ages 12-13)
8th Grade (Ages 13-14)
9th Grade (Ages 14-15)
10th Grade (Ages 15-16)
11th Grade (Ages 16-17)
12th Grade (Ages 17-18)
12th+ Grade (Ages 18+)
Test Prep Directory
Test Prep Bundles
Test Prep Guides
Preschool Academics
Store Locator
Submit Feedback/Request
Sales Alerts Sign-Up
Technical Support
Mission & History
Articles & Advice
Testimonials
Our Guarantee
New Products
Free Activities
Libros en Español

IMAGES

10 Essential Critical Thinking Skills (And How to Improve Them
The 5 Most Useful Critical Thinking Flowcharts For Your Learners
💋 What is critical thinking examples. What Is Critical Thinking?. 2022
How to promote Critical Thinking Skills
What is critical thinking?
The 6 Stages of Critical Thinking Charles Leon

VIDEO

Experiments & Studies Spring 13
Critical Thinking: Reject False Information and Make Better Decisions! 🧠❓ #shortvideo #statssaga
Embrace Mistakes, Learn, and Succeed!
Importance of critical thinking for students
Immersive Critical Thinking Activities: Think Like A Scientist
Unlocking Philosophical Sophistication: A Journey into Deep Thinking

COMMENTS

7 thought experiments that will make you question everything
The Veil of Ignorance. Mural of Lady Justice by Alex Proimos. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons) This experiment was devised by John Rawls in 1971 to explore notions of justice in his book A Theory of ...
Thought Experiments: Exploring Creative and Philosophical Thinking
We will also explore how thought experiments can be used to generate new ideas and challenge existing assumptions. Finally, we will examine how thought experiments can be used to encourage dialogue, critical thinking, and stimulate creativity. Thought experiments can be used to explore a variety of topics, from the philosophical to the scientific.
Thought Experiments
Thought Experiments. First published Sat Dec 28, 1996; substantive revision Tue Nov 28, 2023. Thought experiments are basically devices of the imagination. They are employed for various purposes such an entertainment, education, conceptual analysis, exploration, hypothesizing, theory selection, theory implementation, etc.
Thought Experiments and Philosophical Problems
What If. . .Collected Thought Experiments in Philosophy is a brief collection of over 100 classic and contemporary "thought experiments," each exploring an important philosophical argument. These thought experiments introduce students to the kind of disciplined thought required in philosophy, and awaken their intellectual curiosity.
1.2: Introduction and Thought Experiments- The Trolley Problem
The goal of a critical thinking course is to enable you to understand and analyze arguments. By the end of the course you should be able to recognize such arguments and determine if they are good (i.e. if a rational person, upon hearing such an argument, should be convinced by it.) ... The trolley problem is a thought experiment in ethics. The ...
Thought Experiment: How Einstein Solved Difficult Problems
Mastering thought experiments can help you confront difficult questions and anticipate (and prevent) problems. *** The purpose of a thought experiment is to encourage speculation, logical thinking and to change paradigms. Thought experiments push us outside our comfort zone by forcing us to confront questions we cannot answer with ease.
1: Introduction to Critical Thinking, Reasoning, and Logic
It may seem strange to begin a logic textbook with this question. 'Thinking' is perhaps the most intimate and personal thing that people do. Yet the more you 'think' about thinking, the more mysterious it can appear. It is the sort of thing that one intuitively or naturally understands, and yet cannot describe to others without great ...
PDF Thought Experiments
7/29/2020 Thought Experiments - Philosophy - Oxford Bibliographies ... How can we learn something new about the world just by thinking? Answers ... Häggqvist 1996 is a critical survey, with an emphasis on modal considerations. Rescher 2005 and Sorensen 1992 both cover a variety of issues and provide many examples.
Thought Experiments
Often a real experiment that is the analogue of a thought experiment is impossible for physical, technological, or financial reasons; but this needn't be a defining condition of thought experiments. The main point is that we seem able to get a grip on nature just by thinking, and therein lies the great interest for philosophy.
What Are Thought Experiments?
Thought experiments are devices of the imagination used to investigate the nature of things. Thought experimenting often takes place when the method of variation is employed in entertaining imaginative suppositions. Stanford Encyclopedia. The most elaborate proposal I was able to find is due to Tamar Szabo Gendler.
Thought Experiments: An introduction to philosophy
The second module illustrates the role that thought experiments play in Socratic dialogues and conceptual analysis, by putting examples of and counterexamples to competing analyses of knowledge under close scrutiny. The focus is on the Gettier problem, i.e., the problem that justified true belief doesn't seem sufficient of knowledge, and four ...
Thought Experiments
Thought Experiments in Philosophy. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1996. A critical discussion of the early rival accounts of thought experiments. Especially concerned with the relation between thought experiments and modal notions (necessity and possibility). Horowitz, T., and G. Massey, eds. Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy ...
Thought experiments: the films that turn us into philosophers
The classical thought experiment comes alive and is even more convincing when depicted on the big screen; ... Therefore, it seems to me that critical thinking needs to be encouraged early on. By ...
Thought Experiments: A Powerful Tool for Problem Solving
Thought experiments are mental exercises that provide valuable problem-solving tools, benefiting diverse professionals such as scientists, philosophers, and entrepreneurs. Utilizing imagination and critical thinking, these exercises challenge conventional wisdom, explore complex issues, and foster creativity. An effective thought experiment defines a problem, imagines scenarios, encourages ...
Thought experiments
Article Summary. Thought experiments are strange: they have the power to present surprising results and can profoundly change the way we view the world, all without requiring us to examine the world in the way that ordinary scientific experiments do. Philosophers who view all hypothetical reasoning as a form of thought experimentation regard ...
Thought Experiments
Thought experiments - like Schrödinger's cat and the trolley problem - are a way for inquirers to focus the power of the imagination. ... 'We are thinking of starting a new program. It will help us increase profits, but it will also harm the environment.' ... Krimsky, S. (1973). The use and misuse of critical Gedankenexperimente ...
Critical Thinking
Experiments have shown that educational interventions can improve critical thinking abilities and dispositions, as measured by standardized tests. Glaser (1941) developed teaching materials suitable for senior primary school, high school and college students. To test their effectiveness, he developed with his sponsor Goodwin Watson the Watson ...
11 Activities That Promote Critical Thinking In The Class
Read our article: 10 Innovative Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking in the Classroom. 5. Save the Egg. Make groups of three or four in the class. Ask them to drop an egg from a certain height and think of creative ideas to save the egg from breaking.
9 Philosophical Thought Experiments That Will Keep You Up at Night
This thought experiment reveals the complexity of morality by distinguishing between killing a person and letting them die — a problem with implications to our laws, behavior, science, policing ...
3 Famous Thought Experiments, or The Art of Counterfactuals
3 Famous Thought Experiments by Contemporary Thinkers. The list of well-known thought experiments is a long one, but here a few examples that have caught the attention of recent scholars. 1. Mary's Room Thought Experiment. The philosopher Frank Jackson posed in 1982 the thought experiment most commonly known as Mary's Room, or Mary the ...
A Model for Thought Experiments
For more on Brown's treatment of Galilei, as well as an extended discussion of his views on thought experiments, see Häggqvist, S. ' The Priori Thesis: A Critical Assessment,' Croatian Journal of Philosophy 19 (2007) 47 - 61.Google Scholar For instructions on how to run the reverse experiment, see De Mey, 'Thinking Through Thought ...
Developing Critical Thinking through Science
08713BEP. Developing Critical Thinking through Science Book 2 - eBook. 4-8. eBook. $29.99. Add to Cart. Developing Critical Thinking through Science presents standards-based, hands-on, minds-on activities that help students learn basic physical science principles and the scientific method of investigation.
Thought experiments: A surefire way to stretch your team's creativity
Thought Experiment: An imagined scenario put forth for the purpose of eliciting a reasoned response to a complex question Thought experiments are meant to get people thinking. Use them to explore ...