Harm, this paper proposes, is a viable teaching objective. Presenting an andragogy of post secondary liberal arts education, this paper explores the relationship between critical thinking and subjective harm, arguing that subjective harm is an inevitable outcome of critical thinking practice. The author situates this teaching methodology within the discourse theory of psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, positioning this critical thinking andragogy specifically within the Discourse of the Hysteric, which interrogates the institutionalized epistemology present in universities. Defining critical thinking as a subjective (...) cognitive technique adjoined to reflexivity and reflective practice, this paper examines and refutes the university principle of primum non nocere (do no harm), arguing that it represents a logical incoherence in university principles. Semantically and conceptually examining the terminologies involved, the author contends that, to the extent that we accept the definition of “harm” found in the Discourse of the University, any teaching practice that valorizes critical thinking inevitably will, and should, be harmful. (shrink)

This article seeks to examine central aspects of the relationship between ethics and education in the beginning of the twenty-first century. Since both ethics and education are practical disciplines that are bound to deal with and are challenged by human predicaments, cultural ills and social evils, it seems that in examining the relations between the two, one is required to go beyond analytic elucidation into a more normative, prescriptive and political discourse. It is in light of this understanding and in (...) light of the catastrophes and social ills that humanity has brought upon itself in the last century that I will argue that the time is ripe for educators around the world to substitute their loyalty to the national, religious and ideological establishments, in their own communities, for a commitment to a universal professional ethics-one that is founded on the tenets of humanism and critical pedagogy. (shrink)

“Critical thinking in higher education” is a phrase that means many things to many people. It is a broad church. Does it mean a propensity for finding fault? Does it refer to an analytical method? Does it mean an ethical attitude or a disposition? Does it mean all of the above? Educating to develop critical intellectuals and the Marxist concept of critical consciousness are very different from the logician’s toolkit of finding fallacies in passages of text, or the practice of (...) identifying and distinguishing valid from invalid syllogisms. Critical thinking in higher education can also encompass debates about critical pedagogy, i.e., political critiques of the role and function of education in society, critical feminist approaches to curriculum, issues related to what has become known as critical citizenship, or any other education-related topic that uses the appellation “critical”. Equally, it can, and usually does, refer to the importance and centrality of developing general skills in reasoning—skills that we hope all graduates possess. Yet, despite more than four decades of dedicated scholarly work “critical thinking” remains as elusive as ever. As a concept, it is, as Raymond Williams has noted, a ‘most difficult one’ (Williams, 1976, p. 74). (shrink)