This was our design question going into week 44.

​

 

In an effort to better on understand this design question, I shall take some different perspective in to consideration – and view the question through a variety of assumptions. For the sake of coherency and scale – I’m going to focus this text towards critical thinking. A text solely devoted to the implication of the philosophical aspect is also needed.

 

The first question that arises out of any call to a specific action – is the question of what one hopes to achieve with the given action. In this case, why would one act in manner that would bring critical thinking & philosophy on the agenda of Catalan schools? One would have to work on the basis of some sort of assumption to actually be able to move forward from here. One such assumption would be that putting Critical Thinking & Philosophy on any sort of agenda – would be to increase the frequency of their application. Working with this assumption, one further has to clarify whether it is A) the teachers and school administrators one wishes to increase the frequency of applied Critical Thinking & Philosophy – or B) the pupils attending the school one wishes to increase the frequency of applied Critical Thinking & Philosophy. Further, either one of these options leads to a rabbit hole of ever increasing and complex questions. Again, for the purpose of moving forward, one has to assume that with increased use of critical thinking & philosophy, individuals will become both more critical and more philosophical. In contrast to this assumption, one could also assume that increased application of philosophy and critical thinking would bring about more pessimism & a stronger sense of political identity. Also, I am going to assume that this design question mainly revolves around B) the pupils attending the school.

 

Continuing down this rabbit hole – one has to ask, why would anyone want individuals – on a general basis – to be more critical and more philosophical. What does more critical and philosophical even mean? Looking at critical, one first has to clarify how one wish to apply the word – from a linguistic perspective. For “Critical” like with most words from the Anglo-Saxon language English, has multiple meanings. Though unique with this particular word, is that it has not two or three definitions – but seven.

adjective

​

1. inclined to find fault or to judge with severity, often too readily.

2. occupied with or skilled in criticism.

3. involving skilful judgment as to truth, merit, etc.; judicial:

(a critical analysis.)

4. of or relating to critics or criticism:

(critical essays.)

5.providing textual variants, proposed emendations, etc.:

(a critical edition of Chaucer.)

6. Pertaining to or of the nature of a crisis:

(a critical shortage of food.)

7. of decisive importance with respect to the outcome; crucial:

(a critical moment.)

 

Of course, moving on from here – one would have to make furthermore assumptions. I’m going to work with the assumption that critical thinking, in this case, mainly revolves around the first definition. Of course, if the original design question revolved around art schools in Catalonia – I would probably instead assume definition two to four – as they would probably be occupied with the art of giving a critic (of a certain work of art). Moving on with my first assumption, one further has to has to ask – why one would want to making pupils more “inclined to find fault”? Where are the faults? Supposedly, on can assume there are faults in some or many aspects of the life of the pupil? Because one can hardly except the pupil to start discovering faults outside of their life (outside their life, would be outside their daily activities, friends, family, acquaintance, school, society, etc.) So, for any of this to make sense – we have to operate with the notion that the daily life, activities and occupation of the pupil – or grown up pupil aka. the common person – are flawed or have elements of faults. In that is the case, one might need critical thought if one wishes to find these flaws. Of course, it is a massive leap to accept this notion, that the world of people is at a fault – that it is to say – somewhat broken, not functioning or wrong.

 

Summarizing a little bit, where we are at in the string of assumptions so far. We’re assuming that this is all aimed at pupils in schools, that more philosophy & critical thinking will make or wish to make pupils more critical & philosophical, that with critical one means the pursuit of finding faults and last but not least – that the world is somewhat broken or at a fault.

If we try this out on fictive scenario here, working with these assumptions. To see if we can envision some sort of applicability of our design question. Let’s say that the for example the school system or how the pupils are taught, is fundamentally flawed or faulty. In this scenario let’s say that the worldview of the teachers – and how they project that world view – is not compatible with the pupil’s pursuit of happiness. In this case, pupils with a more critical mind might better be able to detect these faults. In this scenario however – assuming that the teachers aren’t actively aware of their oppressiveness – these pupils will have to be taught a form of critical thinking that in turn, will make them see the oppression of their teachers.

 

An epiphany

If one wishes to work accurately and efficient with this Design question, one has to be sure that everyone involved have made the exact same assumptions on every step of the way.