Lesson 26: Post Formal Operational Thinking


Attention

Thinking Man

Piaget says that both adolescents and adults may have Formal Operational thinking capacity...however, it is clear that "adult" thinking is distinct from "adolescent" thinking, even though the capacities for abstract and deductive reasoning are present...


Learning Outcomes

Upon completion of this lesson's material, students will be able to:

  • Apply concepts related to adult intelligence to personal life changes
  • Relate brain plasticity to the impact of consuming web-based information
  • Apply post formal reflective judgment to a sample statement

Teaching

Adult Intelligence

Clearly, as indicated at the top of this page, adult cognitive abilities are different than adolescent cognitive abilities.

Remember that Intelligence (as measured by IQ) is mostly a measure of how well individuals can perform academic tasks (that is what IQ tests were developed for). Many measures of intelligence though are actually multidimensional, meaning they measure all kinds of abilities.

Consider the Intelligence theory of Howard Gardner.

Gardiner's Multiple Intelligence Theory

Each of us can be said to have a certain level of "IQ" for each of these areas

Brain Plasticity

Another aspect of the adult brain that is important to understand is that it is "plastic". This means that it is continually changing and adapting to the environment. This allows us, for instance, to modify our expectations for behavior when we encounter a new culture or a new workplace...we can quickly adapt new "habits" of behavior that allow us to function in these new environments.

This ability, however, sheds a disturbing light on the the modern, internet-based, information age. Read the excerpt from Nicholas Carr's book The Shallows: What the Internet is doing to our Brains

Click here to read the excerpt
Click here to buy the book

While this excerpt is only a brief introduction to a book-long thesis...the major point is that the Internet is designed to allow us to skim material, provides substantial help in finding just what we want, and promotes shallow reading of content. Consider how these "habits" of doing "research" on the Internet may impact your own thinking processes.

Consider how you do the following tasks now:

  • How do you find out what is playing at the theater?
  • How much do you read novels?
  • Do you have a hard time reading our textbook?
  • Do you find that you sometimes read instructions and then forget details?
  • Do you have a hard time concentrating when you are not being stimulated by technology?
  • Do you miss your computer when you are away from it?
  • Do you think you can multitask and still produce the same quality, or have you lowered your expectations for quality?

While the Internet has placed a world of information at our fingertips, are there some specific cognitive skills that are beginning to atrophy because we don't "need" them anymore?

Post Formal Thinking

Yes, there is life after Piaget! At least for our understanding of cognitive capacities!

Post Formal thinking is characterized by the ability to recognize

  • that "truth" (the correct answer) may vary from situation to situation
  • that solutions must be realistic to be reasonable
  • that ambiguity and contradiction are the rule rather than the exception
  • that emotions and subjective factors usually play a role in thinking

Reflective Judgment is the capacity that adults use when dealing with dilemmas and evaluating information that they receive.

Consider the stages of Reflective Judgment that are outlined below:

Pre-Reflective Thinking (Stages 1, 2, and 3)

Stage 1

View of knowledge: Knowledge is assumed to exist absolutely and concretely; it is not understood as an abstraction. It can be obtained with certainty by direct observation.

Concept of justification: Beliefs need no justification since there is assumed to be an absolute correspondence between what is believed to be true and what is true. Alternate beliefs are not perceived.

"I know what I have seen."

Stage 2

View of knowledge: Knowledge is assumed to be absolutely certain or certain but not immediately available. Knowledge can be obtained directly through the senses (as in direct observation) or via authority figures.

Concept of justification: Beliefs are unexamined and unjustified or justified by their correspondence with the beliefs of an authority figure (such as a teacher or parent). Most issues are assumed to have a right answer, so there is little or no conflict in making decisions about disputed issues.

"If it is on the news, it has to be true."

Stage 3

View of knowledge: Knowledge is assumed to be absolutely certain or temporarily uncertain. In areas of temporary uncertainty, only personal beliefs can be known until absolute knowledge is obtained. In areas of absolute certainty, knowledge is obtained from authorities.

Concept of justification: In areas in which certain answers exist, beliefs are justified by reference to authorities' views. In areas in which answers do not exist, beliefs are defended as personal opinion since the link between evidence and beliefs is unclear.

"When there is evidence that people can give to convince everybody one way or another, then it will be knowledge, until then, it's just a guess."

Quasi-Reflective Thinking (Stages 4 and 5)

Stage 4

View of knowledge: Knowledge is uncertain and knowledge claims are idiosyncratic to the individual since situational variables (such as incorrect reporting of data, data lost over time, or disparities in access to information) dictate that knowing always involves an element of ambiguity.

Concept of justification: Beliefs are justified by giving reasons and using evidence, but the arguments and choice of evidence are idiosyncratic (for example, choosing evidence that fits an established belief).

"I'd be more inclined to believe evolution if they had proof. It's just like the pyramids: I don't think we'll ever know. Who are you going to ask? No one was there."

Stage 5

View of knowledge: Knowledge is contextual and subjective since it is filtered through a person's perceptions and criteria for judgment. Only interpretations of evidence, events, or issues may be known.

Concept of justification: Beliefs are justified within a particular context by means of the rules of inquiry for that context and by the context-specific interpretations as evidence. Specific beliefs are assumed to be context specific or are balance against other interpretations, which complicates (and sometimes delays) conclusions.

"People think differently and so they attack the problem differently. Other theories could be as true as my own, but based on different evidence."

Reflective Thinking (Stages 6 and 7)

Stage 6

View of knowledge: Knowledge is constructed into individual conclusions about ill-structured problems on the basis of information from a variety of sources. Interpretations that are based on evaluations of evidence across contexts and on the evaluated opinions of reputable others can be known.

Concept of justification: Beliefs are justified by comparing evidence and opinion from different perspectives on an issue or across different contexts and by constructing solutions that are evaluated by criteria such as the weight of the evidence, the utility of the solution, and the pragmatic need for action.

"It's very difficult in this life to be sure. There are degrees of sureness. You come to a point at which you are sure enough for a personal stance on the issue."

Stage 7

View of knowledge: Knowledge is the outcome of a process of reasonable inquiry in which solutions to ill-structured problems are constructed. The adequacy of those solutions is evaluated in terms of what is most reasonable or probable according to the current evidence, and it is reevaluated when relevant new evidence, perspectives, or tools of inquiry become available.

Concept of justification: Beliefs are justified probabilistically on the basis of a variety of interpretive considerations, such as the weight of the evidence, the explanatory value of the interpretations, the risk of erroneous conclusions, consequences of alternative judgments, and the interrelationships of these factors. Conclusions are defended as representing the most complete, plausible, or compelling understanding of an issue on the basis of the available evidence.

"One can judge an argument by how well thought-out the positions are, what kinds of reasoning and evidence are used to support it, and how consistent the way one argues on this topic is as compared with other topics."

Source: King, P.M. & Kitchener, K.S. (1994). Developing Reflective Judgment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 14-16.


Assessment

Lesson 26 Discussion

Reflect on the questions I have posed regarding the potential impact of the Internet on your cognitive skills.