What is "critical thinking" anyway?

The term "critical thinking" appears repeatedly in state education visions, but I wonder whether everyone who uses it would define it the same way. Before I begin to research what others say about the term, I thought I would attempt to begin formulating a comprehensive definition of what I think it means. The following is my first pass. I welcome suggestions and critiques.

Critical thinking can be used in the process of arriving at a single right answer, but often, it can lead to a number of possible decisions, outcomes, solutions, or answers.

Critical thinking is concerned with some "object" for consideration. On a micro level, that object might be a text, an image, a spoken statement, a piece of music, a physical action, or a natural phenomenon. It might be a product or performance that combines multiple objects and types of objects. On a macro level, it might be an entire domain or subdomain of knowledge.

The object for consideration can be viewed or interpreted or responded to in multiple ways.

The object for consideration has content and form. Content might include facts and claims of fact, descriptions, concepts, ideas, theories, evidence, arguments, proposed actions or methodologies, etc. Form is the way content is arranged or structured to create a whole.

I would define critical thinking as examining an object closely, going beyond first impressions, surface appearance, and the most salient details in order to arrive at a goal—a decision or course of action, a solution, or new knowledge (or at least an enlightened theory, idea, or course of action). That examination of an object—let's say the object is a proposed idea—begins with clearly articulating the idea followed by such processes as:

1) Ensuring the idea is understood. Defining terms associated with the idea and being aware of alternative ways of articulating the idea. Putting the idea into a more understandable form if needed. Exploring assumptions about and subjective reactions to the idea to prevent bias. Exploring how the form of the idea affects its content, as well as how it might affect response to the idea.

2) Comparing the idea to other ideas in order to place it in a group, establish its distinctiveness from a group to which others have assigned it, and/or associate it with other relevant ideas. Exploring its opposite and other alternative ideas.

3) Taking the idea apart and identifying its parts. Determining the important ways its parts fit and work together and how they affect one another.

4) Putting the idea in a larger context—historical, environmental, societal/cultural, artistic, philosophical—whatever context might affect or be affected by the idea. Exploring the origins of the idea. Exploring the future implications of the idea.

5) Connecting the idea to evidence (objective facts, accepted ideas, expert opinions, data from experiments) that might establish its validity, applicability, and or superiority. (Of course, critical thinking must, in turn, be applied to that evidence, as well as to the question of whether that evidence is appropriate to the idea.)

6) Applying criteria to the idea to determine its value.

Throughout the process of employing these thinking strategies, creative thinking is an undercurrent: Asking questions about the idea, finding different ways to look at it, conducting thought experiments.

Regarding Yesterday's Post:

Correction: I corrected a reference in yesterday's post. Frans Johansson's Medici Effect was the book that said prolific innovators continue to have bad ideas throughout their lives.

Addendum: I found a discussion of hands on learning at the university level and some great to consider on a January 19 post at The Clever Sheep blog.