Scientific knowledge is not the only human endeavour- we look for information for a variety of purposes.

Critical thinking important in a variety of domains (politics, authority perspectives, etc.) for bettering yourself, society, etc.

Side note: Dogmatic about science and the scientific process (in the article). We also need to critically evaluate science. But, science should be a self-correcting process so the ability to subscribe to the scientific method is perhaps more warranted here. However, there is a distinction between the ideal of science and the practice of science, so assuming science is actually self-correcting in practice is not warranted.

2.Emotion and intuition as a starting point for scientific research. Many legitimate scientific questions arise out of intuition and emotion. Example: Thomas Edison and the lightbulb.

-Access subconscious knowledge through intuitions- turn these into conscious knowledge through scientific process.

3. Equality of opinions:

Context-specific: how much access do we have to knowledge?

Where is the opinion derived from? Opinions that are derived from consensus reality and grounded in logic are stronger than ones that aren’t.

Logic: necessary component of critical thinking, but we don’t need symbolic logic to reason logically in arguments.

-Innateness of logic in humans: Some logic is basic but as problems get more complex, maybe some more formal guidance is needed. Innate ability to reason logically, but not necessarily to apply this logical reasoning. If someone had all possible knowledge in every situation, would they then reason logically every time? There’s a lack of knowledge in certain situations that leads to what can be perceived as illogical thinking but the lack of knowledge is not evidence of lack of logical thinking.

Example: If you don’t have knowledge about how to fix a car, and you take action, is this a lack of logical thinking or knowledge? OR is the lack of knowledge and action taking an example of illogical thinking?