My primary complaint with the article is that it makes the implicit connection that "critical thinking" is something that tied to science. Good science needs c

My primary complaint with the article is that it makes the implicit connection that "critical thinking" is something that tied to science. Good science needs critical thinking, true. Dealing with life ALSO needs critical thinking, and I suspect that's a more direct impact to the average person. (Witness your most/least favorite political discussion, see any bit of TV news, heck, the recent Amazon brouhaha, and see what people not having enough critical thinking does to life) College is quite late to try and teach* the skill, but better late than never. I can think of only one class I ever had that I felt covered critical thinking. It was a junior high school home ec class, and for one single class period, they passed out magazines, had us pick out ads, and then list at least 5 ways these ads manipulated us. Turns out 5 is a significant number: to say wealth, sex, and happiness feature in the ads is easy...but 4 & 5? That requires thought. Thought about how we are being misled, how there is something non-obvious but true. To this day one of the lessons sticks in my mind. "Bayer: 4 out of 5 doctors recommend" But who picks the 5 doctors? It was mind-blowing to young me, and I think it filters in to how I consider information I'm getting to this day. *Teaching critical thinking isn't really teaching, so much as repeatedly providing the opportunity and motivation and hoping for the lights to turn on. It's the best system we've got, and we don't do it enough, but I'll acknowledge that it is harder than teaching a more passive, observable skill.