Hugur - 01.06.2011, Qupperneq 132

130
Ólafur PállJónsson
Heimildir
Aristotle. 1984. The Complete Works ofAristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2. bindi.
Ritstj. Jonathan Barnes. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Descartes, René. 2001. Hugleiðingar u?nfrumspeki. Þýð. Þorsteinn Gylfason. Reykjavík:
Hið íslenska bókmenntafélag.
Dewey, John. 1916. Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Education. New York: MacMillan.
Dewey, John. 2010. Þörfin fyrir heimspeki menntunar. Þýð. Gunnar Ragnarsson. De-
wey íhugsun og verki. Ritstj. Jóhanna Einarsdóttir og Olafur Páll Jónsson. Reykjavík:
Háskólaútgáfan.
Dretske, Fred. 1988. Explaining Behavior: Reason in a World of Causes. Cambridge,
Ma.: MIT Press.
Freire, Paulo. 1998. Pedagogy of Freedom. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
Guðmundur Heiðar Frímannsson. 2010. Hugarfar gagnrýninnar hugsunar. Hugur 22.
Immordino-Yan, Mary Helen og Antonio Damasio. 2007. We Feel, Therefore We
Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education. Mind,
Brain andEducation 1(1).
Mikael M. Karlsson. 1995. Hugsum við með heilanum? Hugur 7.
Mikael M. Karlsson. 2005. Hugsun og gagnrýni. Hugsað með Páli. Ritstj. Róbert H.
Haraldsson, Salvör Nordal og Vilhjálmur Arnason. Reykjavík: Háskólaútgáfan.
Ólafur Páll Jónsson. 2008. Gagnrýnar manneskjur. Hugur 20.
Ólafur Páll Jónsson. 2010. Skynsamar skepnur. Vísindavefur: Ritgerðasafn til heiðurs
Þorsteini Vilhjálmssynisjötugum. Ritstj. Einar H. Guðmundsson o.fl. Reykjavík: Hið
íslenska bókmenntafélag.
Páll Skúlason. 1987. Er hægt að kenna gagnrýna hugsun? Pælingar. Reykjavík: Ergo.
Piaget,Jean. 1993. Jan Amos Comenius (1592-1670). Prospects XXIII(i/2).
Platon. 1991. Ríkið. Þýð. Eyjólfur Kjalar Emilsson. Reykjavík: Hið íslenzka bók-
menntafélag.
Abstract
Thinking persons
Plato’s theory of Ideas was a view about the real world as a possible subject for
clear thinldng because in its essence, the world was fully clear. Aristotle, Plato’s
pupil, rejected this idea and argued that it would be better to give up the hope for
a completely clear and distinct world of pure concepts (Ideas) and accept our fate
as beings in a messy world. However, Aristotle believed that in this messy world,
one could find various laws and regularities and, hence, it could be the subject
of clear thinking. In this paper I explore what it means to think clearly about a
messy world. I first consider two obstacles on the way to clear thinking.
(1) Sometimes we don’t have a close enough relationship with the world to
think clearly about it.
(2) Sometimes we have too close a relationship with the world to be able to
think clearly about it.
I argue that in order to think clearly about the world one must cultivate one’s