Competency in critical thinking develops over time and no doubt all readers of this book will have developed it outside the study of law, although they may not have put a name to the process. This development can be transferred to your legal studies. But you may not have really considered the issue of critical thinking before. In academic studies, critical thinking and a healthy scepticism of universality, are demonstrated by approaches to reasoning. Critical thinkers for example are aware that often arguments contain contradictions and these contradictions have to be looked for. They are also able to distinguish between differing types of statement, for example they can understand the difference between a statement of fact and an statement of opinion; this naturally affects the expertise of their reasoning processes. It makes a great deal of difference whether an argument is based on opinions or facts! The core of critical thinking is the constant considered identification and challenging of the accepted. It involves the evaluation of values and beliefs as well as competing truth explanations and of course texts; it involves both rationality/objectivity and emotions/subjectivity; it involves the questioning of the very categories of thought that are accepted as proper ways of proceeding and to ensure that one always: • searches for hidden assumptions; • justifies assumptions; • judges the rationality of those assumptions; • tests the accuracy of those assumptions. In this way you will ensure the best levels of coverage for each area of your study. The next section covers each of the main clusters of skills. The critical thinker has to engage not only with micro questions within the text, both at the superficial and the deep readings, but also with the macro-issues surrounding topics, courses and ultimately the legal system. Much of your degree study will revolve around working with legal primary or secondary texts, reconciling, distinguishing and/or following the arguments of others as well as the tentative construction of your own arguments. Much of your time may be spent explaining differences of interpretation that seem close. When deciding what words mean in texts we make far reaching decisions and often engage with morals, religion, justice, ethics, in the search for meaning, for the truth of the text in this time. Critical thinkers look for hidden assumptions underlying the face value explanations of the texts, they are not deceived by the theorists particularity dressed as neutrality, they are aware of the power of language and the value of argument. They know that all texts are not logical and do not necessarily feel that they have to be so. Texts will form the ‘bare bones’ of your studies. They are carried in language that has to be read, interpreted, questioned and seen in its fragmented contexts. It is vital to develop a critical approach.

DOI link for Competency in critical thinking develops over time and no doubt all readers of this book will have developed it outside the study of law, although they may not have put a name to the process. This development can be transferred to your legal studies. But you may not have really considered the issue of critical thinking before. In academic studies, critical thinking and a healthy scepticism of universality, are demonstrated by approaches to reasoning. Critical thinkers for example are aware that often arguments contain contradictions and these contradictions have to be looked for. They are also able to distinguish between differing types of statement, for example they can understand the difference between a statement of fact and an statement of opinion; this naturally affects the expertise of their reasoning processes. It makes a great deal of difference whether an argument is based on opinions or facts! The core of critical thinking is the constant considered identification and challenging of the accepted. It involves the evaluation of values and beliefs as well as competing truth explanations and of course texts; it involves both rationality/objectivity and emotions/subjectivity; it involves the questioning of the very categories of thought that are accepted as proper ways of proceeding and to ensure that one always: • searches for hidden assumptions; • justifies assumptions; • judges the rationality of those assumptions; • tests the accuracy of those assumptions. In this way you will ensure the best levels of coverage for each area of your study. The next section covers each of the main clusters of skills. The critical thinker has to engage not only with micro questions within the text, both at the superficial and the deep readings, but also with the macro-issues surrounding topics, courses and ultimately the legal system. Much of your degree study will revolve around working with legal primary or secondary texts, reconciling, distinguishing and/or following the arguments of others as well as the tentative construction of your own arguments. Much of your time may be spent explaining differences of interpretation that seem close. When deciding what words mean in texts we make far reaching decisions and often engage with morals, religion, justice, ethics, in the search for meaning, for the truth of the text in this time. Critical thinkers look for hidden assumptions underlying the face value explanations of the texts, they are not deceived by the theorists particularity dressed as neutrality, they are aware of the power of language and the value of argument. They know that all texts are not logical and do not necessarily feel that they have to be so. Texts will form the ‘bare bones’ of your studies. They are carried in language that has to be read, interpreted, questioned and seen in its fragmented contexts. It is vital to develop a critical approach.

Competency in critical thinking develops over time and no doubt all readers of this book will have developed it outside the study of law, although they may not have put a name to the process. This development can be transferred to your legal studies. But you may not have really considered the issue of critical thinking before. In academic studies, critical thinking and a healthy scepticism of universality, are demonstrated by approaches to reasoning. Critical thinkers for example are aware that often arguments contain contradictions and these contradictions have to be looked for. They are also able to distinguish between differing types of statement, for example they can understand the difference between a statement of fact and an statement of opinion; this naturally affects the expertise of their reasoning processes. It makes a great deal of difference whether an argument is based on opinions or facts! The core of critical thinking is the constant considered identification and challenging of the accepted. It involves the evaluation of values and beliefs as well as competing truth explanations and of course texts; it involves both rationality/objectivity and emotions/subjectivity; it involves the questioning of the very categories of thought that are accepted as proper ways of proceeding and to ensure that one always: • searches for hidden assumptions; • justifies assumptions; • judges the rationality of those assumptions; • tests the accuracy of those assumptions. In this way you will ensure the best levels of coverage for each area of your study. The next section covers each of the main clusters of skills. The critical thinker has to engage not only with micro questions within the text, both at the superficial and the deep readings, but also with the macro-issues surrounding topics, courses and ultimately the legal system. Much of your degree study will revolve around working with legal primary or secondary texts, reconciling, distinguishing and/or following the arguments of others as well as the tentative construction of your own arguments. Much of your time may be spent explaining differences of interpretation that seem close. When deciding what words mean in texts we make far reaching decisions and often engage with morals, religion, justice, ethics, in the search for meaning, for the truth of the text in this time. Critical thinkers look for hidden assumptions underlying the face value explanations of the texts, they are not deceived by the theorists particularity dressed as neutrality, they are aware of the power of language and the value of argument. They know that all texts are not logical and do not necessarily feel that they have to be so. Texts will form the ‘bare bones’ of your studies. They are carried in language that has to be read, interpreted, questioned and seen in its fragmented contexts. It is vital to develop a critical approach.