Commentary: Does Mindfulness Enhance Critical Thinking? Evidence for the Mediating Effects of Executive Functioning in the Relationship between Mindfulness and Critical Thinking

Asghar Iran-Nejad, Auriana B. Irannejad
2017 Frontiers in Education  
tHe roCKy PatH oF SImPlIFyInG ContrIBUtIonS By InteGratIon Does mindfulness (M) enhance critical thinking (CT)? Asks the target article (TA) and dives into physical science's methodology for systematic observation, its binary process of if-then hypothesis testing aimed at confirming or rejecting the null hypothesis that M enhances CT, and its cause-effect offspring variously known as factual, declarative, or "knowthat" knowledge. This commentary illustrates, with the apt example of the TA, why
more » ... he methodology does not apply, as readily as it is commonly employed, to life sciences like education and psychology. Binary if-then questions are, as a set, an indispensable tool for simplifying complexity by isolating sources of contribution to make those sources more observable, a tool less rewarding for the unobservable biofunctional systems that populate life sciences. To solve their systematic observation problems, biofunctional life scientists must embrace the rocky path of getting well acquainted with another set of questions and learn to use it corequisitely with the first, and we may be quick to add, both conceptually and biofunctionally (Iran-Nejad and Irannejad, 2017) . The second question set contrasts dramatically with the first in that it simplifies complexity in science by integration of multiple diverse sources-a process we use here synonymously with understanding. Specifically, the second set of questions has to do with the all too familiar "how, " mainly, but also "why" and similar forms of question. It is straightforward to show how the two sets of questions and their answers can be corequisites and as such a challenge to the TA. Consider the declarative conceptual understanding statement, CU1 I know that I am mindful to think critically. CU1 is an almost contributor-to-contributor match to the subtitle of the TA in three sources of contribution, namely, the active "I" or the executive function (EF), M, and CT. However, CU1, but not the subtitle, presupposes a fourth source of
doi:10.3389/feduc.2017.00008 fatcat:bvxdoyugbveznerle6lphgbh5a