Watermelanin
Proud self-hating degenerate
I think it's best to start with establishing what "critical thinking" actually means:
Basically, it's the ability to evaluate information provided and come to conclusions which accurately represent that information without being tainted by fallacious reasoning and cognitive biases. It also includes the ability to discern whether information is fact or fiction based on other acquired information.
Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with how much information you have. Critical thinking skills are basically the flip-side of knowledge. Someone can become very knowledgeable on bullshit, it's critical thinking that helps sort what is and isn't bullshit. Someone can be a great critical thinker and come to bullshit conclusions, it's knowledge that provides the tools available to construct an accurate representation of the world around us.
Critical thinking is basically a sort of "pure" IQ.
My opinion on this particular matter: All generations probably had about the same level of critical thinking ability. Sure people who are instructed and tested on their ability to identify logical fallacies and sources of bias will do better on said tests than those not given such instruction (hence the Flynn effect). But in general, day-to-day, life people don't use these acquired skills unless actively prompted to in a manner which doesn't conflict with their existing biases. This makes them bad at doing it. Aristotle, if born today, would probably be one of the leaders in whatever field he chose to go into. Same goes with Newton, Einstein, or whoever you want to bring into this conversation. But the fact remains that the majority of those around them back in their generation were just kinda "meh" like we see today.
Basically, it's the ability to evaluate information provided and come to conclusions which accurately represent that information without being tainted by fallacious reasoning and cognitive biases. It also includes the ability to discern whether information is fact or fiction based on other acquired information.
Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with how much information you have. Critical thinking skills are basically the flip-side of knowledge. Someone can become very knowledgeable on bullshit, it's critical thinking that helps sort what is and isn't bullshit. Someone can be a great critical thinker and come to bullshit conclusions, it's knowledge that provides the tools available to construct an accurate representation of the world around us.
Critical thinking is basically a sort of "pure" IQ.
My opinion on this particular matter: All generations probably had about the same level of critical thinking ability. Sure people who are instructed and tested on their ability to identify logical fallacies and sources of bias will do better on said tests than those not given such instruction (hence the Flynn effect). But in general, day-to-day, life people don't use these acquired skills unless actively prompted to in a manner which doesn't conflict with their existing biases. This makes them bad at doing it. Aristotle, if born today, would probably be one of the leaders in whatever field he chose to go into. Same goes with Newton, Einstein, or whoever you want to bring into this conversation. But the fact remains that the majority of those around them back in their generation were just kinda "meh" like we see today.