This paper takes up the issue of whether the skill of critical thinking in university education is best thought of as a broad universal generic skill or rather as only a loose category taking in a variety of modes of thought. Through the linguistic analysis of some sample texts, I argue that the discourse of general thinking programs should not be thought of as a generalist discourse at all, but in fact a quite specific one. The implications both for the teaching and testing of critical thinking are considered in the light of this position.