Critical Thinking
Deal with your ego
consider daily questions like the following: Did I behave irrationally in order to get my way? Did I try to impose my will on others? Did small things make me irritable?
Three functions of the mind
thinking feeling wanting
Characteristics of an Advanced Thinker (Paul and Elder)
-Understanding the role of critical thinking in the quality of life and the relationship among thoughts, feelings, and desires -Monitoring thoughts, feelings, desires -Employing strategies for improving critical thinking and critiques of progress in improvement -Developing new habits of thought and sensitivity to inconsistency and contradictions -Embracing intellectual integrity intellectual empathy intellectual courage
Egocentric oversimplification
Description Ignoring complexity and embracing simplicity that conforms to our existing views, values, and beliefs Ways to correct Focusing on complexities and restating them and considering their impact on our thinking
attacking evidence
This approach focuses on discrediting the underlying evidence for an argument and thereby questioning its validity.
Misleading Techniques
By adjusting the X or Y axis scales, you can exaggerate the effect a line chart displays
treating abstracts as reality
Citing abstract concepts (freedom, justice, science) to support an argument or to call for action.
In analyzing causation, looking for a single shared factor
Common factor method
Ad hominem fallacy
Dismissing an argument by attacking the person who offers it rather than by refuting its reasoning.
Faulty analogy
Drawing an invalid comparison between things for the purpose of either supporting or refuting some position.
Transparency
How easy is it to trace the origins of the information? Are there citations or references? Can other researchers access the information (especially important with primary source documents)?
either-or
If you don't invest your nest egg in the stock market, you might as well just stuff it under the mattress.
Universal ethical standards
Principles for correct human behavior acknowledged by reasonable people
Research sampling
The process of selecting events or people to study
Begging the question
Asserting a conclusion that is assumed in the reasoning.
Which of the following is NOT a characteristic of an advanced thinker, as defined by Paul and Elder?
Making decisions by instinct
Misinformation
Incorrect or erroneous information
Implication
What logically follows from reasoning
Theories are examples of:
CONCEPTS
In strategic thinking, recognizing when your thinking is irrational or flawed is which component?
Identification is recognizing when your thinking is irrational or flawed.
A scientist discovered that all laboratory hamsters that had been eating lettuce developed Salmonella poisoning. This is an example of causation by:
This is an example of causation by a shared common factor.
Which of the following is an example of the logic of egocentric thinking applied to point of view?
I don't really care what anyone thinks, I deserve to be rewarded and that's the way it is.
Intuition
A hunch, "gut feeling," or premonition
Fallacy
An error in reasoning.
All reasoning is based on assumptions.
Correct. All reasoning is based on assumptions. Critical thinkers analyze and identify their assumptions.
Concomittant variation refers to a pattern of variation between a possible cause and a possible effect. True or false?
True Correct. One way to analyze causation is to look for concomittnat variation, a pattern of variation between a possible cause and a possible effect.
According to Paul and Elder, a two-step process can be helpful in developing a rational mind:
Identifying the predictable, pathological tendencies we have; and Correcting these pathologies through critical thinking.
denying inconsistencies
Refusing to admit contradictions or inconsistencies when making an argument or defending a position.
Inference
A logical process of drawing conclusions
Thinking that is easily understood reflects which of the intellectual standards?
Clarity
Activated Ignorance
False information that is mistakenly believed to be true and acted upon. -"Taking into the mind, and actively using, information that is false, although we mistakenly think it is true." -We mislearn or partially learn information or accept illogical beliefs and then act on them. -Accepting stereotypes about given ethnic or racial groups and altering behavior because of them.
Activated Ignorance
False information that is mistakenly believed to be true and acted upon. 8
evading questions
Avoiding direct and truthful answers to difficult questions through diversionary tactics, vagueness, or deliberately confusing or complex responses.
Quality Criteria
Believable Objective Sufficient Relevant From reputable sources Free of bias Independently verifiable Logically sound Internally consistent
3. All reasoning is based on assumptions.
Clearly identify your assumptions and determine whether they are justifiable. Consider how your assumptions are shaping your point of view.
All reasoning occurs from some point of view
Clearly identify your point of view Seek other relevant points of view and identify their strengths and weaknesses Strive for fair-mindedness in evaluating all points of view
looking for a pattern of variation between a possible cause and a possible effect
Concomitant variation In analyzing causation
To analyze the logic of an article, one can apply:
To analyze the logic of an article, one can apply the Elements of Reasoning.
The implicit beliefs that support our explicit reasoning about something are:
assumptions
Sources of Evidence
Analogy Intuition Personal observation Appeal to authority Case example Testimonial Survey/questionnaire Research study Personal experience
weak sense critical thinkers
Ignore the flaws in their own thinking Often seek to win an argument through intellectual trickery or deceit. Lacks key higher-level skills and values of critical thinking Makes no good faith effort to consider alternative viewpoints. Lacks fair-mindedness Employ lower-level rhetorical skills (making unreasonable thinking appear reasonable and reasonable thinking appear unreasonable). Employ emotionalism and intellectual trickery. Hide or distort evidence
Egocentric hypocrisy
Ignoring inconsistencies between belief and behavior and between public standards and private actions
Hard-cruel-world argument
Justifying illegal or unethical practices by arguing that they are necessary to confront a greater evil or threat.
Reasoning that is specific, exact and sufficiently detailed is said to be:
Precise
Which of the following statements does NOT conform to Paul and Elder's foundations of ethical reasoning?
We can pick and choose our ethical principles.
thinking and content are related:
What this means in practice is that thinking through content is the key to learning, understanding and applying knowledge.
Citing majority sentiment or popular opinion as the reason for supporting a claim is an example of:
appeal to popularity
Inert Information
-"Taking into the mind information, that, though memorized, we do not understand." -We think we understand this information, but we don't and can't use it. -Memorizing the Gettysburg Address or the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag without understanding them Repeating undefined political slogans like "power to the people," "taking back our country," or "the American way of life" without thinking about whether they have any meaning.
Mill's approach can help in developing a causal claim for an event or happening. Some simple causal claims are:
-Above average rainfall causes flooding of the river. -Infant vaccination causes (does not cause) autism in children. -Homeowners being laid off causes an increase in foreclosures.
Concomitant variation In
-analyzing causation, looking for a pattern of variation between a possible cause and a possible effect -Medical researchers expose laboratory animals to different strains of a tropical microbe to see which are likely to cause sickness
Line graph
A graph that plots the relationship between 2 or more variables by using connected data points
Survey
A research method or instrument for measuring people's attitudes or beliefs
Survey/questionnaire
A research method or instrument for measuring people's attitudes or beliefs
Which of the following terms describes a plausible alternative explanation for why a particular outcome happened?
A rival cause is a plausible alternative explanation for why something happened.
Egocentric myopia
Adopting an overly narrow point of view and thinking in absolutes
Appeal to fear fallacy
Citing a threat or possibility of a frightening outcome as the reason for supporting an argument.
Mill's Methods of Determining Causation
Common factor Single Difference Concomitant variation In Process of elimination
The data, facts, opinions, and experiences that factor in your reasoning
Correct. Information should be used to support your claims, and it should be evaluated carefully.
____________________ involves developing the tools of critical thinking and applying them to current and future challenges.
Deep learning
ad hominem
Dismissing an argument by attacking the person who offers it rather than by refuting its reasoning. -The tort reform legislation must be worth supporting because the greedy trial lawyers all oppose it.
Concepts
General categories or ideas by which we interpret or classify information used in our thinking
Scope and depth
How broad and deep is the information? What questions can this information help answer? How much detail is offered? What is missing?
Which of the following statements about thinking through content would Paul and Elder NOT agree with?
It's possible to learn a body of content without thinking through the connections between its parts.
What is the term for the goal or desired outcome of our reasoning?
Purpose
Which kind of evidence describes the meaning (i.e., the why and how) of something?
Qualitative
A research study is an example of which kind of evidence?
Quantitative
Distinctions between the elements of reasoning are_______ not ________
Relative/Absolute
Egocentric memory
Remembering only that evidence and information that supports our thinking
A mechanic ruled out failures in 10 different engine parts before finding the problem in the carburetor. This is an example of:
The mechanic is using the process of elimination.
The _______ is the value that appears most frequently in a dataset.
The mode is the value that appears most frequently in a dataset.
Appeal to authority fallacy
To justify support for a position by citing an esteemed or well-known figure who supports it.
Assumptions
Unstated or hidden beliefs that support our explicit reasoning
Qualitative evidence derives
from participant observation and personal communications. It is the result of unstructured or unscientific gathering of information.
In thinking through a problem, the critical thinker does all of the following except:
gathers information that supports his/her presuppositions
"Reasoning can only be as sound as the ________________ it is based on."
information
The opposite of intellectual conformity is:
intellectual autonomy
A rival cause tells us that there is _____________ for why something happened.
more than one credible explanation
For statistical data to be valid, the sample must be _______ and sufficiently ________.
random / large
Another term used to describe egocentric thinking is:
rigidity of thought
In analyzing causation, looking for a causal factor that is present in one situation but absent in another, similar, situation is called the:
single difference method.
Paul and Elder believe that ethical principles common to all humans can be found in:
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
sociocentrism
the assumption that one's own social group is inherently superior to all others
our mind continually communicates three kinds of messages to us:
what's happening in our life feelings (positive or negative) about what's happening things to pursue or direct our energy toward
Statistics involves
collecting, organizing, and analyzing data.
All reasoning is based on assumptions
Clearly identify your assumptions Determine whether they are justifiable Consider how your point of view is shaped by your assumptions
slippery slope
Heaven help us if the Supreme Court upholds the prohibition on assault weapons. Next thing you know, it will allow bans on handguns, and before long we will no longer enjoy any right under the Constitution to bear arms.
two components in strategic thinking:
Identification. Recognizing when your thinking is irrational or flawed. Intellectual action. Engaging and challenging your own thinking.
successively ruling out non-causal factors until one correct causal factor remains
Process of elimination In analyzing causation,
Point of view
What are the biases or prejudices of the creator(s) of any given information? Are they neutral or partisan? Are they looking to advance a cause or ideology? Do they try to pass off opinions as facts? What other motives may be at work that could introduce bias (personal aggrandizement, professional jealousy, institutional pride, etc.)?
Personal observation
What we see first hand
A key to developing questions of judgment is to remember: .
-These will be questions that could be answered differently by people with different view points, and; -Among competing answers, there may be one that is the best (based on the intellectual standards outlined by Paul and Elder). -A question of judgment does not have one correct answer, but a number of well-reasoned answers
When confronted with a more powerful or prestigious person who can help them achieve their goals, an egocentric thinker is likely to turn to which of the following strategies?
The egocentric thinker is likely to turn to submission, catering to those who can help them achieve their goals.
The elements of reasoning are also known as the:
The elements of reasoning are also known as the parts of thinking and fundamental structures of thought.
Mode
The value that appears most frequently in a series of values
Rival cause
A plausible alternative explanation for why a certain outcome happened
Empirical
Based on or derived from practical experiment and direct observation
Egocentric myopia
Description Adopting an overly narrow point of view and thinking in absolutes Ways to correct Considering points of view that conflict with ours
Egocentric absurdity
Description Failing to recognize thinking that has "absurd" consequences Ways to correct Reviewing our thinking for realism
Egocentric memory
Description Remembering only that evidence and information that supports our thinking Ways to correct Explicitly seeking evidence and information that runs counter to our thinking
faulty analogy
Drawing an invalid comparison between things for the purpose of either supporting or refuting some position. A faulty analogy suggests that because two things are alike in some respect, they must be alike in other respects.
Wanting
Drives us to act as we do goals desires purposes agendas values motives
Not seeing facts and evidence that contradicts your way of thinking is called egocentric myopia. True or false?
False Not seeing facts and evidence that contradicts your way of thinking is called egocentric blindness. Egocentric myopia occurs when a thinker adopts an overly narrow point of view and thinks in absolutes.
Egocentric righteousness
Feeling superior because of possessing the "Truth"
hasty generalization
Inferring a general proposition about something based on too small a sample or an unrepresentative sample.
Intellectual standards require that assumptions be acknowledged and stated clearly and concisely.
True, Assumptions, what is presupposed to be true, must be directly acknowledged and analyzed.
Critical thinking involves_______ one's own thinking.
analyzing, evaluating, and improving one's own thinking.
The Standards(Intellectual)
clarity accuracy precision relevance depth breadth logic significance fairness
First-order thinking
Americans have always done it that way, and as the greatest country in the world, it's always worked for us in the past. How can we trust the engineering work on this building? The structural engineers weren't educated in the U.S. My intuition tells me to turn right here, so I won't bother to look at the map.
Significance
Explanation Our reasoning should concentrate on the most important information relevant to the issue at hand Our thinking falters when we fail to recognize that not all information which happens to be pertinent to an issue is equally important Questions it implies Which of these ideas is most important? Is this the central idea to focus on?
Which of the following correctly reflects the relationship between the standards of thinking, the elements of thinking, and intellectual traits?
The standards must be applied to the elements as the critical thinker learns to develop intellectual traits.
Acknowledging different sources of point of view is an argument for intellectual relativism. True or false?
false, Acknowledging that different sources shape point of view is not an argument for intellectual relativity, i.e., the claim that nothing is provable because everything is relative. Observing things from a particular point of view does not render one unable to distinguish accurate from inaccurate statements.
An unsupported claim is what critical thinking experts refer to as a(n):
opinion
Which of the following statements is NOT true, according to Paul and Elder?
Egocentricity is NOT unnatural, it is an innate human trait, according to Paul and Elder.
There are number of reasons why it can be very difficult to get accurate or precise statistics about our conduct in the real world. Some obstacles include:
Misinformation (i.e., incorrect or erroneous information) or deliberately false information Unreported or undisclosed information Unobservable events
faulty analogy
Reducing taxes to spur job growth is like cutting calories to gain weight.
search for perfect solution
The immigration reform law has its merits. But I cannot support it because it fails to address the problem of illegal immigration on all fronts.
Statistics
The science of collecting, organizing, and analyzing quantitative data
Thrown-in statistics fallacy
The use of irrelevant, misleading, or questionable statistics to support an argument or defend a position.
"Is basketball or ice hockey more fun to watch?" is a:
This is a question of preference, since it is asking for a subjective choice.
Three Types of Thinker (Paul and Elder)
Uncritical Persons Skilled manipulators Fair-minded critical persons
Inference
A logical process of drawing conclusions.
Egocentric thinkers also also described as rigidity of thought
selfishly desire to maintain their beliefs and to validate their current way of thinking. As an innate human trait, egocentricity is pervasive in the human experience.
What is said to follow from our reasoning?
Implications
Statistics is the science of collecting, organizing, and analyzing _________.
Quantitative data
Data is a type of information.
TRUE, Examples of information include data, facts, experiences and observations, and word of mouth. Information that plays a role in thinking and argumentation must be carefully analyzed.
Feeling
Tells us how we are doing happy sad depressed anxious stressed calm worried excited
Questions of fact
-Evidence and reasoning within single system -Serve as basis of knowledge -Only one correct answer -Who wrote the Harry Potter books?
Random sample
A study sample that is representative of the whole population
Which of the following is something we take for granted as true in our reasoning?
An assumption is something whose truth we take as a given.
Two wrongs make a right fallacy
Defending or justifying our wrong position or conduct by pointing to a similar wrong done by someone else
Which of the following statements is correct?
The standards of critical thinking must be applied to the elements as the critical thinker learns to develop intellectual traits.
Of the five key factors Jefferson Flanders identifies in evaluating research, which one best addresses tracing the origins of the information?
Transparency
Critical thinking comprises three interlinking dimensions:
-Analyzing one's own thinking- breaking it down into its component parts. -Evaluating one's own thinking- identifying its weaknesses while recognizing its strengths. -Improving one's own thinking- reconstructing it to make it better.
Thinking to Some Purpose
As a critical thinker, never assume that: your purposes are consistent with one another; or your announced purposes are your actual purposes
7. All reasoning contains inferences or interpretations by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data.
Infer only what the evidence implies. Check inferences for their consistency with each other. Identify assumptions that lead you to your inferences. Make sure your inferences logically follow from the information.
It is impossible to interpret the significance of a percentage without knowing the _________ on which it is based.
Absolute numbers We need to know the absolute numbers from which a percentage has been derived in order to interpret its significance.
two wrongs make a right
Defending or justifying our wrong position or conduct by pointing to a similar wrong done by someone else.
Egocentric immediacy
Description Overgeneralizing so that immediate events, whether favorable or unfavorable, influence thinking Ways to correct Adopting a broader view and keeping positive and negative events in perspective
Inferences
In reasoning, we sometimes begin with something we know (or at least, which we believe we know) and figure out something else based on it. When we do so, we make inferences. For example, if one drives by a store and sees no cars in the parking lot or lights in the window, one infers that the store is closed. To make inferences is to come to conclusions. We continually make inferences about people, events, and things in our everyday lives.
Analogy
Inference that if 2 things are alike in one respect, they will be alike in other respects
Intellectual traits
Intellectual Humility Intellectual Autonomy Intellectual Integrity Intellectual Courage Intellectual Perseverance Confidence in Reason Intellectual Empathy Fair mindedness
In strategic thinking, engaging and challenging your own thinking is which component?
Intellectual action is engaging and challenging your own thinking.
Uncritical Persons
Intellectually unskilled thinkers Socially conditioned beliefs Personal beliefs often grounded in prejudice Motivated by irrationality, personal vanity, intellectual arrogance Prone to emotional counter-attacks when thinking is questioned See themselves as "good" and opponents as "evil"
Inert Information
Memorized information that is not fully understood.
What are the three kinds of implications that may be involved in any situation?
Possible, probable, necessary
In constructing questions of judgment, which of the following is NOT part of the process?
Questions that have only one answer are questions of fact, not questions of judgment.
Sociocentrism
The belief that one's own society or group is superior to others
Egocentrism
The belief that one's own thinking or life is superior to others
Neglect of a common cause
The failure to recognize that 2 events may be related through the effects of a common third factor
Statistical distribution
The frequency with which each value in a series of values occurs
Statistical range
The gap between the smallest and largest values in a series of values
Point of view
The particular perspective from which something is observed or thought through
A common problem with applying the critical thinking standard of clarity to information is:
the information isn't clear
How Inferences Relate to Assumptions
-You see traffic at a dead halt in front of you on the highway. -There was an accident ahead. (inference) -Accidents invariably are responsible for bumper-to-bumper traffic jams. (Assumptions) The phone rings in the middle of the night. It must be bad news. (inference) Midnight calls always deliver bad news. (assumption) You see dark clouds forming. It's going to rain. (inference) Dark clouds always presage a rainstorm. (assumption)
ELEMENT OF REASON QUESTION AT ISSUE
DESCRIPTION All reasoning involves at least one question to answer or issue to resolve. Assess your ability to formulate the question at hand clearly. APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS Determine whether the question is important and answerable. Ask yourself if you understand what's required to settle the question. Pose questions that sharpen your focus on the question at issue. What precisely is the question? Is it the most fundamental one at issue? Is there more than one question that I need to address in order to effectively reason through the problem?
Logic
Questions that focus on making thinking more logical include: Does all of this fit together logically? Does this really make sense? Does that follow from what you said? How does that follow from the evidence? Before, you implied this, and now you are saying that. I don't see how both can be true.
Significance
Questions that focus on making thinking more significant include: What is the most significant information we need to address this issue? How is that fact important in context? Which of these questions is the most significant? Which of these ideas or concepts is the most important?
Implications and consequences
Reasoning delivers us to a position or viewpoint about something. The implications of our reasoning are what extend beyond the position we reach. They form the answer to the question, "What follows from our reasoning?" Suppose we reason to the conclusion that tobacco should be banned by law because tobacco is a grave public health hazard. One implication of our reasoning might be that a ban should also be considered on the sale of high-fat foods, which are implicated in epidemics of cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Which of the following is not a bad habit of thought?
reasoning from assumptions that are not one's own
The Elements(of reasoning) Whenever you are reasoning, you are trying to accomplish some purpose, within a point of view, using concepts or ideas. You are focused on some question, issue, or problem, using information to come to conclusions, based on assumptions, all of which have implications.
purposes questions point of view information inferences concepts implications assumptions
A ________ is calculated by adding up all the values in a dataset and dividing by the total number of values in the dataset.
A mean is calculated by adding up all the values in a dataset and dividing by the total number of values in the dataset.
Which of the following statements is false?
A. All reasoning has a purpose. B. All reasoning occurs from a point of view. C. All reasoning has implications. D. None of the above D, Correct. All of the statements listed above are true.
begging the question
Asserting a conclusion that is assumed in the reasoning. The reason given to support the conclusion restates the conclusion.
Search for perfect solution fallacy
Asserting that a solution (or argument) is not worth adopting because it does not fix the problem completely.
Evaluating information 5 key factors
Authority Point of view Transparency Scope and depth Accuracy
Precision
Being precise or exact
Clarity
Being unambiguous and easily understood
"The union has a number of legitimate grievances which have never been addressed by management. If you talk to any of the workers involved in these disputes, it's clear that their testimony has been ignored." Is this information fairly gathered and reported or biased?
Biased Correct. This is an example of biased information. While the union point of view is represented, management's POV is not.
appeal to fear
Citing a threat or possibility of a frightening outcome as the reason for supporting an argument. This threat can be physical or emotional: the idea is to invoke fear. This is sometimes termed "scare tactics."
The Customer Service committee has been very disciplined in reviewing the weekly call reports by focusing on each category of call sequentially." Is this information consistently applied or inconsistently applied?
Consistently applied Correct. This is a consistent application of information.
Straw man fallacy
Distorting or exaggerating an opponent's argument so that it might be more easily attacked.
Fairness
Explanation Our thinking is fair when it is justified To be justified is to think fairly in context Thinking that satisfies all other fundamental intellectual standards satisfies the standard of justifiability Examples of unfairness in reasoning: -refusing to consider relevant information that would lead us to change our view -using concepts unjustifiably to manipulate people -making unjustified assumptions (unsupported by facts) that lead to flawed inferences Questions it implies Are my assumptions justified? Am I taking full account of the thinking of others?
Precision
Explanation Reasoning is precise when it is specific, exact, and sufficiently detailed Precision is related to clarity but distinct from it. Something may be clear but not precise. For example: -I am going to the party soon (clear but imprecise) -I am going to the party at eight o'clock (clear and precise) Questions it implies Could you provide more details? Could you be more specific?
Logic
Explanation Thinking is logical when thoughts and the order in which they are organized are mutually supportive and make sense in combination Thinking that is internally contradictory or includes conflicting ideas is not logical Questions it implies Does all this make sense together? How does that follow from the evidence?
Which of the mind's basic functions evaluates the extent to which life's events are either positive or negative?
Feeling evaluates the extent to which life's events are either positive or negative.
All reasoning contains inferences by which one reaches conclusions and gives meaning to information
Infer only what the information implies Check your inferences for consistency with each other Identify assumptions that underlie your inferences Be sure your inferences logically stem from the information
Evidence
Information that is provided to support the dependability of a factual claim
red herring
Introducing an irrelevant point or topic to divert attention from the issue at hand. It is a tactic for confusing the point under debate.
We've been asked to provide an estimate of sales for next year. I think we can safely say that we will reduce costs 25 percent and improve profitability." Is this information relevant or irrelevant?
Irrelevant Correct. The information provided is not relevant to the question, which is asking for a sales forecast, not a cost forecast.
Which of the following statements best sums up Paul and Elder's criticism of shallow learning?
It doesn't produce lasting knowledge or comprehension.
Rival Causes The use of evidence to establish causation—to show that one thing caused another thing—introduces the problem of rival causes. A rival cause is a plausible alternative explanation for why a certain outcome happened. Consider the following example.
Outcome The ace of the pitching staff is recording fewer strikeouts now than he did earlier in the season. Cause proposed After reviewing video of his ace's last couple of outings, the manager believes he has identified the problem: the pitcher is unconsciously tipping off batters when he's about to throw his fastball. Rival cause The pitching coach blames the decline on a tired arm. He says radar gun readings from the ace's last couple of outings show that his fastball has lost some velocity.
Egocentric immediacy
Overgeneralizing so that immediate events, whether favorable or unfavorable, influence thinking
Purpose
Purpose is the goal or objective of reasoning. It describes the desired outcome or intent (e.g., winning an argument, grasping a complex concept, justifying one's behavior). We can identify purpose in anything that entails reasoning. The critical thinker always asks what function reasoning serves and in what direction it is moving.
Depth
Questions focusing on depth of thought include: How does your answer address the complexities in the question? How are you taking into account the problems in the question? How are you dealing with the most significant factors in the problem?
Denying inconsistencies fallacy
Refusing to admit contradictions or inconsistencies when making an argument or defending a position.
Which report of risk reduction conveys a more significant treatment effect?
Relative Expressing risk reduction in relative rather than absolute terms conveys a far more significant treatment effect.
Sociocentrism
Seeing social conventions, beliefs and taboos of your society as the only correct way to live and think.
Assumptions
The unstated or hidden beliefs that support our explicit reasoning about something.
Which of the following statements about Uncritical Persons (as defined by Paul and Elder) is false?
They are skilled in manipulation.
" The United States landed the first man on the moon in 1969." Is this information accurate or inaccurate?
This is a limited, but accurate, statement.
Slippery slope fallacy
To suggest that a step or action, once taken, will lead inevitably to similar steps or actions with presumably undesirable consequences.
Paul and Elder propose five foundations for ethical thinking:
We cannot pick and choose our ethical principles subjectively. If we are reasonable, we should respect clear-cut ethical principles. We must learn how to apply ethical concepts and principles to ethical issues. We should distinguish ethical principles from other domains (law, religion, ideology, societal norms and taboos). We should recognize egocentrism and sociocentrism as significant barriers to sound ethical reasoning.
Skilled manipulators
Weak-sense critical thinkers Skilled in manipulation Pursue self-interest Employ manipulation, domination, demagoguery Try to keep other points of view from being heard
Statistics based on imprecise reporting is known as:
a. a best guess b. an opinion c. an approximation Statistics based on imprecise reporting is known as a best guess, an approximation, and also an opinion.
Shallow learning (cramming information through memorization),
on the other hand, doesn't produce lasting knowledge or comprehension.
Quantitative evidence
quantifies an observation or phenomenon—i.e., expresses it as a number or empirical measure
Hiding or distorting evidence illustrates which of the following?
weak-sense thinking
Purpose
The goal or objective of reasoning
Research study
A systematic set of observations collected through scientific methods
Which elements of reasoning are operative when we think through a problem?
All eight elements of reasoning are present whenever we think through a problem.
Evading questions fallacy
Avoiding direct and truthful answers to difficult questions through diversionary tactics, vagueness, or deliberately confusing or complex responses.
When is the optimal time for a learner to apply the Elements of Reasoning to the logic of a subject?
Before the learner has begun his or her course of study
Factual claims
Beliefs about the way the world is, was, or will be whose credibility depends on the quality of evidence offered to support them
There are six steps in the scientific method: 1) Ask a question; 2) Conduct background research; 3) Construct a hypothesis; 4) Test this hypothesis through experiment(s); 5) Analyze the data and draw a conclusion; and 6) Communicate results." Is this information clear or unclear?
CLEAR
Which of the following statements falsely represents Paul and Elder's views of the news media?
Events can be viewed and interpreted from one objective point-of-view.
Challenging the thinking within a field of knowledge, profession, or academic discipline is easy and straightforward. True or false?
False Challenging the thinking within a field of knowledge, profession, or academic discipline is no easy matter, but critical consumers will ask difficult questions to challenge the status quo.
"The first place winner in the 10K race was Steven Katz. The third place finisher was Gregor Mankins. Fred Habib finished fourth." Is this information adequate or inadequate?
Inadequate Correct. This is not adequate information. We are not given the finishing times of the runners, nor who won second.
Hasty generalization
Inferring a general proposition about something based on too small a sample or an unrepresentative sample.
All reasoning seeks to settle some question
State the question clearly and precisely Clarify the question's meaning and scope by expressing it several ways Determine whether the question has one right answer, is a matter of opinion, or demands reasoning from more than one point of view Think through the question deeply (plumb its complexities)
Fair-minded critical persons
Strong-sense critical thinkers Reject manipulation and controlling others Combine critical thinking skills with desire to serve public good Want all points of view expressed Want manipulative persuasion exposed
two wrongs make right
Sure, I fudge the numbers on my tax return, but so does everybody.
ad hominem
The tort reform legislation must be worth supporting because the greedy trial lawyers all oppose it.
"We should have stricter gun control because 56% of Americans surveyed by Harris Interactive, Inc., a polling firm, supported tighter restrictions."
This is an appeal to popularity fallacy. The fact that a majority of Americans support stricter gun control demonstrates that the idea is popular. This statement doesn't offer any logical arguments supporting the view that there should be more restrictions on gun.
appeal to authority
To justify support for a position by citing an esteemed or well-known figure who supports it. An appeal to authority does not address the merit of the position.
Personal experience
What we experience; what we ourselves do or go through
Authority
Who stands behind the information? Is it from a primary or secondary source? What expertise do authors or editors have, if any? What are their credentials, academic or professional? Is the information subject to peer review or an established editing process? If documents are involved, where did they come from? Who vouches for their authenticity?
The critical thinker should look for rival causes whenever evidence is being used to support a claim about what caused something. The following constructs are common cues that indicate when evidence ("X") is being presented to support causation:
X leads to... X determines... X is responsible for... X results in... X brings about... These or similar cues should put us on alert for possible rival causes.
Strong analogies entail comparisons between things that have _________ and lack _________.
a) Similarities/differences Correct Answer Checked b) Relevant similarities/relevant differences c) Relevant differences/relevant similarities d) Similar characteristics/contradictions Feedback: Strong analogies compare things that have relevant similarities and lack relevant differences.
Which of the following statements represent the negative impact of sociocentrism?
a) false sense of superiority b) close-mindedness c) suppression of opposing viewpoints Correct Answer Checked d) all of the above
Given the following dataset, what is the median? 1, 5, 7, 8, 3, 2, 5, 6, 8, 4, 9
a. 5 Yes, the correct answer is a. The median is 5. Re-ordering the values in the dataset gives us: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9 The middle point is data point 5. b. 3 c. 9 d. 5.3
Which of the following is NOT a good reason to rely on established institutions for the quality and accuracy of information?
c. A well-known institution always is a guarantee of quality and accuracy. Yes, the correct answer is c. There are no permanent guarantees of quality and accuracy in information, no matter how respected the institution.
ELEMENT OF REASON CONCEPTS
DESCRIPTION All reasoning takes form in concepts. Concepts include the theories, principles, axioms, and rules implicit in our reasoning. APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS Assess the extent to which concepts in your reasoning are clear precise relevant to the issue at hand distorted by your point of view Pose questions that sharpen your focus on concepts used in your reasoning. What is the most fundamental concept applied to the issue at hand? Are my concepts deep and broad enough to do intellectual justice to the question or problem?
Accuracy
Explanation -To be accurate is to represent something as it actually is -We think accurately when our reasoning expresses how things actually are Common barriers to accurate reasoning: -presuming one's own thoughts are automatically accurate -presuming others' thoughts are inaccurate when they disagree with us -failing to question statements that validate what we already believe Questions it implies How can we determine if that is true? How can we verify the accuracy of that?
Which of the following is not a drawback to using appeal to authority as a source of evidence?
An authority will often support the rival cause.
An effective approach to correcting egocentric myopia would be to:
An effective approach to correcting egocentric myopia would be to consider points of view that conflict with ours.
Intuition
An instinctive "knowing" (e.g., a hunch or gut feeling) that does not derive from a rational intellectual process
Treating abstracts as reality fallacy
Citing abstract concepts (freedom, justice, science) to support an argument or to call for action.
Appeal to popularity/ popular passions fallacy
Citing majority sentiment or popular opinion as the reason for supporting a claim.
Accuracy
Has the veracity or accuracy of the information been challenged? Does it match other sources of information on the same topic, or on the facts? How current is the information? Is it the most up-to-date?
Which of the following is not a characteristic of second-order thinking?
It relies on intuition. Second-order thinking is first-order thinking that is consciously realized (i.e., analyzed, assessed, and reconstructed). First-order thinking relies on intuition rather than reasoned thought.
Which of the following best describes activated ignorance?
Mentally taking in and actively using false information
begging the question
Mercy killing is immoral because the taking of innocent life is morally wrong.
A systematic, disciplined approach to asking questions aimed at assessing truth
Socratic questioning
Opponents of off-shore drilling for oil in the U.S. will make us totally dependent on expensive and unreliable sources of petroleum from the Middle East in exchange for misguided overprotection of the environment."
This is a straw man fallacy. This statement distorts the position of those who oppose off-shore drilling on environmental grounds; most argue for replacing petroleum with renewable energy sources, not continuing to rely on Middle Eastern oil.
Thinking through Implications
Three kinds of implications may be involved in any situation: -Possible Every time you ride your bike, one possible implication is that you could suffer a fall. -Probable If you don't slow down when riding your bike on a winding downhill road, one probable implication is that you will suffer a fall. -Necessary If you ride your bike "no hands" while accelerating on a winding downhill road, one inevitable implication is that you will suffer a fall. -be aware of exactly what we imply when we say something -consider the reasonability (or lack thereof) of what we imply -Put another way, we should say what we mean and mean what we say.
slippery slope
To suggest that a step or action, once taken, will lead inevitably to similar steps or actions with presumably undesirable consequences. The fallacy is invoked to justify not taking a given initial step or action, lest it lead us down the "slippery slope."
Taking Command of Concepts
To take command of your thinking, you must: become master of your own conceptualizations; and not become trapped in one set of concepts
Asking questions and challenging the status quo makes you a critical consumer of information. True or false?
True Asking critical questions and challenging the status quo in a given field will make you what Paul and Elder call a critical consumer of information.
Which of the following statements best defines critical thinking?
Critical thinking involves thinking about thinking while thinking in order to make thinking better.
Fairness
Questions that focus on ensuring that thinking is fair include: Is my thinking justified given the evidence? Am I taking into account the weight of the evidence that others might advance in the situation? Are these assumptions justified? Is my purpose fair given the implications of my behavior? Is the manner in which I am addressing the problem fair—or is my vested interest keeping me from considering the problem from alternative viewpoints? Am I using concepts justifiably, or am I using them unfairly to manipulate someone (to selfishly get what I want)?
Assessing Information
Reasoning requires some information as part of one's thinking. As critical thinkers, we must: Seek trustworthy information sources Be vigilant about information sources we use Be alert to the use we make of our own experience, which could be biased, distorted, or self-deluded. (As Paul and Elder point out, biased experience supports bias, distorted experience supports distortion, and self-deluded experience supports self-delusion)
1. All reasoning has a purpose.
Take time to state your purpose clearly. Choose significant and realistic purposes. Distinguish your purpose from related purposes. Make sure your purpose is fair in context (that it doesn't involve violating the rights of others). Check periodically to be sure you are still focused on your purpose and haven't wandered from your target.
egocentrism
the tendency to view everything in relationship to oneself;
Common factor
-In analyzing causation, looking for a single shared factor -Tourists infected with a tropical disease all took the same flight
To admit flaws in one's own thinking is an expression of:
intellectual integrity
Qualitative evidence
Evidence that describes an observation or phenomenon and communicates its meaning
A claim that is made without any supporting statements
is not a conclusion. It is an unsupported claim, or an opinion.
Becoming an Informed/Critical News Consumer
-Democracy depends on an informed citizenry, and it is vital that citizens recognize bias, slanting, and propaganda in news coverage; -Any set of events can be viewed and interpreted from multiple points of view. News consumers should be open to a range of viewpoints and to question their own. -To achieve objectivity, one must distinguish between facts and opinion/spin. -Two genuine forms of objectivity are "the objectivity of intellectual humility" (knowledge of one's own ignorance) and "the objectivity of fair-minded, multi-dimensional thinking." -An inauthentic version is "sophistic objectivity" where multiple viewpoints are considered and then dismissed to protect the status quo. -The major media fosters sociocentric thinking, reflecting national and cultural bias. (Sociocentrism is seeing social conventions, beliefs and taboos of your society as "the only correct way to live and think," according to Paul and Elder.) -There is a bias in the mainstream news media towards reporting what is novel, strange, or sensational. This leads to news reporting which ignores important stories while the sensational is blown out of proportion.
Dimensions of Problem-Solving THERE ARE SEVEN
-Figure out and regularly reevaluate your goals, purposes, and needs. -Identify your problems explicitly, then analyze them. -Figure out the information you need, and actively seek that information. -Carefully analyze, interpret, and evaluate the information you collect. -Figure out your options for action and evaluate them. -Adopt a strategic approach to the problem, and follow through on that strategy. -When you act, monitor the implications of your action as they begin to emerge.
Bias
A partiality or prejudice that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation.
Intellectual Autonomy
Characterization Thinking for oneself while adhering to standards of rationality Hallmarks Reasoning through issues on one's own rather than uncritically accept others' viewpoints Relying on one's own reasoning when deciding what to or what not to believe Accepting others' views only so far as they are reasonable in light of the evidence Its Opposite Intellectual conformity Intellectual dependence Society rewards conformity of thought, which perpetuates the status quo (political, economic, or intellectual), while providing scant incentive for true intellectual autonomy Relationship to Fair-Mindedness Fair-mindedness isn't possible without intellectual autonomy because reasoning things out from others' vantage points requires independent thinking
Clarity (clearness)
Explanation -Our thinking is clear when it is easily understood. -We must be clear in our own mind about what we mean -We must express what we mean clearly so others understand us Clarity of thought enables us to see where our thinking is leading us We can't determine either the accuracy or relevance of a statement if it is unclear Questions it implies Could you elaborate on that point? Could you give me an example?
Breadth
Explanation Our reasoning is broad when it considers the issue at hand from every relevant viewpoint Breadth directs us to look around us, at alternative or opposing perspectives Failure to duly consider points of view pertinent to an issue is to think narrow-mindedly Questions it implies Do we need to consider another point of view? Do we need to look at this in other ways?
Mean
The average derived by adding up all the values and dividing the sum by the total number of values
Median
The average represented by the middle value in a series of values
Which of the following represents a difficulty with surveys as evidence?
a) Survey questions are sometimes worded ambiguously b) Survey responses don't necessarily reflect the actual beliefs of respondents c) Surveys have built-in biases d) All of the above Correct Answer Checked d) All of the above Feedback: The wording of survey questions may be subject to differing interpretations; survey responses may not reflect respondents' true beliefs; and surveys have built-in biases.
Primary standards associated with assumptions
clear, justified, and consistent
Bringing an unbiased perspective to all relevant viewpoints exemplifies which of the following?
fair-mindedness
An inference is something we presuppose. True or false?
false, An inference is a mental step by which one concludes that something is true based on something else being true or appearing to be so. An assumption is something we presuppose.
All reasoning is shaped by, and expressed through, concepts
Clearly identify key concepts Consider alternative concepts Use concepts with care and precision Use concepts justifiably (i.e., don't distort their established meanings)
appeal to popularity/ popular passions
Citing majority sentiment or popular opinion as the reason for supporting a claim. It assumes that any position favored by the larger crowd must be true or worthy.
A question with competing and debatable answers
Question of judgment
Risk reduction can be expressed in _______ and ________ terms.
a. relative / absolute Yes, the correct answer is a. Risk reduction can be expressed in relative and absolute terms. b. ratio / index c. qualitative / quantitative d. none of the above
Relevance
Questions focusing on relevance include: How is this idea connected to the question? How does that bear on the issue? How does this idea relate to this other idea? How does your question relate to the issue we are dealing with?
In reasoning through any problem, a well-cultivated critical thinker:
Raises vital questions Gathers and assesses relevant information Reaches well-reasoned conclusions and solutions Thinks open-mindedly Communicates effectively with others
Dimensions of Decision-Making THERE ARE 9
-Figure out, and regularly rearticulate, your most fundamental goals, purposes, and needs. -Take problems and decisions one-by-one. -Figure out the implications of alternatives. -Figure out the information you need and seek it. -Draw reasonable inferences from the information you analyze and interpret. -Figure out long- and short-term options and limitations (time, money, power). -Consider pros and cons of options. -Be strategic in your decision-making. -Monitor the implications of your actions and shift strategy if need be.
Process of elimination
-In analyzing causation, successively ruling out non-causal factors until one correct causal factor remains -To figure out why tourists were sick, blood tests ruled out five different diseases and singled out one tropical microbe that was causing the sickness
Questions of preference
-Subjective choice -No judgment or assessment -Many possible answers based on subjective preferences -Who is your favorite actor? -What color should we paint the living room?
Three Types of Questions
-The first category, questions of fact, have definitive answers. -The second category, questions of preference, have a range of potential answers, which reflect personal and subjective views on a topic. -The third, questions of judgment, have more than one reasoned answer, but some answers are better than others.
An average of numbers can be expressed 3 different ways:
-The mean is derived by adding up all the values and dividing the sum by the total number of values -The median represents the middle value in a series of values; half of the values are above it, and half are below it -The mode is the value that appears most frequently in a series of values
How do critical thinkers approach the news as a source of information and avoid being manipulated?
-looking at events from multiple perspectives. -assessing news stories for clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, and significance. -noticing the contradictions and inconsistencies, questionable implicit assumptions, and disputed facts in stories. -questioning the sociocentrism in media accounts.
According to Paul and Elder, intellectual action requires figuring out:
1) what is going on in a situation; 2) options for action; 3) a justification for choosing an option; 4) ways to reduce the impact of irrational thinking.
Whenever we think, we think for a purpose within a point of view based on assumptions leading to implications and consequences. We use concepts and theories to interpret data, facts, and experiences to answer questions, solve problems, and resolve issues. Here are all the elements listed separately:
1. All thinking has a purpose or goal. 2. All thinking raises at least one question. 3. All thinking requires information. 4. All thinking requires concepts. 5. All thinking involves inferences. 6. All thinking involves assumptions. 7. All thinking involves implications. 8. All thinking involves a point of view.
Intellectual Integrity
Characterization Holding oneself to the same rigorous intellectual standards that one expects others to meet Practicing daily what we preach to others Admitting flaws and inconsistencies in our own thinking Identifying weaknesses in our own thinking Basic measure: extent to which one's beliefs and actions are consistent (i.e., one doesn't say one thing and do another) it's oppopsite Intellectual dishonesty Marked by contradictions and inconsistencies of which the perpetrator is unconscious Hiding our hypocrisy from ourselves (due to naturally egocentric mind) Regarding ourselves as fair even when we expect others to follow much more rigorous standards than those we impose on ourselves Relationship to Fair-Mindedness Fair-mindedness requires us to think and act in compatible ways Those blind to contradictions and inconsistencies in their own thinking and behavior can't reason well through ethical issues involving themselves
6. All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas.
Clearly identify key concepts. Consider alternative concepts or alternative definitions for concepts. Make sure you are using concepts with care and precision. Use concepts justifiably (not distorting their established meanings).
strong sense critical thinkers
consistent pursuit of what is intellectually fair and just strive to be ethical strive to empathize with other's viewpoints will entertain arguments with which they do not agree change their views when confronted with superior reasoning. employ their thinking reasonable instead of manipulatively. requires fair mindedness combined with basic critical thinking skills
Identification involves
looking at your irrational emotions or desires and figuring out what is generating them. Then, the critical thinker seeks to replace the irrational thinking with rational thinking.
Intellectual Courage
Characterization Confronting ideas, viewpoints, or beliefs with fairness, even when doing so is painful Examining fairly beliefs which one has strong negative feelings and toward which one has previously been dismissive Challenging popular belief Leads us to recognize that ideas which society deems dangerous or absurd may hold some truth or justification Fortifies us to confront false or distorted ideas embraced by social groups to which we belong Its Opposite Intellectual cowardice Fear of ideas that do not conform to one's own Deters serious consideration of ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints perceived as dangerous Threatened by ideas when they conflict with our self-identity (e.g., conservative or liberal, believer or nonbeliever, etc.) Relationship to Fair-Mindedness Critical thinkers don't link their self-identities to their beliefs. They define themselves according to how they arrive at their beliefs (i.e., the intellectual process) Refusing to connect one's identity with one's beliefs fosters greater intellectual courage and fair-mindedness
ELEMENT OF REASON PURPOSE
DESCRIPTION We reason to some goal or objective whenever we reason. If our purpose is faulty (e.g., confused or muddled), our reasoning in pursuit of it will suffer. APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS Always state your purpose precisely. Strive to be clear about your purpose in all situations. Pose questions that sharpen your focus on your purpose. Is my purpose significant? Is it justifiable? Does it contradict other goals I have?
Thinking Across Points of View
many sources Point-of-view source Example Point in time 18th century, 1960s, yesterday Culture Western, Eastern, youth Religion Christian, Jewish, Muslim Gender/Sexual Orientation male, female, straight, gay Profession lawyer, teacher, soldier Academic discipline biology, history, sociology Peer group jock, theater/drama, overachiever Economic interest landlord, renter, business owner, rank-and-file employee Emotional state outraged, resentful, euphoric Age group adolescence, twenty-something, elderly
Testimonial
An account of someone else's personal experience
Faulty analogy
An analogy in which there are important relevant dissimilarities between 2 things being compared
search for perfect solution
Asserting that a solution is not worth adopting because it does not fix the problem completely.
Red herring fallacy
Introducing an irrelevant point or topic to divert attention from the issue at hand.
The mind drawing conclusions on the basis of reasons defines which process?
REASONING
"We should fund research on human cloning and only narrow-minded religious fundamentalists oppose it based on their outdated belief system."
This is an example of an ad hominem fallacy. Opponents of research on human cloning have a series of arguments they can make against the practice. Rather than addressing these, this statement attacks "religious fundamentalists" who are "narrow-minded" with "outdated beliefs," using negative descriptive language to attack the person who hold a belief rather than actually contesting it.
Which of the following statements are false? Statistics always prove truth. Statistics can't be trusted. Unreported information leads to false conclusions. Average, rate, and ratio are the only methods of reporting statistics.
a. I, II, and III b. I, II, and IV Yes, the correct answer is b. Statistics do not prove truth in all cases, but soundly derived statistics can be trustworthy. Also, a percentage is another form of statistical reporting, along with average, ratio, and rate. c. None of the above are false. d. All of the above are false.
Question
All reasoning is directed at some question. In any reasoning context, the critical thinker should ask... What question needs to be answered? or What problem needs to be solved? or What issue needs to be resolved? As an aspiring critical thinker, you need to learn how to clearly frame the question, problem, or issue at which your reasoning is directed.
4. All reasoning is done from some point of view.
Clearly identify your point of view. Seek other relevant points of view and identify their strengths as well as weaknesses. Strive to be fair-minded in evaluating all points of view.
2. All reasoning is an attempt to figure out something, to settle some question, solve some problem.
Take time to state the question at issue clearly and precisely. Express the question in several ways to clarify its meaning and scope. Break the question into sub-questions (when you can). Identify the type of question you are dealing with (historical, economic, biological, etc.) and whether the question has one right answer, is a matter of mere opinion, or requires reasoning from more than one point of view. Think-through the complexities of the question (think-through the question deeply).
Assumptions
Reasoning has to begin somewhere. It begins with our assumptions. These encompass everything we take for granted as true in order to figure out something else. For example, suppose you're the new general manager of a pro baseball team that just finished in last place. As you undertake to improve the team, you might assume that... Its won-lost record reflects its talent level You need better players You must spend more money to upgrade your roster Assumptions are always present in any form of reasoning. They lie at the heart of arguments. But people usually don't openly express their core assumptions when they reason. Being able to identify assumptions (others' and our own) is essential to critical thinking.
Second-order thinking
The assumptions we've relied upon may be flawed. Let's review them again. I'd like to talk this over with some colleagues. They may have some insights we are missing. As far as I am concerned, you're headed down the wrong path on this project, and I'm rarely wrong on these matters. I didn't completely understand the repercussions of my original decision, and so now I have changed my mind and I am recommending a new approach.This is an example of second-order thinking, which is self-correcting.
8. All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences.
Trace the logical implications and consequences that follow from your reasoning. Search for negative as well as positive implications. Consider all possible significant consequences. 5.21 Think for Yourself CHECKPOINTS IN THINKING
Information
We use information whenever we reason. Information takes many forms: statistical data, our observations, others' testimony, etc. In thinking critically about an issue, we must determine what information is relevant to it. We rely on information to direct us to a supportable conclusion. Reasoning often follows from bad or incomplete information. Therefore, the critical thinker must be able to skillfully evaluate information for accuracy and completeness. We need to recognize when we don't have sufficient information to draw a reasonable conclusion.
Which of the following is not among the suggested beginning tactics for improving your thinking?
Handle multiple problems per day.
Precision
Questions focusing on making thinking more precise include: Could you give me more details? Could you be more specific?
Clarity
Questions that focus on clarity include: Could you elaborate on that point? Could you express that point in another way? Could you give me an illustration? Could you give me an example? Let me state in my own words what I think you just said. Tell me if I am clear about your meaning.
Points of view
Reasoning always takes place within some point of view. It has some comprehensive focus or orientation. The same issue considered from different points of view may appear not at all the same. Each of us is at the center of our own point of view. We see from our vantage point. The critical thinker must be able to identify within which point of view reasoning occurs. From what perspective or angle (e.g., conservative or liberal, religious or secular, political or cultural) is an issue being looked at or characterized?
Concepts
Reasoning takes form in concepts. These are general categories or ideas by which we interpret or classify information used in our thinking. When we think about anything (for example, a new law), we reason based on some concept of that thing (for example, its fairness or unfairness). The concept, not the thing itself, is what we hold in our mind as our understanding of it. Most of us take our concepts for granted. Critical thinking requires us to be aware of the concepts we hold and consider how they drive our reasoning.
5. All reasoning is based on data, information, and evidence.
Restrict your claims to those supported by the data you have. Search for information that opposes your position as well as information that supports it. Make sure that all information you use is clear, accurate, and relevant to the question at issue. Make sure you have gathered sufficient information. Make sure, especially, that you have considered all significant information relevant to the issue.
series of measures or steps to help aspiring critical thinkers lay a foundation for improving their thinking.
Use "wasted" time Handle one problem per day Internalize intellectual standards Keep an intellectual journal Practice intellectual strategies Reshape your character Deal with your ego Redefine the way you see things Get in touch with your emotions Analyze group influences on your life
Which term means the tendency to view everything in relationship to oneself?
egocentrism
HOW THE PARTS OF THINKING FIT TOGETHER
-our purpose affects the manner in which we ask questions; --the manner in which we ask questions affects the information we gather; - the information we gather affects the way we interpret it; - the way we interpret information affects the way we conceptualize it; - the way we conceptualize information affects the assumptions we make; - the assumptions we make affect the implications that follow from our thinking; -the implications that follow from our thinking affect the way we see things—our point of view.
Distinguishing between Inferences and Assumptions
A key skill to master in critical thinking is that of distinguishing inferences from assumptions. These crucially related elements frequently get confused. To review their basic meanings: An inference is a mental step by which one concludes that something is true based on something else being true or appearing to be so. For example, if you spot a campaign bumper sticker on someone's car, you infer that that person will vote for the candidate named on the bumper sticker. An inference can be accurate, logical, or justified. Conversely, it can be inaccurate, illogical, or unjustified. An assumption is something we presuppose. We take its truth for granted. Because we do, we don't question it. Assumptions are part of our beliefs, which we use to interpret the world around us. People routinely use their beliefs as assumptions and make inferences based on those assumptions. We rely on assumptions and inferences because we cannot make sense of our world—we cannot judge, interpret, or conclude—without them.
Intellectual Humility
Characterization Commitment to discovering the extent of one's own ignorance on any issue Recognition that one does not—and cannot—know everything Consciousness of one's biases and prejudices Aware of the limitations of one's viewpoint Recognition that one should claim only what one actually knows Awareness that egocentrism is often self-deceiving (i.e., convinces the mind that it knows more than it does) Its Opposite Intellectual arrogance Overestimation of how much one knows No insight into self-deception or into the limitations of one's viewpoint Relationship to Fair-Mindedness Fair-mindedness requires us to first recognize the ignorance and flaws in our own thinking and to comport ourselves accordingly. It requires self-awareness and a willingness to examine the limitations of one's own point of view. Being a fair-minded thinker means habitually applying the standards of reasoning to one's own thinking in an effort to improve it.
Intellectual Empathy
Characterization Inhabiting the perspectives of others in order to genuinely understand them Requirements Ability to reconstruct other people's viewpoints and reasoning Ability to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas not one's own Motivation to concede when one was wrong in the past despite a strong conviction of being right at the time Ability to imagine being similarly mistaken in a current situation Its Opposite Intellectual self-centeredness Thinking centered on self Renders us unable to understand others' thoughts, feelings, and emotions Won't permit us to consider problems or issues from a vantage point other than our own Relationship to Fair-Mindedness Fair-mindedness requires a sincere attempt to inhabit the perspectives of other people in order to fathom their thinking One can't be fair to the reasoning of others if one has not genuinely tried to understand it
Confidence in Reason
Characterization Proceeds from the belief that both the individual's and society's higher interests are best served by unfettered reason Encourages people to arrive at their own conclusions through their own powers of rational thinking Faith that we can learn to: think for ourselves reach well-informed viewpoints draw reasonable conclusions think clearly, accurately, relevantly, and logically persuade one another through sound reasoning and evidence be reasonable despite fundamental barriers to reasonableness in human nature and social life Its Opposite Intellectual distrust of reason Lack of confidence in reason Inclines us to assert the truth of our own beliefs, flawed though they might be relationship to Fair-Mindedness Fair-mindedness is impossible if one does not appreciate the importance of reason One cannot be fair-minded if one won't seriously consider sound reasoning with which one disagrees
ELEMENT OF REASON INFORMATION
DESCRIPTION We use information whenever we reason. Various forms Data Facts Experiences and observations Word of mouth APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS Utilize only evidence that is clear, fair, and accurate. Assess whether information you use in reasoning is relevant to the issue at hand and sufficient to achieve your purpose. Assess whether you are distorting information to fit your own point of view. Pose questions that sharpen your focus on information in your reasoning. What is the most important information I need? What (if any) alternative information sources do I need to consider? How can I determine if the information I'm using is accurate? Is all of the information I'm using relevant to the issue at hand?
Depth
Explanation Our reasoning is deep when it: -plumbs beneath the surface of an issue or problem to identify the underlying complexities; and -addresses those complexities in an intellectually responsible way Depth directs us to delve deeper into an issue Questions it implies What are some of the complexities of the question? How do you take into account the problems in the question?
Thinking
Makes sense of the world judging perceiving analyzing clarifying determining comparing synthesizing
Breadth
Questions focusing on making thinking broader include: Do we need to consider another point of view? Is there another way to look at this question? What would this look like from a conservative standpoint? What would this look like from the point of view of ...?
The ability to reconstruct others' viewpoints exemplifies which of the following traits?
intellectual empathy
Another term for critical thinking is:
second-order thinking
Critical thinking is characteristically:
self-directed self-disciplined self-monitored self-corrective
Intellectual Perseverance
Characterization Working one's way through intellectual complexities despite frustrations inherent in doing so Not giving up when confronted by complicated problems that don't lend themselves to easy solutions Hallmarks Reasoning through complex issues carefully and methodically Following rational principles rather than trusting initial impressions and simplistic answers Realizing that true understanding or insight comes only when one grapples with confusion and unsettled questions over time Its Opposite Intellectual laziness Giving up quickly when confronted with a tough intellectual challenge Reflects a low tolerance for mental struggle or frustration Relationship to Fair-Mindedness Lack of intellectual perseverance impedes fair-mindedness We can't understand others' (complex) viewpoints unless we're willing to undertake the hard intellectual work of reasoning through them
ELEMENT OF REASON ASSUMPTIONS
DESCRIPTION All reasoning begins with our assumptions (i.e., our presuppositions, or what we take for granted as true). APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS Assess your ability to identify/recognize assumptions. Assess your ability to analyze assumptions (yours and others') according to relevant intellectual standards. Clear or unclear? Justifiable or unjustifiable (in the context of the issue at hand)? Consistent or contradictory? Logical or illogical? State your assumptions clearly and precisely.
ELEMENT OF REASON IMPLICATIONS
DESCRIPTION Implications follow from our reasoning whenever we reason. That which extends beyond whatever conclusion we reach through our reasoning. APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS Assess your ability to identify/recognize implications. The critical thinker strives to: grasp implications wherever they occur be able to trace the logical implications and consequences of reasoning Assess implications for their clarity, depth, breadth, and significance.
ELEMENT OF REASON INFERENCES
DESCRIPTION Steps of mind by which we conclude that something is true based on something else being true (or appearing to be so). All reasoning proceeds by steps in the following construct: "Because this is so, that also is so (or probably is so)." Learn to identify whenever you or someone else has made an inference. APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS State inferences clearly and precisely. Pose questions that sharpen your focus on inferences in reasoning. What are the key inferences? What assumptions are the inferences based upon? Are the inferences justifiable? Are the inferences logical? Even if logical, are the inferences relevant and important to the question at issue?
ELEMENT OF REASON POINT OF VIEW
DESCRIPTION We reason within some point of view or frame of reference whenever we reason. Possible flaws in our point of view Too narrow Founded on false or misleading information Embodies contradictions Strive for a point of view that considers opposing points of view with fairness. APPLYING THE INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS Strive for a point of view that is broad, flexible, and justifiable. Weigh alternative points of view when you reason through an issue. State all points of view that are relevant to the issue at hand (and state them clearly, precisely, and accurately). Pose questions that sharpen your focus on your point of view. From what vantage point am I viewing this issue? Am I so rooted to my point of view that I can't see the issue from other points of view? Must I consider alternative points of view in order to reason effectively through the issue at hand?
Relevance
Explanation Something is relevant when it pertains to the problem we seek to solve Thinking is relevant when it focuses on what is important—on what matters—in understanding or deciding the issue at hand Irrelevant thinking dwells on what properly should be set aside or disregarded Questions it implies How does this idea relate to the issue? How does your claim bear on the question?
Questions of judgment
-Evidence and reasoning within multiple systems -Competing answers -Reasoned judgment -More than one answer, with some better than others -How can we deal with global warming? -What is the best way to improve elementary school education?
Single difference
-In analyzing causation, looking for a causal factor that is present in one situation but absent in another, similar, situation -Only those tourists who visited a given village were infected with a tropical disease; those who did not were disease-free
According to the five foundations of ethical thinking introduced by Paul and Elder, we must pick and choose our ethical principles subjectively. True or false?
False We cannot pick and choose our ethical principles subjectively.
Case example
A detailed account of a person or event; a striking or dramatic anecdote
Statistics express information in numerical form.
Among the common statistical forms are averages, percentages, ratios, and rates.
Either-or fallacy
Assuming only two alternatives when, in reality, there are more than two.
either-or
Assuming only two alternatives when, in reality, there are more than two. It implies that one of two outcomes is inevitable—either x or y.
Understanding Assumptions and Inferences
Assumptions are the unstated or hidden beliefs that support our explicit reasoning about something. Assumptions are what we take for granted as being true when we formulate or accept an argument. An inference or conclusion is the outcome of reasoning. It is what the writer or speaker is trying to prove about the issue being addressed. Therefore, we find the inference/conclusion when we identify what the communicator is trying to persuade us to accept.
Accuracy
Being near to the true value or meaning of something 8
All reasoning is based on information
Claim only what you can support with the information you have Seek information that opposes your position as well as information that supports it Utilize only information that is clear, accurate, and relevant to the issue at hand Gather sufficient information Consider all significant information relevant to the issue
Appeal to experience fallacy
Claiming to speak with the "voice of experience" in support of an argument (even when that experience may not be relevant).
appeal to experience
Claiming to speak with the "voice of experience" in support of an argument (even when that experience may not be relevant).
Applying Standards to Information
Clear Relevant Fairly gathered and reported Accurate Adequate Consistently Applied
Paul and Elder's "Dimensions of Decision-Making" suggest all of the following steps, except:
D. Paul and Elder counsel that you take problems and decisions one-by-one, not merging them together.
Egocentric righteousness
Description Feeling superior because of possessing the "Truth" Ways to correct Stating unanswered questions Reminding ourselves how little we actually know
Egocentric hypocrisy
Description Ignoring inconsistencies between belief and behavior and between public standards and private actions Ways to correct Comparing beliefs and behaviors and standards and actions to expose inconsistencies
Egocentric blindness
Description Not seeing facts and evidence that contradict our thinking Ways to correct Seeking out facts and evidence that challenge our thinking
Quantitative evidence derives from quantitative research and deductive analysis. It generally is an outcome of scientific methods including:
Devising empirical models/hypotheses about things Testing the models/hypotheses through controlled experiments Using statistically valid samples Developing instruments for measuring outcomes Collecting verifiable data Quantitative evidence is concerned with determining causation: one thing (e.g., a new diabetes drug) caused another thing (e.g., glycemic control in diabetic patients) under controlled experimental conditions.
straw man
Distorting or exaggerating an opponent's argument so that it might be more easily attacked.
Analogy
Drawing a comparison between 2 things in order to show a meaningful resemblance between them. It implies that if 2 things are alike in one respect, they will be alike in other respects
Quantitative evidence
Evidence that quantifies an observation or phenomenon and is concerned with determining causation
Remembering only that evidence and information that supports our thinking is essential for developing a rational mind. True or false?
False Only remembering evidence and information that supports our way of thinking is a pathological tendency called egocentric memory. Correcting this pathology is part of developing a rational mind.
appeal to authority
I support Third World debt relief because U2 front man Bono has tirelessly advocated this position.
appeal to popularity
If the majority of lawmakers favor tort reform, then it's good enough for me.
In reasoning, we make __________ based on __________
Inferences/assumptions
Appeal to authority
Justifying a position by citing an expert or authority who supports it
hard-cruel-world argument
Justifying illegal or unethical practices by arguing that they are necessary to confront a greater evil or threat.
Which of the following graphical forms is well suited to summarizing time series data?
Line graph
Which of the following terms expresses the value which appears most frequently in a series of values?
Mode
All reasoning has a purpose
State your purpose clearly Choose a significant purpose Distinguish it from related purposes Make sure it is fair in context Periodically check to be sure you remain focused on your purpose
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING AN AUTHOR'S REASONING
Now that you have worked through the logic of an article or a textbook, or both, you are ready to assess the author's reasoning by focusing on how well the author uses each of the elements of reasoning within the article or book. Choose the logic of either the article or the textbook. For the one you choose, go through each of the elements, or parts, of the author's reasoning and evaluate them using the intellectual standards outlined here: 1. Focusing on the author's purpose: Is the purpose well-stated? Is it clear and justifiable? 2. Focusing on the key question that the written piece answers: Is the question at issue well-stated (or clearly implied)? Is it clear and unbiased? Does the expression of the question do justice to the complexity of the matter at issue? Are the question and purpose directly relevant to each other? 3. Focusing on the most important information the author presents: Does the writer cite relevant evidence, experiences, and information essential to the issue? Is the information accurate and directly relevant to the question at issue? Does the writer address the complexities of the issue? 4. Focusing on the most fundamental concepts at the heart of the author's reasoning: Does the writer clarify key concepts when necessary? Are the concepts used justifiably? 5. Focusing on the author's assumptions: Does the writer show a sensitivity to what he or she is taking for granted or assuming (insofar as those assumptions might reasonably be questioned)? Or does the writer use questionable assumptions without addressing problems that might be inherent in those assumptions? 6. Focusing on the most important inferences or conclusions in the written piece: Do the inferences and conclusions the author makes follow clearly from the information relevant to the issue, or does the author jump to unjustifiable conclusions? Does the author consider alternative conclusions where the issue is complex? Does the author use a sound line of reasoning to come to logical conclusions, or can you identify flaws in the reasoning somewhere? 7. Focusing on the author's point of view: Does the author show a sensitivity to alternative relevant points of view or lines of reasoning? Does he or she consider and respond to objections framed from other relevant points of view? 8. Focusing on implications: Does the writer show a sensitivity to the implications and consequences of the position he or she is taking?
A question with one correct answer
Question of fact
A Question with many possible subjective answers
Question of preference
These questions have more than one answer, with some answers better than others.
Questions of judgment have competing answers, with some better than others.
Attacking evidence fallacy
Seeking to falsely discredit the underlying evidence for an argument and thereby questioning its validity.
straw man
Senator Smith suggests that the only defense against the threat of terrorism is to strip us of our civil liberties and turn our society into a police state.
In analyzing causation, looking for a causal factor that is present in one situation but absent in another similar situation
Single difference method
hasty generalization
That rookie quarterback is lousy. In his first 2 games as a pro, he threw 4 interceptions and no touchdowns. He's a bust!
Absolute number
The total or aggregate of something, expressed as a number without relationship to other numbers
thrown-in statistics
The use of irrelevant, misleading, or questionable statistics to support an argument or defend a position.
"Based on the research findings of physicist Steven E. Jones, formerly of Brigham Young University, it is clear that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition during the September 11, 2001 attacks."
There are several reasons that this is a fallacious appeal to authority. Jones may be a physicist, but that does not make him an expert on the collapse of modern skyscrapers. Members of BYU's engineering faculty criticized Jones' research (which was not peer reviewed) and Jones retired from BYU in the controversy that followed. Further, the vast majority of experts (professional associations of architects, structural engineers, and fire safety experts) cited the crash of jets into the World Trade Center towers as the reason for their destruction and conclude that controlled demolition was not involved.
"Asking people for photo identification when they come to vote is just the first step in establishing a national identity card."
This is a slippery slope fallacy. Laws that ask for photo ID at the voting place don't mean a national identity card is inevitable; driver's licenses, passports, or state-issued photo IDs are typically what are accepted for identification purposes.
All reasoning has implications and consequences
Track the logical implications and consequences that stem from your reasoning Search for negative as well as positive implications of your reasoning Consider all possible significant consequences
According to Paul and Elder, egocentrism and sociocentrism are significant barriers to sound ethical reasoning. True or false?
True According to the five foundations of ethical thinking introduced by Paul and Elder, egocentrism and sociocentrism are barriers to sound ethical reasoning.
One good way to analyze causes is to eliminate non-causal factors, identifying the causal factor through the process of elimination. True or false?
True Correct. In analyzing causation, it is a good idea to try to rule out non-causal factors until one correct causal factor remains.
Activated Knowledge
Truthful information that is employed to pursue more knowledge and/or is acted upon -"Taking into the mind, and actively using information that is true and also, when understood insightfully, leads us by implication to more and more knowledge." -We bring significant ideas and knowledge into the mind and are able to apply them, systematically, to new situations. -Learning a model (such as the scientific method or basic research techniques) and then applying it to new situations.
Activated Knowledge
Truthful information that is employed to pursue more knowledge and/or is acted upon. 8
In some cases, the conclusions we draw are based on assumptions that operate at a(n) ________ level.
Unconscious
Which of the following statements is NOT true about the gap between the real and ideal in academic disciplines or fields of study, according to Paul and Elder?
a) Egocentrism contributes to the gap Correct Answer Checked b) Higher order thinking contributes to the gap. c) Sociocentrism contributes to the gap d) Human fallibility contributes to the gap Feedback: The correct answer is B. Higher order thinking does NOT contribute to the gap; if anything it would act to narrow it.
Which of the following are motives that may introduce bias into information?
a. Ideology b. Professional jealousy c. Personal aggrandizement d. All of the above Yes, the correct answer is d. All of these can introduce bias.
If a sample is too small or not random enough, the critical thinker must:
a. assume the findings are incorrect. b. be skeptical of the outcome. Yes, the correct answer is b. A critical thinker must be skeptical of an outcome derived from a statistical sample that is too small or not sufficiently random. c. trust the outcome. d. none of the above
Which of the following is more widely regarded as a high quality source of evidence?
a. research studies Yes, the correct answer is a. Research studies, if conducted properly, can provide very strong evidence because they produce empirical data that may be independently tested and verified.
Actively using information that is false, although we mistakenly think it is true, is an example of:
activated ignorance
Dismissing an argument by attacking the person who offers it rather than by refuting its reasoning is an example of:
ad hominem fallacy
Paul and Elder maintain that
all content is explained, illustrated, analyzed, applied, transformed, evaluated, synthesized, learned, discovered, and organized by thinking.
According to Paul and Elder, there are two other key insights into the question of thinking through content:
all content is organized by concepts; and all content is logically interdependent. The practical implication of these insights is that you can enhance your learning by (1) focusing on the concepts defining and structuring a body of content and by (2) figuring out how the different parts of content relate to one another.
Line Graphs plot the relationship
between two or more variables by using connected data points. Line graphs are very useful where there is time series data to be summarized. They are appropriate where the data values are continuous.
Fair mindedness yields many intellectual virtues
consider all thinking by the same standards expect good reasoning from supporters as well as from opponents apply the same critical criteria to our own logic as to others' reasoning recognize the actual strengths and weaknesses of any reasoning we assess
Critical thinking values ________ of thought over ______ of thought.
depth/speed
Qualitative evidence
describes or recounts an observation or phenomenon. It communicates understanding and meaning—why and how something happened.
Deep learning involves
developing the tools of critical thinking and applying them to whatever challenges you encounter now and in the future.
Ignoring complexity and embracing a version of reality that conforms to our existing views, values, and beliefs is an example of:
egocentric oversimplification