WGU - C168 Critical Thinking and Logic

Intellectual traits

Intellectual Humility Intellectual Autonomy Intellectual Integrity Intellectual Courage Intellectual Perseverance Confidence in Reason Intellectual Empathy Fair mindedness

Thinking

Makes sense of the world judging perceiving analyzing clarifying determining comparing synthesizing

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

Critical thinking involves_______ one's own thinking.

analyzing, evaluating, and improving one's own thinking.

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.

In thinking through a problem, the critical thinker does all of the following except:

gathers information that supports his/her presuppositions

The opposite of intellectual conformity is:

intellectual autonomy

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

What are the three dimensions of critical thinking?

1. Analyzing one's thinking 2. Evaluating one's thinking 3. Improving one's thinking

What are the four characteristics of critical thinking?

1. self-directed 2. self-disciplined 3. self-monitored 4. self-corrective

Which of the following statements best defines critical thinking?

Critical thinking involves thinking about thinking while thinking in order to make thinking better.

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 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?

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.

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.

Feeling

Tells us how we are doing happy sad depressed anxious stressed calm worried excited

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.

Critical thinking values ________ of thought over ______ of thought.

depth/speed

Which term means the tendency to view everything in relationship to oneself?

egocentrism

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

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)

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.

What are three things a well-cultivated critical thinker does while reasoning?

1. Raises vital questions 2. Gathers and assesses relevant information 3. Reaches well-reasoned conclusions and solutions 4. Thinks open-mindedly 5. Communicates effectively with others

What are some examples of strong critical thinkers?

1. The consistently pursue what is intellectually fair and just 2. They strive to be ethical 3. They will entertain arguments with which they do not agree

What are some examples of weak critical thinkers?

1. They ignore the flaws in their own thinking 2. They seek to win an argument through intellectual trickery or deceit 3. They make no true effort to consider alternative viewpoints 4. They are willing to hide or distort evidence

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.

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.

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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)

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).

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

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

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.

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?

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 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?

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?

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?

Wanting

Drives us to act as we do goals desires purposes agendas values motives

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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.

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. These statements are a result of what kind of thinking?

First-order thinking

Which of the following is not among the suggested beginning tactics for improving your thinking?

Handle multiple problems per day.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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 ...?

Precision

Questions focusing on making thinking more precise include: Could you give me more details? Could you be more specific?

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)?

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?

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?

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.

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.

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)

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.

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. These statements are a result of what kind of thinking?

Second-order thinking

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)

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).

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.

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

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

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.

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.

_____ is the tendency to view everything in relation to oneself.

egocentrism

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.

The ability to reconstruct others' viewpoints exemplifies which of the following traits?

intellectual empathy

To admit flaws in one's own thinking is an expression of:

intellectual integrity

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

Which of the following is not a bad habit of thought?

reasoning from assumptions that are not one's own

Another term for critical thinking is:

second-order thinking

_____ is the assumption that one's own social group is inherently superior to all others.

sociocentrism

Three functions of the mind

thinking feeling wanting

Hiding or distorting evidence illustrates which of the following?

weak-sense thinking