Critical thinking and reasoning

begging the question (petitio principii)

(petitio principii) A begging the question fallacy is a form of circular reasoning that occurs when the conclusion of the argument is used as one of the premises of the argument.

accident (sweeping generalization)

A fallacy by accident occurs when a generally true statement is applied to a specific case that is somehow unusual or exceptional.

formal fallacies

A formal fallacy exists because of an error in the structure of the argument. In other words, the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises

informal fallacies

An informal fallacy occurs because of an error in reasoning. Unlike formal fallacies which are identified through examining the structure of the argument, informal fallacies are identified through analysis of the content of the premises.

appeal to pity (argumentium ad misericordium)

Appeals to pity are another form of pulling on the emotions of the audience. In the appeal to pity, the argument attempts to win acceptance by pointing out the unfortunate consequences that will fall upon the speaker. In effect, the goal is to make us feel sorry for the speaker and ignore contradictory evidence.

traits of critical thinker (Inquisitive)

Critical thinkers are curious by nature. Critical thinkers ask questions of what is going on around them and in a message. Critical thinkers want to know more and take action to learn more.

traits of critical thinker (Analytic Nature)

Critical thinkers are interested in understanding what is happening in a message. Critical thinkers ask questions of the message, breaking it into its individual components and examining each in turn.

traits of critical thinker (Judicious)

Critical thinkers are prudent in acting and making judgments. Critical thinkers are sensible in their actions. That is, they don't just jump on the bandwagon of common thought because it looks good or everyone else is doing it.

traits of critical thinker (Systematic by Method)

Critical thinkers avoid jumping to conclusions. Critical thinkers take the time to systematically examine a message.

traits of critical thinker (Truth-Seeking Ethos)

Critical thinkers exercise an ethical foundation based in searching for the truth. Critical thinkers understand that even the wisest people may be wrong at times.

traits of critical thinker (confident in Reasoning)

Critical thinkers have faith in the power of logic and sound reasoning. Critical thinkers understand that it is in everyone's best interest to encourage and develop sound logic. More importantly, critical thinkers value the power of letting others draw their own conclusions.

defining deduction

Deductive reasoning refers to an argument in which the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its conclusions

ambiguity (equivocation)

Fallacies caused by ambiguity occur, not surprisingly, when some ambiguous term is used in the argument. An ambiguous term is one that has more than one meaning.

fallacy of quantitative logic

Fallacies of quantitative logic revolve around the grammatical structure of the proposition. The focus is on the use of some sort of quantifying word such as "all" or "some."

critical thinker skills (listening)

In order to understand listening, we must first understand the difference between listening and hearing.

the value of critical thinking

In public speaking, the value of being a critical thinker cannot be overstressed. Critical thinking helps us to determine the truth or validity of arguments. However, it also helps us to formulate strong arguments for our speeches.

bad reasons fallacy (argumentum and logicam)

In this fallacy, the conclusion is assumed to be bad because the arguments are bad. In practice, a premise of the argument is bad and therefore the conclusion is bad or invalid. This fallacy is seen often in debate or argumentation.

critical thinker skills (analysis)

Once we have listened to a message, we can begin to analyze it. In practice we often begin analyzing messages while still listening to them. When we analyze something, we consider it in greater detail, separating out the main components of the message.

false cause (non causa, pro causa)

Sometimes called a Questionable Cause fallacy, this occurs when there exists a flawed causal connection between events. The fallacy is not just a bad inference about connection between cause and effect, but one that violates the cannons of reasoning about causation.

genetic fallacy

The ad hominem fallacy occurs when we shift our focus from the premises and conclusions of the argument and focus instead on the individual making the argument.

self-regulation

The final step in critically examining a message is actually a skill we should exercise throughout the entire process. With self-regulation, we consider our pre-existing thoughts on the subject and any biases we may have. We examine how what we think on an issue may have influenced the way we understand (or think we understand) the message and any conclusions we have drawn.

masked man fallacy (intensional fallacy)

The masked man fallacy involves a substitution of parties. If the two things we substitute are identical, then the argument is valid

division

The opposite of the composition fallacy, a division fallacy occurs when we think the parts of the whole contain the same quality as the whole.

black-or-white Fallacy

This fallacy is also known as an Either/or fallacy or False Dichotomy. The thrust of the fallacy occurs when we are only given the choice between two possible alternatives, when in fact more than two exist.

strawman

This fallacy occurs when the actual argument appears to be refuted, but in reality a related point is addressed. The individual using a strawman argument will appear to be refuting the original point made but will actually be arguing a point not made in the original.

composition

This fallacy occurs when we assume that if all the parts have a given quality, then the whole of the parts will have it as well.

appeal to emotion

This fallacy occurs with the use of highly emotive or charged language. The force of the fallacy lies in its ability to motivate the audience to accept the truth of the proposition based solely on their visceral response to the words used. In a sense, the audience is manipulated or forced into accepting the truth of the stated conclusions.

fallacies of appeal

This type of fallacy is actually a group of fallacies. At its most basic, the truth of the argument rests on reference to some outside source or force.

logic and the role of arguments

We use logic every day. Even if we have never formally studied logical reasoning and fallacies, we can often tell when a person's statement doesn't sound right.

appeal to authority

When we appeal to authority we claim the truth of a proposition is guaranteed because of the opinion of a famous person.

appeal to Ignorance

When we appeal to ignorance, we argue that the proposition must be accepted unless someone can prove otherwise.

critical thinker skills (evaluation)

When we evaluate something we continue the process of analysis by assessing the various claims and arguments for validity. One way we evaluate a message is to ask questions about what is being said and who is saying it.

understanding fallacies

When we form arguments or examine others' arguments, we need to be cognizant of possible fallacies. A fallacy can be defined as a flaw or error in reasoning. At its most basic, a logical fallacy refers to a defect in the reasoning of an argument that causes the conclusion(s) to be invalid, unsound, or weak.

defining arguments

When we think and speak logically, we pull together statements that combine reasoning with evidence to support an assertion, arguments. A logical argument should not be confused with the type of argument you have with your sister or brother or any other person.

false analogy

When we use analogies in our reasoning, we are comparing things. A fallacy of weak analogy occurs when there exists a poor connection between examples

traits of critical thinker (open-mindedness)

critical thinkers are open and receptive to all ideas and arguments , even those with which they may disagree.

critical thinking

critical thinking is active thinking in which we evaluate and analyze information in order to determine the best course of action.

inference and interpretation or explanation

message is to interpret or explain the conclusions that we draw from it. At this phase we consider the evidence and the claims together. In effect we are reassembling the components that we parsed out during analysis.