Critical thinking errors

Unwarranted Assumption

Assumptions are ideas that are taken for granted rather than consciously reasoned out. When we take for granted a claim that is unjustified by our experience or the situation, the assumption is unwarranted. Because assumptions are seldom expressed directly, the only way to identify them is to "read between the lines" for what is implied.

Bias for or against change

Bias for change assumes that change is always for the best; bias against change assumes that change is always for the worst. To avoid both errors, give any proposal for change a fair hearing and decide, apart from your predisposition, whether change is really positive or negative.

Irrational Appeal

Our appeals to authority, emotion, and common belief may be either rational or irrational. Our appeals are irrational when they are unreasonable in the context of a particular situation and/or when the appeal discourages critical thought. To avoid this, our claims and analysis should complement rational thought.

Overgeneralizing and stereotyping

Overgeneralization ascribes characteristics to all members of a group even though those characteristics apply to only some members. A stereotype is an overgeneralization that is rigidly maintained. To avoid these errors, we must resist the urge to force individual people, places, and things into fixed categories. We should also keep in mind that the more limited our experience, the more modest we should make our assertions.

Oversimplification

Oversimplification goes beyond making complex ideas easier to grasp; it twists and distorts ideas and facts in an attempt to mislead people. To avoid this error, we must refuse to adopt superficial views and make a special effort to understand the issues in their complexity

Relativism

The belief that no view is better than any other, that any idea you choose to embrace is automatically correct. Remind yourself that some ideas and some standards of conduct are better than others and that the challenge of critical thinking is to discover the best ones

Shifting the burden of proof

The burden of proof rests with the person making the assertion. Therefore, whenever we demand that others disprove our assertions, we are shifting the burden of proof. To engage the process of argumentation honestly and effectively, we must accept responsibility for supporting our own claims.

Post Hoc fallacy

This error is rooted in the idea that when one action occurs after another, the event must have occurred as a result of the initial action. In reality, the sequence of events may be coincidental. To avoid the post hoc fallacy, we must withhold judgment of a cause-effect relationship until we have ruled out other possible relationships, including coincidence

Attacking the critic

We are guilty of attacking the critic whenever we attempt to discredit an idea or argument by disparaging the person instead of the idea s/he expressed. Critical thinkers avoid this error by focusing on the message rather than the messenger.

Mistaken Authority

We are guilty of this when we ascribe expertise to someone who does not possess expertise in the field of study that we are examining

Automatic rejection

We are guilty of this when we don't allow others to question our views in the context of a fair hearing. We can avoid automatic rejection if we think of our ideas as disposable possessions rather than extensions of our ego.

Double Standard

We are guilty of this when we use one set of criteria for judging arguments that we agree with and a more rigorous standard for judging arguments we disagree with. To avoid this error, we must decide in advance what judgment criteria to use, and we must apply the criteria consistently, regardless of whether the data in question supports our view.

Circular arguments

We argue in a circle when we repeat a statement in a different form, instead of providing evidence to support our claim. To overcome this error, we must consistently provide evidence to support our claims.

Absolutism

We commit this error when we believe that the rules governing our viewpoint do not admit exceptions. This belief causes us to demand that the truth be neat and simple, but in reality it is often messy and complex. To avoid this error, we must accept the truth as we find it rather than requiring truth to fit our preconceptions.

Straw man

We commit this error when we falsely attribute words to someone who never said the words. To avoid this error, we must be scrupulously accurate in quoting or paraphrasing other people's words.

Biased consideration of evidence

We commit this error when we seek only evidence that confirms our bias, and we ignore evidence that challenges our bias. We also express this error when we interpret evidence in a way that favors only our viewpoint.

Mindless Conformity

We do this when we adopt others' views unthinkingly because we are too lazy or fearful to form our own views. To overcome this error, we must develop the habit of resisting internal and external pressures while we engage the process of making up our own minds.

Contradiction

We do this when we claim that a statement is both true and false at the same time and in the same way. To avoid this error, we need to look for inconsistencies in what we say and write. If we detect inconsistency, then we must decide whether it is explainable or whether the inconsistency constitutes a contradiction. If we have expressed a contradiction, then we must revise our statement to make it consistent and reasonable.

False Analogy

We do this when we claim that two dissimilar ideas are similar, but our claim of similarity does not stand the test of scrutiny. To avoid this error, we must test the reasonableness of our analogies, and we must ensure that no important dissimilarities exist.

Either/Or outlook

We limit our perspective to this when we claim that the only reasonable view of any issue will be total affirmation or total rejection. This error rules out any possibility that the most reasonable view might lie between the extremes. To avoid this error, we must consider all possible alternatives.

Meaningless Statement

When our reasoning makes no sense, we are writing this. To correct this error, we must ensure that our reasoning effectively explains our intended thoughts and actions

Changing the subject

When we deceptively turn attention away from the issue under discussion, we are guilty of changing the subject. Critical thinkers learn to face difficult questions head-on rather than avoid them.

Hasty Conclusion

this is a premature judgment that is made without sufficient evidence. To avoid drawing a hasty conclusion, we should identify all possible conclusions. Then we must decide which conclusion is best supported by the evidence.