DOCSLIB.ORG

Critical Thinking III

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Critical Thinking III What You’ll Learn Here I. How to recognize arguments II. How to analyze arguments by 1. Recognizing the ultimate conclusion 2. Determining which other ideas are important 3. Seeing how these other ideas work together to support the ultimate conclusion Critical Thinking III. How to evaluate arguments by 1. Appreciating the structure of the argument The Very Basics 2. Evaluating the premises (at least as I see them) 3. Evaluating the inferences 4. Assessing the argument as a whole IV. How to construct arguments by Dona Warren 1. Deciding upon the ultimate conclusion Department of Philosophy 2. Constructing the chain of reasoning The University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point 3. Communicating the argument The Four Big Steps The Nature of Basics I. Recognizing Arguments • A few, relatively simple, skills II. Analyzing Arguments • Sometimes (and mistakenly) unappreciated III. Evaluating Arguments • The building blocks for any IV. Constructing Arguments more advanced activity • Admit of endlessly Note: It’s very important to sophisticated applications analyze before we evaluate. I. Recognizing Arguments First example An argument is a unit of reasoning that “Critical thinking is taught at many colleges attempts to prove that a certain idea and universities. Courses devoted to critical is true by citing other ideas as thinking are often offered by philosophy departments, but critical thinking skills are evidence. taught in every subject, from art to zoology.” “Is this passage trying to get me to believe something by making a case for its truth Not an argument. rather than by simply asserting it?” “Yes” = It’s an argument. “No” = It’s not an argument. 1 Second example II. Analyzing Arguments “Critical thinking helps people to reason 1. Identify the ultimate conclusion more easily and effectively and prevents 2. Determine which other ideas them from being easily taken in by shoddy arguments. These skills are essential to a are important. happy and productive life, so everyone 3. Determine how these other should study critical thinking.” ideas work together to support An argument. the ultimate conclusion. 1. Identify the Ultimate Conclusion 2. Determine What Other Ideas are Important The ultimate conclusion is the main An idea is important if it helps the idea that the argument is trying to argument to establish the truth of the prove. ultimate conclusion. Frequently, some of the sentences in a Sometimes, it’s unstated. passage that contains an argument don’t convey important ideas. 3. See How these i. Premise / Ultimate Conclusion Other Ideas Work Together Premise to Support the Ultimate Conclusion Inference Idea This is an idea This is the connection that that the holds between the idea(s) argument at the top of the arrow assumes to be Four Basic Patterns of Cooperation and the idea at the bottom true without of the arrow when the support. truth of the idea(s) at the Idea top is supposed to Combinations of Basic Patterns establish the truth of the Ultimate idea at the bottom. Conclusion (This is an argument diagram.) 2 For example: ii. Subconclusions “What’s your opinion of critical thinking? Critical Premise thinking helps us to understand how other people Idea think. Therefore, critical thinking is important.” Subconclusion Critical thinking helps us to This is an understand how other people Idea Inference intermediate idea Indicator think. on the way from the Expression premises to the (Conclusion ultimate conclusion. Indicator) Idea Critical thinking is important. Ultimate Conclusion For example: “What’s your opinion of critical thinking? Look at it this iii. Dependent Reasons way. Critical thinking helps us to understand the arguments that other people give. Thus, critical thinking helps us to understand how other people think. Therefore critical thinking is important.” Dependent Reasons Critical thinking helps us to understand the arguments that Neither idea can other people give. Idea + Idea support the conclusion alone but together they can Critical thinking helps us to understand how other people support the think. conclusion. Idea Critical thinking is important. For example: “Critical thinking helps us to understand how we iv. Independent Reasons think because in the process of assessing arguments, we clarify our own basic assumptions Inference Indicator and clarifying our own basic assumptions helps us Expression to understand how we think. I really enjoy teaching and studying critical thinking.” (Reason Independent Reasons Indicator) Each idea can support In the process of Clarifying our own basic Idea Idea the conclusion on its assessing arguments, we assumptions helps us to own. clarify our own basic + understand how we assumptions. think. This gives us independent lines Idea of reasoning. Critical thinking helps us to understand how we think. 3 Combinations of the For example: Four Basic Patterns “Critical thinking is important since it helps us to understand how other people think. It’s also For “What’s your opinion of critical thinking? Look important because it helps us to understand how example: at it this way. Critical thinking helps us to we think.” understand how other people think because it helps us to understand the arguments that other people give. Hence critical thinking is Critical thinking helps us to Critical thinking helps us important. In addition, in the process of understand how other people to understand how we assessing arguments, we clarify our own basic think. think. assumptions, and clarifying our own basic assumptions helps us to understand how we think, so critical thinking helps us to Critical thinking is important. understand how we think. I really enjoy teaching and studying critical thinking.” Combinations of the Four Basic Patterns III. Evaluating Arguments In the process Clarifying our of assessing own basic Critical thinking arguments, we assumptions •A good argument establishes the truth of helps us to clarify our own + helps us to its ultimate conclusion and gives its audience understand the basic understand how arguments that good reason to think that the ultimate assumptions. we think. other people give. conclusion is true. ☺ •A bad argument either doesn’t establish the Critical thinking helps Critical thinking helps us to understand how us to understand how truth of its ultimate conclusion or else other people think. we think. doesn’t give its audience good reason to think that the ultimate conclusion is true. Critical thinking is important. III. Evaluating Arguments 1. Appreciate the Structure of the Argument 1. Appreciate the Structure of • A good argument must have at the Argument least one good line of reasoning. 2. Evaluate the Premises • A good line of reasoning must 3. Evaluate the Inferences have all good premises and all 4. Assess the Argument good inferences. 4 For example: 2. Evaluate the Premises Idea ☺ Idea Idea ☺ 1. “Is this premise true?” ☺ ☺ ☺ - Here, we think with our own head. Idea Idea Idea 2. “Would most members of the argument’s audience, including people who don’t already Idea ☺+ Idea Idea ☺+ Idea ☺ Idea ☺+ Idea ☺ believe the ultimate conclusion, believe this ☺ ☺ ☺ premise?” - Here, we try to view the premise through Idea Idea Idea someone else’s eyes. 3. “Does the argument’s audience have good reason Idea Idea ☺ Idea Idea ☺ to believe this premise?” ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ • If one answer is “no,” the premise is bad. Idea Idea • If all answers are “yes,” the premise is good. For example: For example: Plausibly true and acceptable to audience. “Sometimes believing the truth isn’t very useful, but Can be believed only many people think that we should try to believe the False by someone who truth anyway. Such people maintain that it’s more already believes the ☺ ultimate conclusion important to have true beliefs than useful ones. Are Most We can’t know these people right? Well, first of all, philosophers philosophers for certain that think that our beliefs are think that useful beliefs are more important than useful true. beliefs are Anything true beliefs and anything that most philosophers more that most Having true think must be right. Second, having true beliefs is important philosophers beliefs is less important than less important that having useful beliefs. And finally, than true + think must be It’s pointless to beliefs. right. having useful even try to since we can’t know for certain that our beliefs are beliefs. believe the truth. true, it’s pointless to even try to believe the truth.” It’s more important that our beliefs be useful than that they be true. (Unstated) 3. Evaluate the Inferences The Bob Method Bob is a perfectly gullible, perfectly Reason (R) Reason (R) rational fellow. The inference is valid = If R were true e.g. Your then C would have to be true as well. ☺! neighbor is a Bob believes R. Martian. How likely is Bob to believe C? The inference is good = If R were true ≠ then C would probably be true as well. ☺ • If Bob is compelled to believe C, the inference is valid. ☺! Conclusion (C) e.g. Your • If Bob is inclined but not The inference is bad = Even if R were neighbor is an compelled to believe C, the Conclusion (C) true, C could very easily be false. extraterrestrial. inference is good. ☺ • If Bob is not at all inclined to believe C, the inference is bad. 5 The Bob Method For example: Bob is a perfectly gullible, perfectly ☺ Reason (R) rational fellow. Most We can’t know philosophers Weak inference for certain that e.g. Your think that Bob believes R. our beliefs are neighbor is a useful true. Martian. beliefs are Anything How likely is Bob to believe C? more that most Having true important philosophers beliefs is less than true + think must be important than It’s pointless to beliefs. right. having useful even try to beliefs. believe the truth. Conclusion (C) The Bob Method helps us to see the ☺ world as someone who accepts certain ☺! e.g.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Pragmatic Origins of Critical Thinking
    The Pragmatic Origins of Critical Thinking Abstract Because of the ancient origins of many aspects of critical-thinking, notably logic and language skills that can be traced to traditional rhetoric, it is easy to perceive of the concept of critical thinking itself as also being ancient, or at least pre-modern. Yet the notion that there exists a form of thinking distinct from other mental qualities such as intelligence and wisdom, one unique enough to be termed “critical,” is a twentieth-century construct, one that can be traced to a specific philosophical tradition: American Pragmatism. Pragmatism Pragmatism is considered the only major Western philosophical tradition whose geographical origin was not in Europe but the United States. Just as other schools of philosophy can be traced to a single individual (such as Phenomenology, the invention of which is generally credited to Germany’s Edmund Husserl), Pragmatism has its origin in the work of the nineteenth and early twentieth century American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. Son of Harvard professor of astronomy and mathematics Benjamin Peirce, Charles was trained in logic, science and mathematics at a young age in the hope that he would eventually grow to become America’s answer to Immanuel Kant. In spite of this training (or possibly because of it) Peirce grew to be a prickly and irascible adult (although some of his dispositions may have also been a result of physical ailments, as well as 1 likely depression). His choice to live with the woman who would become his second wife before legally divorcing his first cost him a teaching position at Johns Hopkins University, and the enmity of powerful academics, notably Harvard President Charles Elliot who repeatedly refused Peirce a teaching position there, kept him from the academic life that might have given him formal outlets for his prodigious work in philosophy, mathematics and science.
    [Show full text]
  • LOGIC and CRITICAL THINKING: the MISSING LINK in HIGHER EDUCATION in NIGERIA Chinweuba Gregory Emeka
    International Journal of History and Philosophical Research Vol.6, No.3, pp.1-13, July 2018 ___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org) LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING: THE MISSING LINK IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN NIGERIA Chinweuba Gregory Emeka (Ph.D) and Ezeugwu Evaristus Chukwudi (Ph.D) Philosophy Unit, General Studies Division, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, (ESUT) Enugu. ABSTRACT: Sustainable development and good living condition in the modern world are determined by people who possess more than normal reasoning abilities. The present Nigerian socio-political, economic and technological dilemma therefore results from the redundancy of mind paved by gross deficiency in logic and critical thinking competencies. This deficiency broadly stems from Nigerian poor educational system which has neglected acquisition of reflective and critical reasoning skills in theoretical and practical terms. This hampers critical competence, and results to irrational judgments, biased policies and dishonest governance. Consequently, problem solving and critical competence in various sectors of Nigerian existence have remained a mirage resulting to unsustainable development. This paper analytically investigates the meaning, cradle, essence, relevance and state of logic and critical thinking in Nigerian higher education and existence. The research finds that logic and critical thinking has been negligently relegated to one of those optional General Studies’ courses rarely needed to make up the required credit load. As such, not every department of education in Nigeria offers logic and critical thinking. This is coupled with the fact that in some Nigerian Higher Institutions, logic and critical thinking is managed by unqualified staff. The paper as well finds that knowledge of logic and critical thinking is indispensable in the daily human expressions, decisions, right choices and actions.
    [Show full text]
  • Leibniz on China and Christianity: the Reformation of Religion and European Ethics Through Converting China to Christianity
    Bard College Bard Digital Commons Senior Projects Spring 2016 Bard Undergraduate Senior Projects Spring 2016 Leibniz on China and Christianity: The Reformation of Religion and European Ethics through Converting China to Christianity Ela Megan Kaplan Bard College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2016 Part of the European History Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Kaplan, Ela Megan, "Leibniz on China and Christianity: The Reformation of Religion and European Ethics through Converting China to Christianity" (2016). Senior Projects Spring 2016. 279. https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2016/279 This Open Access work is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been provided to you by Bard College's Stevenson Library with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this work in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights- holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Leibniz on China and Christianity: The Reformation of Religion and European Ethics through Converting China to Christianity Senior Project submitted to The Division of Social Studies Of Bard College by Ela Megan Kaplan Annandale-on-Hudson, New York May 2016 5 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my mother, father and omniscient advisor for tolerating me for the duration of my senior project.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Thinking: Intellectual Standards Essential to Reasoning Well Within Every Domain of Human Thought, Part Two
    Critical Thinking: Intellectual Standards Essential to Reasoning Well Within Every Domain of Human Thought, Part Two By Richard Paul and Linda Elder In our last critical thinking column we introduced the idea of intellectual • I hear you saying “___.” Am I hearing you correctly, or have I misun- standards and pointed out that all natural languages are repositories for such derstood you? standards, which, when appropriately applied, serve as guides for assessing Accuracy: free from errors, mistakes or distortions; true, correct. human reasoning. We argued that intellectual standards are necessary for A statement can be clear but not accurate, as in “Most dogs weigh more cultivating the intellect and living a rational life, are presupposed in many than 300 pounds.” Thinking is always more or less accurate. It is useful to concepts in modern natural languages, and are presupposed in every subject assume that a statement’s accuracy has not been fully assessed except to the and discipline. In this column, the second in the series, we introduce and extent that one has checked to determine whether it represents things as explicate some of the intellectual standards essential to reasoning well through they really are. Questions that focus on accuracy in thinking include: the problems and issues implicit in everyday human life. • How could I check that to see if it is true? Some Essential Intellectual Standards • How could I verify these alleged facts? We postulate that there are at least nine intellectual standards important • Can I trust the accuracy of these data given the source from which they come? to skilled reasoning in everyday life.
    [Show full text]
  • An Outline of Critical Thinking
    AN OUTLINE OF CRITICAL THINKING LEVELS OF INQUIRY 1. Information: correct understanding of basic information. 2. Understanding basic ideas: correct understanding of the basic meaning of key ideas. 3. Probing: deeper analysis into ideas, bases, support, implications, looking for complexity. 4. Critiquing: wrestling with tensions, contradictions, suspect support, problematic implications. This leads to further probing and then further critique, & it involves a recognition of the limitations of your own view. 5. Assessment: final evaluation, acknowledging the relative strengths & limitations of all sides. 6. Constructive: an articulation of your own view, recognizing its limits and areas for further inquiry. EMPHASES Issues! Reading: Know the issues an author is responding to. Writing: Animate and organize your paper around issues. Complexity! Reading: assume that there is more to an idea than is immediately obvious; assume that a key term can be used in various ways and clarify the meaning used in the article; assume that there are different possible interpretations of a text, various implications of ideals, and divergent tendencies within a single tradition, etc. Writing: Examine ideas, values, and traditions in their complexity: multiple aspects of the ideas, different possible interpretations of a text, various implications of ideals, different meanings of terms, divergent tendencies within a single tradition, etc. Support! Reading: Highlight the kind and degree of support: evidence, argument, authority Writing: Support your views with evidence, argument, and/or authority Basis! (ideas, definitions, categories, and assumptions) Reading: Highlight the key ideas, terms, categories, and assumptions on which the author is basing his views. Writing: Be aware of the ideas that give rise to your interpretation; be conscious of the definitions you are using for key terms; recognize the categories you are applying; critically examine your own assumptions.
    [Show full text]
  • Presuppostions in the Slogans of Indonesian Universities
    PRESUPPOSTIONS IN THE SLOGANS OF INDONESIAN UNIVERSITIES Atika Puspasari Dosen Universitas Bina Darma Jalan Ahmad Yani No.12, Palembang Sur-el: [email protected] Abstract: The objectives of the study were to identify and analyze the presuppositions implied in the slogans of Indonesian universities which are listed in the General Directorate of Higher Education website, and to discuss pragmatic transfer found in the English version of those slogans. The objects of the study were slogans of Indonesian universities. The writer used documentation technique in collecting the data. Then, qualitative method with triangulation was applied by the writer in analyzing the data. The findings showed that existential, factive, and lexical potential presuppositions were implied in the analyzed slogans. Then, actual presuppositions provide clearer and better ideas of the implied messages in the slogans. Meanwhile, the writer did not find any pragmatic transfer in the English version of the slogans. Keywords: Slogans, Presuppositions, Pragmatic Transfer Abstrak: Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi dan menganalisis praanggapan yang terkandung dalam slogan universitas-universitas di Indonesia yang terdaftar pada website dirjen Dikti. Objek penelitian ini adalah slogan dari universitas-universitas yang ada di Indonesia. Penulis menggunakan teknik dokumentasi dalam pengumpulan data dan analisis data dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode kualitatif ditambah dengan triangulasi. Temuan dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa praanggapan yang terkandung dalam slogan tersebut adalah praanggapan existensial, factive , dan lexical. Kemudian, praanggapan aktual lebih memberikan ide yang lebih baik dan lebih jelas mengenai pesan yang terkandung di dalam slogan-slogan tersebut. Sedangkan temuan lainnya yaitu pragmatik transfer tidak ditemukan di dalam slogan-slogan universitas di Indonesia.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Thinking in the Classroom…And Beyond
    Critical Thinking in the Classroom…and Beyond Linda M. Murawski, EdD Adjunct Professor Department of Human Resources Development Graduate & Professional Studies Tusculum College Knoxville, Tennessee ABSTRACT Critical thinking in the classroom is a common term used by educators. Critical thinking has been called “the art of thinking about thinking” (Ruggiero, V.R., 2012) with the intent to improve one’s thinking. The challenge, of course, is to create learning environments that promote critical thinking both in the classroom and beyond. Teaching and practicing critical thinking provides adults with the opportunity to embrace and take charge of their learning. Adults engaged in critical thinking approach the classroom experience differently. Typically, students who implement critical thinking skills approach the courseware in a more thoughtful and effective manner, ask more challenging questions and participate in the learning process more intensely. This critical thinking process endures beyond the classroom and into the workplace. This session examines the background of critical thinking, its role in the classroom and beyond that to the workplace. INTRODUCTION of many years of research, analysis, teaching and practice, Ennis concluded that critical thinking is “focused on de- Critical thinking is a common course in college and uni- ciding what to believe or do,” (Ennis, p. 10). versity settings today. Frequently taught as a way to “im- prove” thinking, the art of critical thinking involves an Ennis separated critical thinking into two categories: dis- approach to thinking--more importantly to learning--that positions and abilities. The ideal critical thinker, in his embraces changing how one thinks about thinking. Criti- writings, is disposed to reach a “right” decision, present cal thinking incorporates how learners develop and apply that position honestly and clearly, consider others’ points thought to understand how thinking can be improved.
    [Show full text]
  • Logic and Critical Thinking Course Code: Phil 1011
    FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND HIGHER EDUCATION LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING COURSE CODE: PHIL 1011 By: Teklay G. (AkU), Adane T. (MU), and Zelalem M. (HMU) Page 1 LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING MODULE COURSE CODE: PHIL101 COURSE CRDIT HOURS: 3 PREPARED BY: Mr. TEKLAY G/MESKEL (AKSUM UNIVERSITY) Mr. ADANE TEKLAY (MEKELLE UNIVERSITY) Mr. ZELALEM MAMO (HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY) AUGUST 2019 ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA By: Teklay G. (AkU), Adane T. (MU), and Zelalem M. (HMU) Page 2 ORGANIZATION OF THE MODULE: 1. Module Introduction: - Teklay G. (AkU) 2. Chapter One: - Teklay G. (AkU) 3. Chapter Two: - Teklay G. (AkU) 4. Chapter Three: - Adane T. (MU) 5. Chapter Four: - Zelalem M. (HMU) 6. Chapter Five: - Zelalem M. (HMU) 7. Chapter Six: - Adane T. (MU) By: Teklay G. (AkU), Adane T. (MU), and Zelalem M. (HMU) Page 3 Table of Contents COURSE INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 8 COURSE OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 10 CHAPTER ONE ......................................................................................................................................... 11 INTRODUCING PHILOSOPHY ............................................................................................................... 11 Chapter Overview ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Theoretical, Empirical and Methodological Insights Into Critical Thinking
    University of Helsinki, Institute of Behavioural Sciences, Studies in Educational Sciences 260 Heidi Hyytinen LOOKING BEYOND THE OBVIOUS Theoretical, Empirical and Methodological Insights into Critical Thinking Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by due permission of the Faculty of Behavioural Sciences at the University of Helsinki in the seminar room 302 at Athena (Siltavuorenpenger 3 A) on the 22nd of May, 2015 at 12 o’clock. Helsinki 2015 Custos Professor Sari Lindblom-Ylänne, University of Helsinki Supervisors Professor Sari Lindblom-Ylänne, University of Helsinki Docent Katariina Holma, University of Helsinki and University of Eastern Finland Docent Auli Toom, University of Helsinki Emeritus Professor Richard Shavelson, Stanford University, USA Pre-examiners Lecturer, Dr Ben Kotzee, University of Birmingham, UK Associate Professor Jeffrey Greene, University of Maryland, USA Opponent Associate Professor Krista Muis, McGill, Canada Cover photo Teemu Ylikoski Unigrafia, Helsinki ISBN 978-951-51-0307-9 (pbk) ISBN 978-951-51-0308-6 (pdf) ISSN-L 1798-8322 ISSN 1798-8322 University of Helsinki, Institute of Behavioural Sciences, Studies in Educational Sciences 260 Heidi Hyytinen Looking Beyond the Obvious Theoretical, Empirical and Methodological Insights into Critical Thinking Abstract The central purpose of this doctoral thesis has been to deepen our understanding of the nature of critical thinking by combining theoretical, empirical and methodological perspectives. The concept of critical thinking has a central role both in research on the philosophy of education and in empirical research on learning and teaching in higher education. Although it is true that the philosophical and empirical analyses of critical thinking and knowledge differ fundamentally, the present thesis argues that there are shared concerns between these two scholarly traditions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts & Tools
    LIMITED DOWNLOAD COPY The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking CONCEPTS AND TOOLS By Dr. Richard Paul and Dr. Linda Elder The Foundation for Critical Thinking www.criticalthinking.org 707-878-9100 [email protected] LIMITED DOWNLOAD COPY Why A Critical Thinking Mini-Guide? This miniature guide focuses on of the essence of critical thinking concepts and tools distilled into pocket size. For faculty it provides a shared concept of critical thinking. For students it is a critical thinking supplement to any textbook for any course. Faculty can use it to design instruction, assignments, and tests in any subject. Students can use it to improve their learning in any content area. Its generic skills apply to all subjects. For example, critical thinkers are clear as to the purpose at hand and the question at issue. They question information, conclusions, and points of view. They strive to be clear, accurate, precise, and relevant. They seek to think beneath the surface, to be logical, and fair. They apply these skills to their reading and writing as well as to their speaking and listening. They apply them in history, science, math, philosophy, and the arts; in professional and personal life. When this guide is used as a supplement to the textbook in multiple courses, students begin to perceive the usefulness of critical thinking in every domain of learning. And if their instructors provide examples of the application of the subject to daily life, students begin to see that education is a tool for improving the quality of their lives. If you are a student using this mini-guide, get in the habit of carrying it with you to every class.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Critical Thinking: the Very Basics
    1 CRITICAL THINKING: THE VERY BASICS - HANDBOOK Dona Warren, Philosophy Department, The University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point I. RECOGNIZING ARGUMENTS An argument is a unit of reasoning that attempts to prove that a certain idea is true by citing other ideas as evidence. II. ANALYZING ARGUMENTS 1. Identify the ultimate conclusion (the main idea that the argument is trying to prove). Sometimes, this is unstated. 2. Determine which other ideas are important. An idea is important if it helps the argument to establish the truth of the ultimate conclusion. 3. Figure out how these other ideas work together to support the ultimate conclusion. Ideas work together according to four basic patterns of cooperation. Basic Patterns: i. Premise / Ultimate Conclusion Idea Premise - an idea that the argument assumes to be true % without support Inference - the connection that holds between the idea(s) at the top of the arrow and the idea at the bottom of the arrow when the truth of the idea(s) at the top is supposed % to establish the truth of the idea at the bottom - often indicated by conclusion indicator expressions like “therefore” and reason indicator expressions “because.” Idea Ultimate Conclusion – what the argument is ultimately % trying to prove. 2 ii. Subconclusions Idea Idea Subconclusion – an intermediate idea on the way from the % premises to the ultimate conclusion Idea iii. Dependent Reasons Idea + Idea Dependent Reasons – neither idea can support the % conclusion alone but together they can support the conclusion Idea iv. Independent Reasons Independent Reasons – each idea can support the Idea Idea conclusion on its own % Idea This gives us independent lines of reasoning.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking
    Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking Version 1.4 Matthew J. Van Cleave Lansing Community College Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking by Matthew J. Van Cleave is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Table of contents Preface Chapter 1: Reconstructing and analyzing arguments 1.1 What is an argument? 1.2 Identifying arguments 1.3 Arguments vs. explanations 1.4 More complex argument structures 1.5 Using your own paraphrases of premises and conclusions to reconstruct arguments in standard form 1.6 Validity 1.7 Soundness 1.8 Deductive vs. inductive arguments 1.9 Arguments with missing premises 1.10 Assuring, guarding, and discounting 1.11 Evaluative language 1.12 Evaluating a real-life argument Chapter 2: Formal methods of evaluating arguments 2.1 What is a formal method of evaluation and why do we need them? 2.2 Propositional logic and the four basic truth functional connectives 2.3 Negation and disjunction 2.4 Using parentheses to translate complex sentences 2.5 “Not both” and “neither nor” 2.6 The truth table test of validity 2.7 Conditionals 2.8 “Unless” 2.9 Material equivalence 2.10 Tautologies, contradictions, and contingent statements 2.11 Proofs and the 8 valid forms of inference 2.12 How to construct proofs 2.13 Short review of propositional logic 2.14 Categorical logic 2.15 The Venn test of validity for immediate categorical inferences 2.16 Universal statements and existential commitment 2.17 Venn validity for categorical syllogisms Chapter 3: Evaluating inductive arguments and probabilistic and statistical fallacies 3.1 Inductive arguments and statistical generalizations 3.2 Inference to the best explanation and the seven explanatory virtues 3.3 Analogical arguments 3.4 Causal arguments 3.5 Probability 3.6 The conjunction fallacy 3.7 The base rate fallacy 3.8 The small numbers fallacy 3.9 Regression to the mean fallacy 3.10 Gambler’s fallacy Chapter 4: Informal fallacies 4.1 Formal vs.
    [Show full text]