DOCSLIB.ORG

Critical Thinking in the Teaching of Linguistics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Critical Thinking in the Teaching of Linguistics International Conference on Social Science and Technology Education (ICSSTE 2015) Critical Thinking in the Teaching of Linguistics Liu Jianwen School of Foreign Languages, Wuhan Polytechnic University, Wuhan, 430024, China Abstract: Theories of every discipline are rooted in goal? Philosophers are always optimistic, philosophy and require critical thinking to get them because they’re never afraid of questions--they through. Studies in linguistics are no exception. This were born to think about, propose and solve paper, taking perspectives of segmentation and problems. This deserves our respect: their rationality, presents analysis of one problem—the courage and unique perspective in thinking. So conflict between the Cooperative Principle and its the inspiration for us is: as long as we’re willing maxims—the violations of maxims and the observation to and dare to think, there is always the way to of the Cooperative Principle, which obsesses many understand and solve problems. This article beginners of linguistics; from this discussion, we can aims to clear the following confusion in college find that some linguistic theories (pragmatic theories in students’ learning linguistics, which is particular) develop from and therefore are rooted in concerned with Grice’s Cooperative philosophy. So, when we deal with some linguistic Principle--if principle should be followed but at theories, we should not only observe them for the sake the same time violated, then it contradicts with of linguistics superficially, but also find out their the law of identity. (Zhao Yanchun, 2005: 76) philosophical background to help us get a thorough That confuses many beginners of linguistics--if understanding of them; during this process, we should only the maxims or submaxims are violated learn to think about, analyze and solve linguistic while the general principle is abode by, then it is problems philosophically. illogical. Of course, that is not what Grice meant Key words: Critical Thinking; the Teaching of by proposing Cooperative Principle. Linguistics; Cooperative Principle; Segmentation; II. The ‘Conflict’ in the Cooperative Intentionality; Principle I. Introduction Cooperative Principle (CP for short) is one Be is one of the most discussed topics in of the fundamental theories of linguistics, western philosophy. The philosophical study of pragmatics in particular, which needs no it begins with and forms ontology-- “What is detailed introduction here. As a linguistics being? What is the nature of the world”. When teacher, I found that the question confuses most there is no desired answers, the study turns to college students is: Grice discusses the the second phase--epistemology (i.e., How do violations of maxims after explaining CP. We humans interpret being? What is the relation know that the observance of CP is the premise between thinking and being, and what is the of successful conversations. So, how could the source, capability and limit of human’s maxim(s) (which will result in implicature) be knowledge?) (Qian Guanlian, 1999: 9). Can violated at the same time CP observed? Here is philosopher, especially philosophers of language, where critical thinking words. I will analyze this find the desired answers to them? Are they phenomenon from the following two avoiding those questions or approaching their perspectives: segmentation and intentionality. © 2015. The authors - Published by Atlantis Press 176 1. Segmentation wrongdoings. In the second phase of generative grammar, (Li Xinhua, 2000: 63) (i.e., Standard Theory), Chomsky put forward Obviously, this is a transferred epithet. It is the hypotheses of ‘deep structure’ and ‘surface the thief not the confess that trembles. This structure’ to get a deeper understanding of the makes sense to us, but why can we get such an structures of sentences. This double structure understanding? This problem can be solved with became the core concepts in the period of his the concept of double structure. Now we will theory. In fact, before Chomsky, some rewrite the the sentence (in the form of surface philosophers and linguists have expressed structure) with its two deeper structures: similar ideas. Wittgenstein discussed the relation a. The thief did wrong doings. between deep grammar and surface grammar; b. The thief made a confession. Hockeet also adopted similar concepts in A c. The thief was trembling when he made a Course in Modern Linguistics. All they try to confession. say is that we should differentiate what is From the analysis above, this transferred expressed directly and what is expressed epithet violates both Quality maxim and indirectly. (editorial board of Foreign Languages Quantity maxim on the surface level, but it Research, 1982: 87) Withe the same purpose, abides by Cooperative Principle on the deep Chomsky discussed ambiguity with similar level. This accords with human cognition. We approach in his syntactic analysis (ibd.: 93) can regard expressions on the surface level as This binary division gives us such a the result of the transformation and combination thought: we should segment or reduce questions of the three expressions on the deep structure. we face to their most base forms. The following The double structures of both rhetorical device is an example of lexical rhetorical device. E.g.: and Cooperative Principle can be analyzed The thief made a trembling confess of his respectively and shown in the following table: Table 1: two levels of structure in the violations of Grciean maxims in stylistic lexical devices: Two levels of structure Surface structure Deep structure Lexical stylistic devices What is literally said/written What is implied Gricean maxims (in lexical One or more Gricean maxims are The CP is observed at a deep stylistic devices) violated level (Liu Jianwen, 2009: 154) As we know, many rhetorical devices have implicature, as a media, bridges the gap between both literal meaning and implied meaning. This lexical stylistic devices and Gricean maxims, for accords with the violation of one or more implicature itself is a kind of implied meaning Gricean maxims on the surface level and the (Hu Zhuanglin, 2001). In fact, almost all the observance of CP on the deep level. The end of examples of lexical rhetorical devices are the double structure is implied meaning and justified to be analyzed from the perspective of conversational implicature, which are same in the violations Gricean maxims. So, the critical nature. In the above table, when Gricean thinking, segmentation here is vital in maxims are violated, observing the CP at a deep understanding and mastering the theory of level, implicature is generated. Note that conversational implicature. 177 2. Intentionality communication, lexical stylistic devices, either After the linguistic turning of philosophy, in written or spoken form, help people meaning becomes the centre topic of it. communicate effectively aided by their aesthetic Philosophers see the speakers’ intention as the function via violating Gricean maxims of the CP main component of meaning. (Qian, 2005: 65) literally and on purpose. Many examples of the Rationality and intentionality, accordingly, violations of Gricean maxims given, it is not become the core concepts in Grice’s theory of difficult to find that there is a double-structure conversational implicature. “intentionality is in both of lexical stylistic devices and Gricean one of the most important concepts in Grice’s maxims. These two structures can be connected theory of meaning, and it decides the meaning by conversational implicature, whose generation of conversations.” (Xu Guangwu, 2006: 7) helps realize the aesthetic function of lexical Besides, Grice mentioned “rational” and stylistic devices. “rationalist” several times. Those two concepts III .CONCLUSIONS are very helpful in answering the question we From what we discuss above, it is no raised at the beginning of this article. Theories difficult to say that if we do not explain some of meaning, in its philosophical sense, attach linguistic theories with critical thinking (be it great importance to the elements of humans, the philosophical background or else), it will be such as rationality and intentionality in difficult to for our students take in those theories. particular. That’s because human activities, The reasons are easy: most linguistic theories including speech acts, are done with specific (pragmatic theories in particular) are rooted in purposes. Speech acts are carried out to philosophy (especially philosophy of language). communicate and therefore, they carry the This is also an inevitable outcome of the speakers’ intention and are “governed” by linguistic turn of philosophy, although the rationality. Hou (Hou Guojin, 2006: 11) points philosophers (of language) did not meant to out that “both Grice’s and Searle’s theories can analyze philosophy in this way. It brings us very be called theories of rationality or intentionality. useful implications about Linguistics teaching: Whether the two parties of speech acts we should encourage the students to think cooperate or not agrees with their intention.” critically, to see through the appearance of some Therefore, we provide the following solution to linguistic theories to perceive the essence of the problem confusing college students: if the them; what’s more, students should learn to seemingly intro-linguistic (purely concerned think and analyze questions to finally solve with language) non-cooperation expressions them. Therefore, in teaching linguistics, what is transmit the speakers’ intention, that is to say, as more important than linguistic theories is the long as the two parties can communicate with critical thinking beneath them. Only in this way each other successfully, they should be regarded can we help them to know what is the main as cooperative. Now it’s clear that this type of content of a specific theory as well as why it is critical thinking about rationality or so. intentionality can help the students better understand and master the concerned linguistic theories. Broadly speaking, as a special form of 178 References: [1] Grice, H. P. Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. & J. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts[C].
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]