© 2005 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Pearson Longman Chapter 9: Critical Thinking PowerPoint by JoAnn Yaworski and Mimi Markus Bridging the Gap,

© 2005 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Pearson Longman

Chapter 9: Critical Thinking

PowerPoint by JoAnn Yaworski

and Mimi Markus

Bridging the Gap, 8/eBrenda Smith


In this Chapter You Will Learn about:

Critical thinkingCharacteristics of critical thinkersBarriers to critical thinking Categories of support for argumentsHow to recognize an argumentArgument fallaciesInductive and deductive reasoning


What Is Thinking?

Thinking is an organized and controlled mental activity that helps you solve problems, make decisions, and understand ideas.

Good thinkers:Form a planSystematically try different solutionsWork with confidencePersistently stick with task


Thinking Critically

Thinking critically is the process of deliberating in a purposeful, organized manner in order to assess the value of information, both old and new. Critical thinkers:

– Search– Compare– Analyze – Clarify– Evaluate– Conclude


Four Habits of Effective Critical Thinkers

Be willing to plan: Think first and write later. Don’t be impulsive. Develop a habit of planning.

Be flexible: Be open to new ideas. Consider new solutions for old problems.

Be persistent: Continue to work even when you are tired and discouraged. Good thinking is hard work.

Be willing to self-correct: Don’t be defensive about errors. Figure out what went wrong and learn from your mistakes.


Academic Goals for Students

Think systematicallyEvaluateDraw conclusions based on

logic


Terminology for Critical Thinking

Analogy Conclusion Argument

Consistency Induction Premise

Reliability Relevance Assertion

Believability Deduction Fallacy


Barriers to Critical Thinking

Frame of referenceWishful thinkingHasty moral judgementsReliance on authorityLabels


What Is an Argument?

An argument is an assertion that supports a conclusion and is intended to persuade(Ex: “You should water the grass tonight because

rain is not predicted for several days.”) Non-argumentative statements do not question truth

but simply offer information to explain and thereby help us understand(Ex: “The grass is wet because it rained last

night.”)


Steps in Analyzing an Argument

Step 1: Identify the position on the issueStep 2: Identify the supportStep 3: Evaluate the supportStep 4: Evaluate the argument


Step 1: Identify the Position on the Issue

Identify the conclusion. This is the position on the issue (the main point).

Key words that signal the issue:as a result in summaryconsequently it follows thatfinally thereforefor this reason thus


Step 2: Identify Support inthe Argument

Identify the significant details, called

premises, that support the main point.

Key words that signal significant premises:

Because assuming that

since given that

if first, second, finally


Categories of Support for Arguments - Part (1)

Facts: Objective truths– Ask: How were the facts gathered? Are they true?

Examples: Anecdotes to demonstrate the truth.– Ask: Are the examples true and relevant?

Analogies: Comparisons to similar cases.– Ask: Are the analogies accurate and relevant?

Authority: Words from a recognized expert.– Ask: What are the credentials and biases of the expert?


Categories of Support for Arguments - Part (2)

Causal relationship: Saying one thing caused another– Ask: Is it an actual cause or merely an association?

Common knowledge claim: Assertion of wide acceptance– Ask: Is it relevant? Does everyone really believe it?

Statistics: Numerical data– Ask: Do the numbers accurately describe the

population? Personal experiences: Personal anecdotes

– Ask: Is the experience applicable to other situations?


Step 3: Evaluate the Support

Evaluate the support according to three

levels of reasoning:

1. Relevance

2. Believability

3. Consistency


What Is a Fallacy?

A fallacy is an inference that appears to be reasonable at first glance, but closer inspection proves it to be unrelated, unreliable, or illogical.


Relevance Fallacies: Is the Support Related to the Conclusion? - Part (1)

Ad hominem: An attack on the person rather than the issue in hopes that if the person is opposed, the idea will be opposed

(Ex: Do not listen to Mr. Hite’s views on education because he is a banker.)

Bandwagon: The idea that everybody is doing it and you will be left out if you do not quickly join the crowd

(Ex: Everybody around the world is drinking Coke, so you should too)

Misleading analogy: A comparison of two things suggesting that they are similar when they are in fact distinctly different

(Ex: College students are just like elementary school students; they need to be taught self-discipline.)



Straw person: A setup in which a distorted or exaggerated form of the opponent’s argument is introduced and knocked down as if to represent a totally weak opposition

(Ex: When a teen-aged daughter is told she cannot go out on the weeknight before a test, she replies with “that’s unreasonable to say that I can never go out on a weeknight.”)

Testimonials: Opinions of agreement from respected celebrities who are not actually experts

(Ex: A famous actor endorses a headache pill.)



Transfer: An association with a positively or negatively regarded person or thing in order to lend the same association to the argument (also guilt or virtue by association)

(Ex: A local politician quotes President Lincoln in a speech as if Lincoln would have agreed with and voted for the candidate.)


Believability Fallacies: Is the Support Believable or Highly Suspicious?

Incomplete facts or card stackingMisinterpreted statisticsOvergeneralizationsQuestionable authority


Consistency Fallacies: Does the Support Hold Together or

Does it Fall Apart & Contradict Itself?

Appeals to emotionsAppeals to pityBegging the question or circular

reasoning OversimplificationSlippery slope


Step 4: Evaluate the Argument

Allow yourself time to go over the

arguments.

Halpern’s four different degrees of support:

1. Unrelated reasons give no support.

2. A few weak reasons do not adequately support.

3. Many weak reasons can support.

4. Strong related reasons provide support.


Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Inductive Inductive reasoners:

– Start by gathering data.

– Consider all available material.

– Formulate a conclusion.

DeductiveDeductive reasoners:

– Start with the conclusion of a previous experience.

– Apply it to a new situation.


Creative and Critical Thinking

Creative thinking is

the ability to generate

many possible

solutions to a problem.

Critical thinking is the

examination of these

solutions for the

selection of the best of

all possibilities.


Two Kinds of Creative Thinking

Vertical

Straightforward, logical thinking to solve a problem

Lateral

Thinking around the problem or even redefining the problem


Visit the Longman English Pages

http://www.ablongman.com/englishpages

Take a Road Trip to the American Southwest!

Visit the Critical Thinking and Analytical Reasoning module in your

Reading Road Trip CD-ROM for multimedia, tutorials, exercises, and tests.

Documents

© 2005 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Pearson Longman Chapter 9: Critical Thinking PowerPoint by JoAnn Yaworski and Mimi Markus Bridging the Gap,