Transcript Thinking Skills Chapter 2 Critical Thinking

Thinking Skills
Chapter 2
Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking


Critical thinking is reasonable, reflective
thinking focused on deciding what to believe
or do.
It involves using basic thinking skills and
processes to analyze arguments and
generate insight into particular meanings and
interpretations; to develop cohesive, logical
reasoning patterns and understand
assumptions and biases underlying particular
positions; and to attain a credible, concise,
and convincing style of presentation.
2
Concept of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking has been described in different
ways:




the evaluation of reasoning and arguments (Ruggiero)
reasonable, reflective thinking directed at deciding what
to believe or do (Ennis)
the application of standards to our judgments (Paul &
Elder)
What these conceptions of critical thinking have
in common is that before we accept a judgment,
we should be sure that it is supported by good
reasons. If it is not, we should not accept it.
3

The critical thinking skills that are the
most frequently needed in our personal
and professional lives, fall into two
categories:


skills related to basic information that we get from
a variety of sources, including media, textbooks,
other people, and even our own observations
(determining the accuracy of observation,
determining the reliability of sources).
skills related to inferences in which we draw
conclusions that we do not verify directly from
information offered as evidence to support them
(causal explanation, prediction, generalization,
and reasoning by analogy), or inferences in which
we deduce conclusions (conditional reasoning).
4
Goals of Critical Thinking


Critical thinking is considered essential for
democratic citizenship; the goal of teaching
critical thinking is to develop people who are
fair-minded, objective, and committed to
clarity and accuracy.
Every idea (or project) has its positive points
and negative ones. Critical thinking does not
mean to discover the negative points only in
your opponent’s idea or point of view. The
goal of critical thinking is to bring out the truth
even if it meant your loss.
5
Traits of Critical Thinker
1. Intellectual Humility (rational modesty): Awareness of the limits
of one’s knowledge, including sensitivity to
circumstances in which one’s native egocentrism is likely
to function self-deceptively; sensitivity to bias and
prejudice in, and limitations of one’s view point.
2. Intellectual Courage: The willingness to face and
assess fairly ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints to which we
have not given a serious hearing, regardless of our
strong negative reactions to them.
3. Intellectual Empathy(understanding) (Justice): recognizing
the need by imaginatively putting oneself in the place of
others to genuinely understand them, this will lead to an
intellectual justice.
6
4. Intellectual good Faith (Integrity or reliability ):
Recognition of the need to be true to one’s own
thinking, to be consistent (steady) in the intellectual
standards one applies, to hold one’s self to the
same thorough standards of evidence and proof to
which one holds one’s opponents.
5. Faith in Reason: Confidence that in the long
run one’s own thinking and higher interests and
those of humankind at large will be served best by
giving the freest play to reason, by encouraging
people to come to their own conclusions by
developing their own rational abilities.
7
6. Intellectual Independence: Critical thinking
is autonomous self-directed thinking, it is the
willingness to tackle all viewpoints
sympathetically kindly and to assess them with
the same intellectual standards without being
affected by one’s own feelings or interests, or
the feelings or interests of one’s friends,
community, or nation.
7. Intellectual Perseverance (persistence):
Willingness to pursue follow intellectual
insights visions and truths despite difficulties,
obstacles, and frustrations.
(
)
(
)
(
(
)
)
8
Skills Used in Critical Thinking

A wide range of skills in critical thinking have been
identified through the literature, e.g.:









Focusing on a question
Analyzing arguments
Judging the credibility of a source
Deducing and judging deductions
Observing and judging observation
Comparing, Classifying
Ordering, Representing
Summarizing, Restructuring, Predicting
Elaborating (explaining), Identifying attributes,
relationships.
9
Barriers of Critical Thinking
1. Lack of Information or Ignorance
Critical thinking involves the evaluation of information and its
conceptualization (forming ideas), application, analysis and
synthesis. Therefore, a critical thinker should have enough
liable (right) information to be able to achieve his/her goal.
2. Self Deception (tricking)
It is not easy to face our failure, many times we blame it on
others. By deceiving ourselves we won’t be able to analyze
our mistakes and treat them.
3. Reliance on Expert Opinion
Experts have their mistakes, and we can be intimidated and
influenced by their opinion. Being a critical thinker means
having a cautious skepticism and gullibility (innocence),
having an open mind while not allowing him/herself to be
conned (cheated). The critical thinker is able to recognize as
well as evaluate the adequacy and applicability of evidence.
10
4. Bias and Prejudice and Desire
Human action is grounded (stuck) in human motives and
motives are typically grounded in human desire and
perceived interest. We routinely categorize, make
assumptions, interpret, and infer from within a viewpoint
we use to advance our personal ends and desires. We
are, in a word, naturally prejudiced in our own favor. It
is not enough to be taught to be ethical, and respectful of
human rights. The mere conscious will to do good does
not remove prejudices which shape our perceptions or
eliminate the on-going drive to form them. To minimize
our egocentric (selfish) drives, we must develop critical
thinking in character as well. Indeed we must develop
and refine our intellectual skills as we develop and refine
our intellectual character, to embed (insert) the skills in our
character and shape our character through the skills.
11
Evaluating Evidence
1. Accuracy of Observation
Eyewitness accounts (explanations) are a special case of
primary source information based on direct observation.
In this instance, the conditions of observation, the use of
observation-enhancing instruments, the person’s
expectations of what he or she is seeing, and when the
report was recorded are all important.
2. The Person’s Expertise
The main source of information must be well informed
and expert on the subject in question. If we need a
medical information we should get it from a specialized
doctor or specialized journal.. and so on.
12
3. Disagreement or agreement among experts
It is a mistake to think that because someone is an expert in a
field, his or her judgment must be accurate. Experts often
disagree and may have vested interests (private) or biases.
Because the general public lacks technical expertise, it has no
way to determine who to believe. As a result, people tend to
reject expert analysis and believe what they want to believe.
A good critical thinker must weigh all factors and establish a pattern
of support for or against a source’s reliability (trustworthiness)
4. Conflicts of Interest
The believability of fact-finding efforts is sharply reduced
when the experts doing the fact-finding work are likely to
benefit personally by providing misleading information. In this
case, opponents and the general public are likely to doubt the
truthfulness or accuracy of the expert's conclusions--even if
the expert is acting reasonably.
13
5. Reputation / Lack of credibility (trustworthiness)
Sometimes, we get information about one of the
factors that influence credibility. We may find
out, for example, that an individual who provides
some important information on a current matter
may not have given accurate information in the
past. His past record casts some doubt on
whether he is a reliable source for the
information he is providing now. However, an
error in the past is not a sufficient support for
unreliability in the present. Also, the source of
professional and personal reputation is
important according to the type of information we
are gathering.
14
Finding resources: is about finding the
information you need to make decisions and
create solutions.
Knowing how to find information is
important because it arms you with
accurate information.
• Our study focus here will be on three
types of resources:
1- The internet.
2- The library.
3- Human resources.
•
1- Internet resources:

Searching the internet for resources
should not be confusing; you just
need to know what you are looking
for, and determine the best way to
find it.
First of all, you can start with
A. search engines:

 Examples of search engines:




http://www.google.com
www.alltheweb.com
www.yahoo.com
www.bing.com
 You can also go through many sites at one time. This type
of search engines called meta-search engines.
 Example of such sites:
www.surfwax.com
• Neither search engine can distinguish between good and bad
sites. They simply list everything they can find which meets
your search criteria.
B. Subject directories:


This method of information searching
is often useful and genuine, because
the sites the directories list, have been
chosen by qualified people. Thus, what
believed to be poor content, not listed.
Some directories hire experts in
various fields to write guides to their
chosen subjects, and also to provide
links to related sites.
 Example of such subject directories:
■ About.com (www.about.com): over 50,00
subjects with links to a million websites.
■ Academic Info (www.academicinfo.net):
consistently maintained to add free educational
resources (for late high school level and above)
while weeding out outdated ones.
■ Librarian’s Index (www.lii.org): over 11,000
Internet resources selected as “the best” by
librarians.
■ Infomine (www.infomine.ucr.edu): aimed at
university-level instructors and students, contains
115,000 Internet resources selected by university
librarians.
C. Encyclopedias:
•
The third way to find what are you looking for is searching
directly the internet on a site at which you believe the
information may be found.
•
Examples of Encyclopedias sites:
Wikipedia.org: a free access encyclopedia has its information
from the contribution of public users.
Xrefer.com: London-based reference book search engine;
searches over 50 encyclopedias, dictionaries (in many
categories), and thesauri
Encyclopedia.com: Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th edition
Britannica.com: the first few paragraphs of each article are free,
so if you need very basic facts, chances are you will get them; for
$50 per year you can have total access to the site
Encarta.com: some entire entries are free, others are blocked to
those who have not paid $69 per year for the CD-ROM or DVD
D. Dictionaries:

Dictionary.com: searches a dozen
dictionaries at one time, including American
Heritage (fourth edition),Webster’s Revised
Unabridged (1998), Princeton University’s
WordNet, and the CIA World Factbook.

M-W.com: Merriam Webster’s older
dictionaries searched free; for access to the
new eleventh edition, the annual fee is $14.95
(merriam-webstercollegiate.com).
Practice
Answer (T) true or (F) false for the
statements below.
___ 1. Search engines direct you to the best
sites about the subject you are
researching.
___ 2. Doing research on the Internet
sometimes costs money.
___ 3. Subject directories are created by
computers.
___ 4. Some search engines search many
other search engines at the same time.
___ 5. You can only find statistics at a library.
 Roadblock to Good Resources


The main roadblock, or obstacle of
conducting a good research is that sites with
poor contents reside side by side with
accurate and legitimate websites. Such sites
(illegitimate, poor content) may make fiction
posing as facts, or simply slipshod work, can
look like real work.
The best way to avoid reliance on poor
information is to be suspicious. Do not take
any information you find on the Internet as
truth until you can substantiate it with
duplicate information on at least three other
sites.
Practice:
•
You are building a house and need to decide how to
heat it. The contractor can put in a natural gas, or
electric furnace. You want to choose the option that is
the least expensive to operate. A search on the
Internet yields five results. Which website(s) will most
likely have the information you need to make a
decision?
1. www.epa.org: the Environmental Protection Agency
2. www.ashrae.org/: the Society of Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers
3. www.forestry.ext.edu: educational site about the
use of wood in home heating units
4. www.electricfurnaceswebe.com: retailer of electric
powered home heating units
5. www.energycodes.gov: Kansas State University’s
Engineering Extension website
2- The library (print resources)
•
We need library in our searching for
resources because internet doesn’t
always have everything.
•
There are three important reasons to do
research at the library:
A. librarians. They are trained
professionals who know how to find
what you are looking for, whether in
the stacks or online.
•
B. Reliability of information. Not all of the
information you find on the Internet is
accurate. Anyone can “publish” online, and it
is not always easy to distinguish between
reliable and unreliable websites. Many sites
containing bogus information appear
professional and well-written.
•
On the other hand, published books (printed
ones) that we find in the library have been
through many layers of safety nets before
they reach the shelves of a library. They are
typically written, edited, proofread, factchecked, published, and then selected by a
librarian for purchase.
C. Price. The use of a library, including
all of its electronic services, is free.
Some of the research resources on the
Internet are not. There are sites that
give away some information, but
charge for full access to their site.
Others will not let you in at all unless
you are a subscriber. Some Internet
resources charge prohibitively high
subscription prices, such as the Oxford
English Dictionary (currently $550 per
year). Libraries often pay these prices
and provide full access.
3. Going to the experts:
•
•
•
Sometimes, you can’t find out what you
need to know from a website or the library,
such as interest rates on mortgages that
change daily, in such cases, you need to
find a person or people who have the
information you are looking for.
Who are experts: Experts are simply
those who know their subjects and can be
relied upon to supply correct information.
They might know about it because they
have studied it or worked with it long
enough to be considered highly informed.
 Checking credentials:
•
•
o
o
before relying on an expert,
determine that the person has the
proper credentials.
Ask questions about where they are
getting their information from.
On what sources do they rely?
How are they qualified to provide
you with the information you are
looking for?
Practice:

The college you will attend in the fall has a rule
that all incoming freshman must take at least two
courses outside their major during their first year
at the school. After looking at the course catalog,
you determine that you only have room for one
such course. You need to know how steadfastly
the college maintains this rule. Must you drop a
course in your major, or can you take a required
course outside your major as a sophomore? How
will you get the information you need?
a. Write a letter to the President of the college
b. Check the school’s website
c. Look it up in the brochure
d. Call the registrar
Argument and Reasoning


Statement and Claims
For the purposes of critical thinking, all
sentences can be divided into those that can be
true or false, and those that cannot. Only a few
sentences cannot be true or false: commands
(Just do it!), exclamations (How beautiful!), and
questions (Why not?).
The vast majority of all sentences in critical
thinking are called statements or claims. Note
that you don’t need to know whether a statement
is true or false, just that it has the form of
sentences as “Before he died, Elvis was thinking
of becoming a vegetarian”.
31

Arguments
An argument is a series of statements used
to persuade someone of something. That
“something” is called the conclusion or a
claim. The first job in analyzing any
argument is to identify its conclusion. One
way to identify conclusions, or other parts of
an argument, is to look for their indicators.
32


Propositions (offers)
A proposition is a statement which is either
true or false. The proposition is the meaning
of the statement, not the precise arrangement
of words used to convey that meaning.
Premises
Premises (evidences) are statements that directly
support the conclusion; or to look at it another
way, the reasons for accepting the argument.
Premises are only premises in the context of
a particular argument; they might be
conclusions in other arguments.
33
I like Ahmad. Ahmad is a nice boy. So he will
receive a reward from his school, because
Ahmad is really smart boy.



You should always state the premises of the argument
explicitly. Failing to state your assumptions is often
viewed as suspicious, and will likely reduce the
acceptance of your argument.
The premises of an argument are often introduced with
words such as "Assume...", "Since...", "Obviously..." and
"Because...." It's a good idea to get your opponent to
agree with the premises of your argument before
proceeding any further.
The word "obviously" is also often viewed with suspicion.
It occasionally gets used to persuade people to accept
false statements, rather than admit that they don't
understand why something is 'obvious'. So don't be
afraid to question statements which people tell you are
'obvious' -- when you've heard the explanation you can
always say something like "You're right, now that I think
about it that way, it is obvious."
35


Inference
Once the premises have been agreed, the
argument proceeds via a step-by-step
process called inference.
In inference, you start with one or more
propositions which have been accepted; you
then use those propositions to arrive at a new
proposition. If the inference is valid, that
proposition should also be accepted. You can
use the new proposition for inference later
on.
36


Conclusion
Hopefully you will arrive at a proposition
which is the conclusion of the argument - the
result you are trying to prove. The conclusion
is the result of the final step of inference. It's
only a conclusion in the context of a particular
argument; it could be a premise or
assumption in another argument.
The conclusion is said to be affirmed(stated) on
the basis of the premises, and the inference
from them. Conclusions are often identified
by phrases like "therefore..." or "...implies
that”.
37
I like Ahmad. Ahmad is a nice boy. So he will
receive a reward from his school, because
Ahmad is really smart boy.
Types of Arguments
1. Deductive (logical) Argument:
Is generally viewed as the most precise and the
most persuasive. It is an argument in which the
premises provide (or appear to provide)
complete support for the conclusion.
 A good deductive argument is known as a valid
argument and is such that if all its premises are
true, then its conclusion must be true. If all the
argument is valid and actually has all true
premises, then it is known as a sound (thorough)
argument. If it is invalid or has one or more false
premises, it will be unsound.
39
Example
1. If you place wood in the fire, it will burn (i.e., if P
then Q)
2. This is a piece of wood (i.e., P)
3. Therefore, it will burn (i.e., Q)

If the premises are all true, then so is the
conclusion. In deductive terms, as an argument,
this is both valid and sound. Yet how do we
know that the premises are in fact true? This is
where inductive reasoning proves useful.
40
2. Inductive Argument
Is an argument such that the premises provide
(or appear to provide) some degree of support
(but less than complete support) for the
conclusion. Induction is usually described as
moving from the specific to the general.
Arguments based on experience or
observation is best expressed inductively.

1.
2.
3.
The reasoning might go something like this:
Most of French class students are English.
John is a student in the French class.
Therefore, John is English.
41


inductive generalization: when we
generalize form a number (n) of cases that
we know to be true, and infer that the same
thing will remain true in all future cases
involving what we believe to be wood and
fire.
argue causation: Inductive arguments are
evaluated according to the degree to which
the conclusion is probably true, as distinct
from conclusively true in deductive
arguments. In terms of validity, an inductive
argument is neither valid nor invalid.
42



1.
2.
3.
Inductive arguments are evaluated according to
the degree to which the conclusion is probably
true, as distinct from conclusively true in
deductive arguments. In terms of validity, an
inductive argument is neither valid nor invalid.
A good inductive argument is known as a
strong (or "cogent“ clear) inductive argument. It is
such that if the premises are true, the conclusion
is likely to be true.
Example:
All of French class students are English.
John is a student in the French class.
Therefore, John is English.
43
Spotting arguments



Spotting an argument is harder than spotting
premises or a conclusion. Lots of people shower
their writing with assertions, without even
producing anything you might reasonably call an
argument.
Sometimes people may state their conclusions
first, and then justify them afterwards. This is
valid, but it can be a little confusing.
A statement of the form "X because Y" can be
re-phrased as an equivalent statement, of the
form "Y therefore X."
44
Evaluating Arguments
1. Comprehending and using language with accuracy,
clarity and discrimination
The critical thinker should notice the language used in
the argument, it should be clear and comprehensive.
The words should be precise and do not imply other
meanings. The critical thinker should also distinguish
the emotional words used which may affect his/ her
judgment.
2. Distinguishing between facts and opinions
It is very important to be able to distinguish between
facts and opinions, we may argue to reject or accept
opinions, but we can’t argue with facts.
45
Practice:

Label each statement as either (F) fact or (O)
opinion.
___ 1. The USA is bigger in size than the UAE.
___ 2. Ice cream is the most delicious dessert.
___ 3. I went to London for a vacation last year.
___ 4. Putting money in the stock market is a bad idea.
3. Applying integrated (unified) information
The critical thinker should be able to distinguish if his
opponent’s arguments have contradictory information. At
the same time he should check his argument and use
only integrated information.
4. The sufficiency of premises
Depending on the argument in question, we should have
enough premises to reach to a certain conclusion. Take
the following example:
 Premises 1: Fatima is a student in UAEU
 Premises 2: Fatima is taking a thinking skills course
 Conclusion: Therefore, Fatima is majoring in Education
As we notice in the previous example, the sentences are
clear, facts, integrated, yet they are not enough to reach
to that conclusion.
47
Logical Fallacies


Logical fallacies are errors that occur in
arguments.
Every argument makes some assumptions. A
convincing argument makes only warranted
assumptions, i.e., its assumptions are not
questionable or false. So, fallacies of
assumption make up one type of logical
fallacy.
48
1. The Bandwagon Fallacy (Peer Pressure)
The Bandwagon is a fallacy in which a threat of rejection by
one's peers (or peer pressure) is substituted for evidence
in an "argument. "Example:
Joe: "Bill, I know you think that 1+1=2. But we don't
accept that sort of thing in our group. "
Bill: "I was just joking. Of course I don't believe that."
Salem: I like tennis, I think tennis is a good sport.
Khalid: What! Tennis is for girls, only weak boys like
tennis.
Ahmad: I don’t like anyone likes tennis. Soccer is for
champs.
Salem: Oh! You’re right, soccer is better. I hate
tennis.
49
It should be noted that loyalty to a group and the need to belong can
give people very strong reasons to conform to the views and
positions of those groups. Further, from a practical standpoint we
must often compromise our beliefs in order to belong to groups.
However, this feeling of loyalty or the need to belong simply does
not constitute evidence for a claim.
2. Straw Man Fallacy

One of the characteristics of a cogent refutation (rejection) of an
argument is that the argument one is refuting is not represented
fairly and accurately. To distort or misrepresent an argument one is
trying to refute is called the straw man fallacy. It doesn't matter
whether the misrepresentation or distortion is accidental and due to
misunderstanding the argument or is intentional and aimed at
making it easier to refute. Either way, one commits the straw man
fallacy.
In other words, the attacker of a straw man argument is refuting a
position of his own creation, not the position of someone else. The
refutation may appear to be a good one to someone unfamiliar with
the original argument.
50
Example on the Straw man fallacy:
 Bill and Jill are arguing about cleaning out their closets:
Jill: "We should clean out the closets. They are getting a bit
messy."
Bill: "Why, we just went through those closets last year. Do we have
to clean them out everyday?"
Jill: "I never said anything about cleaning them out every day. You
just want too keep all your junk forever, which is just ridiculous.“
3. False Dilemma
A False Dilemma is a fallacy in which a person uses the following
pattern of "reasoning":
Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be
false).
Claim Y is false.
Therefore claim X is true.
This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be
false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is
false.
Example on False Dilemma:
1. Bill: "Jill and I both support having prayer in
public schools."
2. Jill: "Hey, I never said that!"
3. Bill: "You're not an atheist are you Jill?“
Example 2:
1. Bill is dead or he is alive.
2. Bill is not dead.
3. Therefore Bill is alive.
4. Appeal to Pity
An Appeal to Pity is a fallacy in which a person substitutes a
claim intended to create pity for evidence in an argument.
Example: “You must accept that 1+1=46, after all I'm dying..."
While you may pity me because I am dying, it would hardly
make my claim true.
Example of a case in which a claim evokes pity and also serves
as legitimate evidence:
 Professor: "You missed the midterm, Bill."
 Bill: "I know. I think you should let me take the makeup."
 Professor: "Why?"
 Bill: "I was hit by a truck on the way to the midterm. Since I had
to go to the emergency room with a broken leg, I think I am
entitled to a makeup."
 Professor: "I'm sorry about the leg, Bill. Of course you can
make it up."
53
5. Burden of Proof (Argument from Ignorance)
Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of
proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version
occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken
to be evidence for side B in cases in which the
burden of proof actually rests on side B. A
common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance.
As an example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on
those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot (Yeti),
psychic (mental) powers, universals, and sense data).
John: "I think that some people have psychic powers."
Edward: "What is your proof?"
John : "No one has been able to prove that people do not
have psychic powers."
54
6. Personal Attack
A personal attack is committed when a person
substitutes abusive (rude) remarks for evidence when
attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of
"reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at
the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The
truth value of a claim is independent of the person
making the claim. After all, no matter how repugnant
(distasteful) an individual might be, he or she can still make true
claims.
In general, it is best to focus one's attention on the
content of the claim and not on who made the claim. It is
the content that determines the truth of the claim and not
the characteristics of the person making the claim.
Dave says that we should pay our share of taxes to the
company. But he is untrustworthy, so it must be wrong to
do that.
55
7. Poisoning the Well
This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to
discredit (dishonor) what a person might later claim
by presenting unfavorable information (be it
true or false) about the person. This
"argument" has the following form:
 Unfavorable information (be it true or false)
about person A is presented.
 Therefore any claims person A makes will be
false.
- Example: “Don't listen to him, he's fake”.
56

8. Diverting the Attention (Evading the
Issue)
This type of fallacy occurs when the person
does not have a valid proof for his/ her
argument, or if he/she does not wish to present
the information in hand.
The person diverts his opponent attention and
moves to another topic. This diversion could be
very smooth and involve interesting topics that
most of times people do not notice it.
57
Rules of Presenting a Convincing Argument
1. Respect your opponent and the opinions of others,
remember always that respect generates respect and
disrespect generates disrespect.
2. Understand your opponent opinions/ points of view, and
identify their strengths as well as weaknesses. Strive to be
fair-minded in evaluating all points of view.
3. All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and
consequences, Trace the implications and consequences
that follow from your reasoning. Search for negative as well
as positive implications. Consider all possible
consequences
58
4. Respecting diversity of culture, socioeconomic
variations, take into account the feelings, beliefs,
and thoughts of other people.
5. Have a positive direction. Don’t argue against a
certain view point if you can’t offer an alternative
for it.
6. Do not deny facts associated with certain
arguments, even if these facts may weaken your
position. Search for information that opposes
your position as well as information that supports
it. Make sure that all information used is clear,
accurate, and relevant to the question at issue.
59
7. Admit strong points in your opponent argument, this will
increase your creditability. Be open-minded: seriously
consider other points of view and be willing to consider
changing one's own position.
8. Do not exaggerate in presenting your argument, people
have short attention span. Few strong arguments have
more affect than long, boring, and probably weak ones.
9. Present suitable argument for your specific audience.
Be aware of your audience’s interest to be able to
present a good argument.
10. Do not use an argument unless you believe in it and
have sufficient evidence to do so. Restrict your claims to
those supported by the data you have. Withhold
judgment/argument when the evidence and reasons are
not sufficient to do so.
60
Table 2: Examples of strategies students could use to
improve their critical thinking abilities
Strategies to improve critical thinking
From: Chaffee (1997)
Ask yourself key questions. e.g.,:
What is the issue?
What is the evidence?
What are the arguments?
Are the evidence and arguments sound?
Check the argument for
fallacies
empirical generalizations
false generalizations
Identify the words that cue in an argument
Use mind maps to clarify your conceptualization
61
End of Chapter 2
62