CRWT111 (FINALS)

• Critical thinking


  Reasonable reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do
• A critical thinker


  • Determines the relevance and importance of ideas
  • Understands the connection between ideas
  • Identifies inconsistencies in reasoning
  • Recognizes, appraises, and builds arguments
  • Reflects on the justification of his own beliefs
  • Approaches problem solving in a systematic way, favoring objectivity over subjectivity
• Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

  Critical thinking is that mode of thinking–about any subject, content, or problem–in which the thinker improves the quality of his thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them
• 2 key ingredients of critical thinking

  • Reflective thinking (thinking about your own thinking)
  • Thinking done well (high standards of reasoning)
• 3 components of critical thinking (Paul-Elder)

  • Element of thought
  • Intellectual standards
  • Intellectual traits (consistent and disciplined application)
• Elements of Thought


  • All reasoning has a purpose
  • All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some questions, to solve a problem
  • All reasoning is based on assumptions
  • All reasoning is from some point of view
  • All reasoning is based on data, information, experiences and evidence
  • All reasoning is expressed through concepts and ideas
  • All reasoning contains inferences by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data
  • All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences
• Universal Intellectual Standards


  • Clarity: a clear statement
  • Accuracy: a statement that is true
  • Precision: to give the details needed for someone to understand exactly what is meant
  • Relevance: it is directly connected with the issue at hand
  • Depth: we think deeply when we get beneath the surface of an issue or problem, identify the complexities inherent in it, and deal with those complexities
  • Breadth: we think in a broad way. Failure to give due consideration to various perspectives makes our thinking narrow-minded
  • Logic: thoughts must be mutually supporting and make sense in combination – making it logical
  • Significance: we must identify which information is important to take into account
  • Fairness: to think fairly in context, to think objectively or in accord with reason
• Valuable Intellectual Traits


  • Intellectual Humility: acknowledging your biases and the limits of your knowledge
  • Intellectual Courage: questioning popular or long-held beliefs in the face of new information
  • Intellectual Empathy: considering others' perspectives in order to reconstruct their viewpoints
  • Intellectual Integrity: hold yourself to the same rigorous standards of thinking to which you hold others
  • Intellectual Perseverance: continue to struggle to gain understanding
  • Intellectual Autonomy: independently think through problems
  • Confidence in Reason: rely on the critical thinking process and trust its results
  • Fair Mindedness: strive to treat every viewpoint in an unbiased way
• Barriers of Critical Thinking

  • Egocentrism: the tendency to see reality as centered on oneself
  • Sociocentrism: group-centered thinking. It can hinder rational thinking by focusing excessively on the group
  • Unwanted Assumptions and Stereotypes
  • Relativistic Thinking: the view that truth is a matter of opinion
  • Wishful thinking: believing something because it makes one feel good, not because there is good reason for thinking that is true
• Statement


  A sentence that can be viewed as true or false
• Argument


  A claim defined with reasons that are supported by evidence. Composed of one or more premises and a conclusion
• What is NOT an Argument

  • Reports: to convey information about a subject
  • Unsupported assertions: what a speaker believes; can be true, false, rational, or irrational
  • Conditional statements: an "if-then" statement
  • Illustrations: provides examples of a claim, rather than supporting/proving the claim
  • Explanations: shows why something is the case, not to prove that it is the case
• 4 Basic Tests to Distinguish Arguments - Explanations

  • The Common-Knowledge Test
  • The Past-Event Test
  • The Author's Intent Test
  • The Principle of Charity
• Toulmin Method


  Used for analyzing and formulating arguments
• 6 Major Components of the Toulmin Method

  • Claim
  • Grounds
  • Warrant
  • Backing
  • Qualifier
  • Rebuttal
• Claim


  The assertion that the author would like to prove to their audience
• Types of Claims


  • Claim of Fact: it debates whether the statement of the claim is correct or incorrect, valid or invalid, true or false
  • Claim of Value: it asserts qualitative judgments along a good-to-bad continuum relating to persons, events, and things in one's environment
  • Claim of Policy: it asserts that something should or should not be done by someone or something. It proposes that some specific course of action should, but not necessarily will, be taken
• Grounds


  The evidence and facts that help support the claim
• Warrant


  The assumption that links the grounds to the claim
• Backing


  Any additional support of the warrant
• Qualifier


  Shows that a claim may not be true in all circumstances
• Qualifier


  • Character: the extent of an argument's presumed reach. The use of modals will help establish the character of the argument
  • Scope: entails such considerations as whether the proposition is thought to be true always or just sometimes. Is the claim being made supposed to apply in all instances or just in some?
• Rebuttal


  An acknowledgement of another valid view of the situation
• Critical thinking


  Reasonable reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do
• A critical thinker


  • Determines the relevance and importance of ideas
  • Understands the connection between ideas
  • Identifies inconsistencies in reasoning
  • Recognizes, appraises, and builds arguments
  • Reflects on the justification of his own beliefs
  • Approaches problem solving in a systematic way, favoring objectivity over subjectivity
• Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

  Critical thinking is that mode of thinking–about any subject, content, or problem–in which the thinker improves the quality of his thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them
• 2 key ingredients of critical thinking

  • Reflective thinking (thinking about your own thinking)
  • Thinking done well (high standards of reasoning)
• 3 components of critical thinking (Paul-Elder)

  • Element of thought
  • Intellectual standards
  • Intellectual traits (consistent and disciplined application)
• Elements of Thought


  • All reasoning has a purpose
  • All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some questions, to solve a problem
  • All reasoning is based on assumptions
  • All reasoning is from some point of view
  • All reasoning is based on data, information, experiences and evidence
  • All reasoning is expressed through concepts and ideas
  • All reasoning contains inferences by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data
  • All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences
• Universal Intellectual Standards


  • Clarity: a clear statement
  • Accuracy: a statement that is true
  • Precision: to give the details needed for someone to understand exactly what is meant
  • Relevance: it is directly connected with the issue at hand
  • Depth: we think deeply when we get beneath the surface of an issue or problem, identify the complexities inherent in it, and deal with those complexities
  • Breadth: we think in a broad way. Failure to give due consideration to various perspectives makes our thinking narrow-minded
  • Logic: thoughts must be mutually supporting and make sense in combination – making it logical
  • Significance: we must identify which information is important to take into account
  • Fairness: to think fairly in context, to think objectively or in accord with reason
• Valuable Intellectual Traits


  • Intellectual Humility: acknowledging your biases and the limits of your knowledge
  • Intellectual Courage: questioning popular or long-held beliefs in the face of new information
  • Intellectual Empathy: considering others' perspectives in order to reconstruct their viewpoints
  • Intellectual Integrity: hold yourself to the same rigorous standards of thinking to which you hold others
  • Intellectual Perseverance: continue to struggle to gain understanding
  • Intellectual Autonomy: independently think through problems
  • Confidence in Reason: rely on the critical thinking process and trust its results
  • Fair Mindedness: strive to treat every viewpoint in an unbiased way
• Barriers of Critical Thinking

  • Egocentrism: the tendency to see reality as centered on oneself
  • Sociocentrism: group-centered thinking. It can hinder rational thinking by focusing excessively on the group
  • Unwanted Assumptions and Stereotypes
  • Relativistic Thinking: the view that truth is a matter of opinion
  • Wishful thinking: believing something because it makes one feel good, not because there is good reason for thinking that is true
• Statement


  A sentence that can be viewed as true or false
• Argument


  A claim defined with reasons that are supported by evidence. Composed of one or more premises and a conclusion
• What is NOT an Argument

  • Reports: to convey information about a subject
  • Unsupported assertions: what a speaker believes; can be true, false, rational, or irrational
  • Conditional statements: an "if-then" statement
  • Illustrations: provides examples of a claim, rather than supporting/proving the claim
  • Explanations: shows why something is the case, not to prove that it is the case
• 4 Basic Tests to Distinguish Arguments - Explanations

  • The Common-Knowledge Test
  • The Past-Event Test
  • The Author's Intent Test
  • The Principle of Charity
• Toulmin Method


  Used for analyzing and formulating arguments
• 6 Major Components of the Toulmin Method

  • Claim
  • Grounds
  • Warrant
  • Backing
  • Qualifier
  • Rebuttal
• Claim


  The assertion that the author would like to prove to their audience
• Types of Claims


  • Claim of Fact: it debates whether the statement of the claim is correct or incorrect, valid or invalid, true or false
  • Claim of Value: it asserts qualitative judgments along a good-to-bad continuum relating to persons, events, and things in one's environment
  • Claim of Policy: it asserts that something should or should not be done by someone or something. It proposes that some specific course of action should, but not necessarily will, be taken