Critical Thinking

Process
weighing arguments, asking for definitions, evaluating information, looking for proof, questioning assumptions, making judgements…above all, asking questions

 

Good vs. bad critical thinking: 
Good:  strives to understand different points of view, keeps an open mind, unbiased or aware of one’s own biases
Bad:  one-sided, based on emotion rather than reason, unsupported assumptions, refuses to question deeply

Key terms:  logic, reason, evidence, assumptions, values

 

Checklist for good critical thinking about an issue

• Summarize accurately the different points of view about this issue
• Analyze the evidence and support for each point of view
• Evaluate the quality of the evidence and reasons
• Decide if you need further information to make a good judgement
• Acknowledge the influence of your own biases and assumptions

 

Application
Select a current controversial issue

• Define the issue in the form of a question
• List two or more supporting claims
• List reasons and evidence supporting each claim
• Evaluate  the reasons – based on factual evidence, assumptions or values
• Evaluate the claims, bearing in mind your own biases and values

 

 

 

Critical Reading

 

Preview

• Title, Author, Publication
• Graphics, Headings, Subheads
• First/Last paragraphs – read for topic/issue/claim

 

Read/Respond/Annotate

• Claim, main supporting points, evidence
• Organization *
• Assumptions
• Tone
• Your response

 

Review

• Outline/mapping
• Summary
• Written or verbal response

 

 

*Organizational Devices

• Deductive

 Inductive

• Simple listing
• Cause effect
• Chronological
• Comparison/contrast
• Position/proposal

Annotating an Argument

 

Definition of annotating:

• to take notes while you read, about the organization, style, content and your own response to the reading. 

• This does not mean using a highlighter or underlining copiously

 

• Your primary activity will be in making comments and notes.  Underline sparely.

 

Some guidelines:

• Use the margin as a way to outline the key points or stages in the argument

 

• Pay close attention to the title, and the first and last paragraphs

• Indicate what you think the claim is – by underlining, marking in the margin

 

• Pay attention to the topic sentences of paragraphs

• Write questions you have in the margin/note points you don/t understand

 

• Make connections with other things you have read or thought about

• If you have annotated well, you should have the skeleton of an outline of the argument

 

 

The Claim

 The claim is what the writer is trying to prove.  It represents his or her position on the issue. Claims may be of fact or value.

Claims of fact
Claims of fact assert that a condition has existed, exists, or will exist and their support consists of factual information – such as statistics, examples, and testimony that most responsible observers assume can be verified. 

Supporting a fact claim

• Be sure the claim is clearly stated, preferably at the beginning of your paper
• Define terms that may be ambiguous or controversial
• Make sure your evidence is sufficient, accurate, recent, typical and reliable
• Make clear when conclusions about the data are inferences or interpretations, not facts.
• Emphasize your most important evidence by placing it near the beginning or end of your paper

Claims of value
Claims of value express approval or disapproval.  They attempt to prove that some action, belief, or condition is right or wrong, good or bad, beautiful or ugly, worthwhile or undesirable.  Some claims of value are simply expressions of taste.  Many can be defended or attacked on the basis of standards that measure the worth of an action, a belief or an object.  In order to defend a claim or value, a writer should establish the criteria or standards on which his or her judgement is based.

Supporting a value claim

• Try to make clear that the values or principles you are defending are important and relatively more significant than other values.
• Suggest that adherence to the values you are defending will bring about good results in some specific situations or bad results if respect for the values is ignored.
• Since value terms are abstract, use examples and illustrations to clarify meanings and make distinctions.
• Use testimony of others to prove that knowledgeable or highly regarded people share your values.

 

Reading to Understand Argument Organization

Beginning/Middle/End

 

What does the writer do in each section of the argument?

Are the techniques effective?  Could they be improved?

 

Beginning Paragraphs – how is the argument introduced?

• Anecdote/statistics/quote
• Background information
• Deductive?  Claim introduced early?
• Sets the tone, writer’s attitude towards issue, style

 

Middle Paragraphs – how is the argument developed? 

• Cause/effect, lists of examples/advantages, time order, climactic
• Types of evidence, appeals to reason/emotion
• Underlying assumptions, values
• Acknowledge and refutes opposing views
• Appeals to logos/ethos/pathos

 

Concluding Paragraphs – how does the argument end?

• Reemphasizes the importance of the issue
• Summarizes key points
• Call to action/broader implications
• Ends with quote, statistic, anecdote

 

Evidence, Assumptions

 

 

Forms of Evidence
Analyze the type and quality of the evidence used to support a particular position

• Statistics
• Analogy
• Personal experience

 

 

Evaluate the Evidence
         Question the evidence for its accuracy, reliability, sufficient

 

Assumptions

• Are the assumptions obvious or hidden?
• Are the assumptions value or fact based?
• Do the assumptions need to be clarified in order for the reader to fully understand the argument, e.g. definition of key terms/concepts?
• Do you agree with the underlying assumptions?

 

 

Warrants

Definition: 

• An assumption, a belief we take for granted, or a general principle. 
• All our claims are grounded in warrants or assumptions that the audience must share with us if our claims are to prove acceptable. 
• Warrants reflect our observations, our personal experience, and our participation in a culture
• Warrants act as a bridge between the claim and the support

Stated Warrant
Claim:  Larry is dumb
Support:  He can’t read above a third-grade level
Warrant:  Anybody who can’t read above a third grade level is dumb.

In order to test whether the warrant is valid, we need to consider the backing – the support I in this case research that links intelligence to reading ability.

Unstated Warrant
Claim:  Development will bring undesirable changes to the present way of life on the Eastern shore, a life of farming and fishing, peace and quiet.

Support:  Developers will build express highways, condominiums, casinos, and nightclubs.

Warrant:  A pastoral life of fishing and farming is superior to the way of life brought by expensive, fast-paced modern development

Why would someone not state the warrant on which the claim is based?

• They might feel the audience would automatically share their assumption
• They may want to conceal the warrant because it is weak
• They may wish to capitalize on unstated values that the audience does not wish to openly admit

Unstated warrants in advertising
In 1918, Leona Currie scandalized a New Jersey beach with a bathing suit cut above her knees.  And to irk the establishment more, she smoked a cigarette.  Leona Curie was promptly arrested.
Oh how Leona would smile if she could see you today.
You’ve come a long way baby.  Virginia Slims.  The taste for today’s woman.

What is the unstated warrant?  Being permitted to smoke cigarettes is a significant sign of women’s liberation.  Shaky warrant, since many readers would not accept.

 
Several times in recent history, a political candidate has claimed that his opponent has suffered from some type of mental illness.  The warrant is that anyone who has been under psychiatric care or suffered from depression is unfit for public office.  This unspoken warrant has usually been effective.