Critical Thinking Terminology

Question 1

A statement of something that the writer (or speaker) wants the reader (or listener) to accept based on the reasons given.

Answer 1

Conclusion

Question 2

A statement that aims to persuade the reader (or listener) to accept a conclusion.

Answer 2

Reason

Question 3

A statement without any reasons to support it.

Answer 3

Claim

Question 4

An attempt to persuade an audience to acceept something. It must have a concluion and at least one reason.

Answer 4

Argument

Question 5

Clues that can be used to identify whether or not something is an argument.

Answer 5

Argument Indicator

Question 6

Two (or more) reasons which work together to support a conclusion. Both or all of them are needed to support the conclusion.

Answer 6

Joint Reasons

Question 7

Two or more reasons which each give separate support to a conclusion on their own.

Answer 7

Independent Reasons

Question 8

It is formed on the way to the main conclusion. It is supported by reasons and acts as a reason for the main conclusion.

Answer 8

Intermediate Conclusion

Question 9

An additional argument that is against what the conclusion seeks to establish.

Answer 9

Counter Argument

Question 10

A way of looking at the consequences that might occur if something were the case.

Answer 10

Hypothetical Reasoning

Question 11

Whether someone’s claims or evidence can be believed.

Answer 11

Credibility

Question 12

Confirmation of, or support for, evidence given by one source by another source.

Answer 12

Corroboration

Question 13

Evidence from one source that disagrees with evidence given by another source.

Answer 13

Confliction

Question 14

What is generally said or believed about the character of a person or an organisation.

Answer 14

Reputation

Question 15

A source’s ability to use any of the five senses to assess an event or situation.

Answer 15

Ability to Percieve

Question 16

Personal interest, usually financial, in a state of affairs or in an organisation leading to the expectation of personal gain from a favourable outcome

Answer 16

Vested Interest

Question 17

Skills, experience and training that give someone specialist knowledge and judgement.

Answer 17

Expertise

Question 18

Being impartial, having no reason to favour either side in a dispute or difference of opinion

Answer 18

Neutral

Question 19

Tendency to be prejudiced against, or in favour of, certain beliefs, or people who engage in particular activities, giving a motive or subconscious reason to lie, misrepresent or distort

Answer 19

Bias

Question 20

A missing reason in an argument that the writer accepts but5 has not stated. It is essential for he conclusion to be drawn.

Answer 20

Assumption

Question 21

A form of argument that uses parallels between similar situations to persuade the audience to accept the conclusion.

Answer 21

Analogy

Question 22

A form of arguemnt that dimisses and opposing view by attacking the person putting forward that view rather than by addressing their reasoning.

Answer 22

Ad Hominem

Question 23

Referring to an expert witness or recognised authority to support a claim.

Answer 23

Appeal to Authority

Question 24

A form of argument that attempts to support a conclusion by engaging the audience’s feelings rather than by giving reasons.

Answer 24

Appealk to Emotion

Question 25

A form of argument that supports a prediction about the future with a reference to the past.

Answer 25

Appeal to History

Question 26

A form of argument which justifies a conclsion by how much it is liked.

Answer 26

Appeal to Popularity

Question 27

A form of argument that supports a conclusion by saying it has always been done this way.

Answer 27

Appeal to Tradition

Question 28

Standards, measures, or benchmarks, against which something can be measured.

Answer 28

Criteria

Question 29

Someone who presents evidence based on first-hand experience.

Answer 29

Eye-witness

Question 30

Evidence based on secondhand information from another source, who may have interpreted it.

Answer 30

Hearsay

Question 31

A fault in the pattern of reasoning that weakens the support given to the conclusion of an argument.

Answer 31

Flaw

Question 32

Whether or not a claim or piece of evidence is reasonable.

Answer 32

Plausibility

Question 33

A guide to action which can be applied in a range of circumstances, beyond the immediate context of the argument.

Answer 33

Principle

Question 34

Presents a limited picure of choices available in a situation in order to support one particular option.

Answer 34

Restricting the options

Question 35

Reasons from one possibility, through a series of events that are not properly or logically linked, to an extreme consequence.

Answer 35

Slippery slope

Question 36

This flaw misrpresents or distorts an opposing view in order to dismiss it.

Answer 36

Straw man

Question 37

An attempt to justify an action the basis that someone else is doing it.

Answer 37

Tu quoque

Question 38

Assuming that because one thing happens before another that one causes the other.

Answer 38

Confusing Cause and Correlation (Post hoc ergo propter hoc)

Question 39

An argument that assumes that something that is necessary is also sufficient, or the other way around.

Answer 39

Confusing necessary and sufficent conditions

Question 40

Parts of an argument that cannot both be the case at the same time, or they would support different conclusions.

Answer 40

Inconsistency

Question 41

To draw a conclusion; to consider vwhat is implied by evidence. To decide what can be supported by the evidence or reasons.

Answer 41

Infer

Question 42

Draws a wideranging conclusion from insufficient evidence.

Answer 42

Hasty generalisation

Question 43

Judge whether the argument or reasoning is strong or weak.

Answer 43

Evaluate

Question 44

A word of phrase can have more than one meaning and it is not clear which meaning is intended in a particular context.

Answer 44

Ambiguous