Unit One - Intro to Critical Thinking

Question 1

What is logic?

Answer 1

• technique of reasoning or providing reasoned accounts
• foundational field in traditional models of education
• field concerned w/ improving one’s own character + abilities
• field of study concerned w/ understanding, analysis, + communication of info
• field concerned w/ skills of analyzing, synthesizing, organizing + assessing info

Question 2

Models of Persuasion

Answer 2

3 general ways of motivating ppl to accept your claims

Question 3

Logos

Answer 3

Persuade ppl by offering compelling reason for ur claim

Question 4

Ethos

Answer 4

Persuade by establishing ur character as one that ppl will place trust in

Question 5

Pathos

Answer 5

Persuade by appealing to ppl’s emotions in a way that makes them emotionally committed to ur claim

Question 6

Rhetoric

Answer 6

Art of reasoning

- involves studying how to make use of all 3 models of persuasion

Question 7

Logic

Answer 7

Art of reasoning

-studying how to make use of one model of persuasion = logos

Question 8

Epistemic Significance

Answer 8

Standard which provides a reliable guide for understanding what is objectively true about world

Question 9

Practical significance

Answer 9

Provides us w/ the means of coming to agreements that are not based on coercion

Question 10

Coercion

Answer 10

Persuading ppl by virtue of power you have over them

-claims that ppl assent to will be those claims which are supported by ppl w/ most power

Question 11

Logos

Answer 11

Persuading ppl by virtue of sharing w/ them a recognition of external standard of belief providing by reasoning
-claims that ppl assent to will be independent of Qs of who has most power

Question 12

Personal significance

Answer 12

Provides the means of forming one’s own beliefs in a way that is independent of power + exercised over one’s thinking by culture, society, etc

Question 13

Critical thinking

Answer 13

Systematic evaluation/formulation of beliefs/statements by rational standards

Question 14

Systematic

Answer 14

Proceeds according to particular standards + methods

Question 15

Evaluative + formative

Answer 15

Aims to assess beliefs + to form/revise beliefs

Question 16

Rational standard

Answer 16

Rule guiding C.T is that beliefs ought to be supported by good reasons

Question 17

Descriptive approach

Answer 17

Describe situations + causes that led to a given belief being formed

Question 18

Normative approach

Answer 18

Assess beliefs based on whether they are reasonable

Question 19

Analytic interpretation

Answer 19

Act of translating piece of natural language into a clearly understood argument

Question 20

Natural language

Answer 20

Describes the presentation of info as we normally encounter it in written + spoken sources

Question 21

Statement

Answer 21

Assertion that something is or is not that case

Question 22

Rhetoric question

Answer 22

Natural language written as if were a question but intended to make a statement

Question 23

Thesis

Answer 23

Claim trying to establish

Question 24

Justification

Answer 24

Claim offer as a reason for thesis

Question 25

Argument

Answer 25

Group of statements in which some of them are intended to support another of them

Question 26

Premise

Answer 26

Statement that give rational support in argument (justification)

Good premise = true/acceptable
Bad premise = false/unacceptable

Question 27

Conclusion

Answer 27

Statement that is rationally supported in argument (thesis)

Good conclusion = true/acceptable
Bad conclusion = false/unacceptable

Question 28

Inference

Answer 28

Relationship of rational support which connects statements that give this support to statement that is supported by it

Good inference = valid/strong
Bad inference = invalid/weak

Question 29

Argument

Answer 29

Good argument = sound/cogent

• only if:
  1) all premise true/acceptable AND
  2) it’s inference = valid/strong

Bad argument = unsound/un-cogent

• only if:
  1) any premise false/unacceptable OR
  2) it’s inference is invalid/weak

Question 30

Standard form

Answer 30

standardized way of presenting an argument

makes it clear what statements are involved, and which statements are premises while which statements are conclusions.

Question 31

Simple arguments

Answer 31

arguments that do not contain any intermediate conclusions

Question 32

Complex arguments

Answer 32

arguments that contain one or more intermediate conclusions

Question 33

Intermediate conclusion

Answer 33

statement which functions as conclusion of one simple argument - also function as premise of another simple argument

Question 34

Dependent premises

Answer 34

premises support conclusion jointly

any premise is set of dependent premises offers support to conclusion when combined w/ other dependent premises in the set

Question 35

Independent premises

Answer 35

premises support conclusion individually

any premise which is independent offers support to conclusion regardless of the presence/absence of any other premises

Question 36

Deductive inferences

Answer 36

conclusion is meant to necessarily follow from the premises

Question 37

good deductive inference

Answer 37

valid

• valid when conclusion must be true if premises are true (else; invalid)

Question 38

good deductive argument

Answer 38

sound

• sound when;
  1) inference = valid and
  2) premises = true/acceptable

Question 39

Inductive inferences

Answer 39

when conclusion is meant to probably but no necessarily follow from the premises

Question 40

good inductive inference

Answer 40

strong

- strong when conclusion is prob true if the premises are true (else weak)

Question 41

good inductive argument

Answer 41

cogent

• cogent when;
  1) inference is strong and
  2) premises are true/acceptable (else un-cogent)

Question 42

implicit premise

Answer 42

statement which functions as premise in given argument but hasn’t actually been written/spoken when argument is given

Question 43

implicit conclusion

Answer 43

statement which functions as premise in given argument but which hasn’t actually been written/spoken when argument is given

Question 44

enthymeme

Answer 44

argument that contains one/more implicit premises/conclusions

Question 45

principle of charity

Answer 45

methodological presumption made in seeking to understand a point of view
whereby we seek to understand it in its strongest, most persuasive form before
subjecting the view to evaluation

Question 46

principles of coherence

Answer 46

should try to interpret the arguer as espousing a logically consistent position

Question 47

principles of correspondence

Answer 47

We should try to interpret the arguer as arguing about the same phenomenon we
would be expect a generally reasonable person to be concerned with in their
situation.

Question 48

humanity principle

Answer 48

We should try to interpret the arguer as having the beliefs about the phenomenon in
question that would be held by a generally reasonable person in their situation

Question 49

straw man fallacy

Answer 49

distorting, weakening, or oversimplifying someone else’s position so it can be more easily attacked or
criticized

When our interpretations of arguments are not consistent with the principle of charity

Question 50

Subjective relativism

Answer 50

Thesis that what is true can always vary from person to person as depends on what they believe

Question 51

Social relativism

Answer 51

Thesis that what is true can always vary form society to next as depends on what society recognizes

Question 52

Philosophical relativism

Answer 52

Thesis that rational standard don’t provide us w/ the grounds for assessing, forming, or revising our beliefs