Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
skills needed to effectively interpret, analyze and evaluate arguments and truth
claims, to formulate logical arguments and to make reasonable and sound
decisions. In short, critical thinking means thinking clearly, logically and
intelligently.
CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS
1. INTERPRETATIVE SKILLS - the skills needed to assess arguments well and
interpret statements in such a way that makes their meaning as clear as
possible.
2. VERIFICATION SKILLS - the skills needed to determine the truth or falsity of
statements.
3. REASONING SKILLS - the skills needed to determine the logic of the
argument, whether or not what it claims has adequate support or basis for it
to be accepted.
4. SKILL IN ASKING RELEVANT QUESTIONS - the skill needed in challenging
the ideas and arguments presented to a critical thinker when they find them
questionable.
CHARACTERISTICS OF A CRITICAL THINKER
It is the most effective means of which we can express our thinking and
reasoning, as well as to convey our thoughts and arguments.
NATURE AND PROBLEMS OF LANGUAGE
1. VAGUENESS - refers to lack of clarity in the meaning of a term. A term is
vague when its meaning is fuzzy or has no exact boundaries. In order not to
be misunderstood by other people, we can remove the vagueness of
language by using a more specific term.
2. AMBIGUITY - arises when a term or a sentence has more than one meaning.
A word is ambiguous when it is not obvious which of its meaning is intended
in a situation in which the word is used. Ambiguity arise because of the way
sentences are constructed. Thus, in order to remove the ambiguity of this
sentence, we need to reconstruct it in such a wasy as to make clear what the
sentence really means.
a. Semantic ambiguity - occurs when it is not clear what is the intended
meaning of a particular word in a given sentence.
b. Grammatical ambiguity - arises when a sentence can have more than
one meaning because of its faulty structure.
TWO KINDS OF DISPUTE
1. VERBAL DISPUTE - when two people to not agree with each other over a
certain issue because they have different notions of what a term means.
Such dispute could be avoided if only these two people clarify from the very
beginning what the words in the sentence actually mean.
2. GENUINE DISPUTE - that which arise not because people have different
understanding of the terms but because people have different knowledge,
information or belief about something.
object."
KINDS OF DEFINITION
1. STIPULATIVE DEFINITION - used to deliberately assigns meaning to a word.
Ex: Words such as "cyberspace", "internet", and "webpage" have been
coined due to the advancement of technology.
2. LEXICAL DEFINITION - used to give the conventional or standard usage of a
term.
Ex: The word "bank" can have various meanings and are listed in its lexical
definition so that a person who consults such a definition is better prepared to
avoid ambiguity.
3. PRECISING DEFINITION - given to further clarify a term that is vague in a
particular context.
Ex: "Before a vital organ transplant can be conducted, the donor must be
dead." There is vagueness as to the statement. Thus, surgeons can be
accused for murder if they violate this law, or if the donor is dead for too long,
the success of the transplant will be imperiled.
4. PERSUASIVE DEFINITION - used to influence others' feelings or beliefs.
ERRORS OF DEFINITION
1. CIRCULAR DEFINITION - when the term we are defining appears in the
definition.
Ex: Hunger is the state of being hungry.
2. TOO BROAD DEFINITION - when the definition includes non-members of the
term being defined.
Ex: A dog is a domestic animal.
3. TOO NARROW DEFINITION - when the definition excludes real members of
the term being defined.
Ex: A triangle is a polygon with three equal sides.
4. FIGURATIVE DEFINITION - if it involves metaphors and tends to pe poetic.
Ex: Love is a many splendored thing.
5. OBSCURE DEFINITION - if it unnecessarily uses technical and unfamiliar
terms.
Ex: A reptile is an air-breathing vertebrate characterized by a completely
ossified skeleton with a single occipital condyle and a distinct quadrate bone.
6. NEGATIVE DEFINITION - if it conveys to us what the term is not rather than
what it is.
Ex: A senator is not a congressman or a mayor.
USES OF LANGUAGE
1. INFORMATIVE - used to communicate information or convey facts.
Ex: The capital of the Philippines is Manila.
Through mere inspection of this form, one can see that the argument is
illogical. The fact that all frogs are reptiles and all frogs are not turtles does
not guarantee that all frogs are not reptiles is also true. This formal fallacy is
called fallacy of illicit major. Regardless of the content of the argument, as
long as its form violates the rules of logic, the argument commits a formal
fallacy.
2. INFORMAL FALLACIES - are those that can be detected only through
analysis of the content of the argument.
Ex.
All students with serious family problems should not be given a failing
mark.
Elmer is a student with serious family problems.
Therefore, Elmer should not be given a failing mark.
Since this form is valid, one might conclude that the argument is logical. But
the argument is not logical because of its content. Looking at the content of
the argument, one would find out the erroneous reasoning contained in the
argument which says that the basis in giving the student a passing or failing
mark is his/her family situation rather than his/her performance in the class.
THREE KINDS OF INFORMAL FALLACIES
1. FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY - are committed because of a misuse of
language. They contain ambiguous or vague language which is deliberately
used to mislead people.
a. EQUIVOCATION - using a term in its different senses/meanings and
making it appear to have only one meaning.
Ex.
This example commits the fallacy of equivocation since the term "law" has
been used in two different senses. In the first premise, it refers to "rule
binding in a particular community or society," while in the second premise,
it refers to "general principle deduced from facts."
b. AMPHIBOLY - using a phrase whose meaning is ambiguous due to its
grammatical construction.
Ex.
This headline might lead one to infer that the President has immediate
plans of declaring martial law whereas the article might simply be
reporting an interview with the President in which she said she might
declare martial law if military officials defy the chain of command or any
circumstances for that matter. Improper accent can also be done by
putting sensational words in large letters qualified sharply by other words
in much smaller letters which usually appear in advertisements.
d. VICIOUS ABSTRACTION - misleading the people by using vague or
abstract terms.
Ex.
In this political campaign, the term "people" was used to make others
think that Elmer Guevarra is supported by a lot of people, or by the
masses. But it is possible that only few people support him.
2. FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE - do not have a problem with language but
with the connection of the premise and conclusion. They occur because the
premises are not logically relevant to the conclusion. They are misleading
because the premises are psychologically relevant, so the conclusion may
seem to follow the premises although it does not follow logically.
a. PERSONAL ATTACK (Argumentum ad Hominem)
i. Abusive - ignoring the issue by attacking the character or personality
of the opponent (includes name calling and mudslinging)
Ex.
You should not listen to her opinion. She has been a drugaddict and has also been arrested due to theft.
Ex.
The speech of Adolf Hitler which brought his German listeners to a
state of patriotic frenzy.
e. STRAW PERSON - misrepresenting an opponent's position or argument
usually for the purpose of making it easier to attack.
Ex.
What I object most about those people who oppose the death
penalty is that they believe that the lives of convicted murderers are more
important than the lives of the innocent people they have victimized.
f. BEGGING THE QUESTION (Petitio Principii) - stating or assuming as a
premise the very thing that should be proven in the conclusion. This is also
called arguing in circle or circular argument.
Ex.
hand.
Ex.
Jose Javier Reyes, director of the movie "Live Show" said in a
press conference that MTRCB has unjustly banned the movie from being
shown. According to him, the movie is not pornographic since it has a very
relevant plot and a well-written story line. Since Reyes is a veteran in
Philippine cinema, we can say that indeed MTRCB acted wrongly in
banning the said movie.
d. ACCIDENT - applying a general rule to a particular case when
circumstances suggest that an exception to the rule should apply. In other
words, it unnecessarily applies a general truth to particular cases.
Ex.
Freedom of speech is a constitutionally guaranteed right.
Therefore, Leo Beltran should not be arrested for his speech that incited
the riot last week.
e. HASTY GENERALIZATION - drawing a general or universal conclusion
from insufficient particular cases. This fallacy is also known as converse
accident because its reasoning is the opposite of the fallacy of accident.
We take a particular case (which may be an exception) and make a
general rule or truth out of that.
Ex.
All of the five Malaysians I met in Boracay last week do not speak
English well. Thus, most Malaysians do not speak English well.
f. DIVISION - wrongly assuming that what is true in general is true in
particular. This is quite related to accident since it proceeds from general
to particular.
Ex.
PNP is one of the most corrupt agencies of the government.
Therefore, these three policemen cannot be trusted.
g. COMPOSITION - wrongly inferring that what holds true of the individuals
automatically holds true of the group made up of those individuals. This
has resemblance with hasty generalization because it proceeds from
particular to general.
Ex.
Roger Federer and Martina Hingis are two of the best tennis
players in the world, so if these two Swiss players team up, they'd make
one of the best mixed doubles teams.
h. APPEAL TO IGNORANCE (Argumentum ad Ignorantiam) - assuming
that the conclusion is true because its opposite cannot be proven.
Ex.
I believe that there are living creatures in Mars called Martians.
Nobody can furnish evidence to disprove my contention, so it must be
true.
i. FALSE CAUSE - mistaking a purely temporal sequence for a causal
connection. Also called post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore
because of this).
Ex. After he broke the bedroom mirror yesterday, he had a car accident