Critical Thinking: Reason and Evidence - D265 WGU

Flashcards for this course in WGU

Critical thinking 5 steps

Being curious and thinking creatively

Separating the thinker from the position

Knowing oneself enough to avoid biases and errors of thought

Having intellectual honesty, humility, and charity

Understanding arguments, reasons, and evidence

Propositions

Statements that are true or false.

Non-propositions

Sentences that are not statements about matters of fact (or fiction). They do not make a claim that can be true or false.

Simple propositions

These have no internal logical structure, meaning they are true or false on their own.

Complex propositions

Has internal logical structure, meaning they are composed of simple propositions.

What are conclusion indicators?

• Therefore

• So

• It follows that

• Hence

• Thus

• Entails that

• We may conclude that

• Implies that

• Wherefore

• As a result

What are premise indicators?

• Because

• For

• Given that

• In that

• As

• Since

• As indicated by

Premise

This claims, evidence, ideas, and so forth intended to support the conclusion.

Conclusions

This claims that the whole argument is intended to support or demonstrate or prove.

Deduction

• arguments where the premises guarantee or necessitate the conclusion

— mathematical arguments, logical arguments, arguments from definition

Induction

• arguments where the premises make the conclusion probable

— analogies, authority, causal inferences, scientific reasoning, extrapolations, etc.

Abduction

Arguments where the best available explanation is chosen as the correct explanation.

Truth

A true proposition accurately represents reality.

Validity

If the premises were true, the conclusion would necessarily have to be true also. This doesn't require that the same premises have to be true. Rather, it just means that if they were true, the conclusion would have to be true too.

Soundness

A deductive argument is sound if it has a valid structure and all its premises are true. (If an argument is deductive but has either an invalid structure or at least one false premise, then it is an unsound argument.)

Sound Argument

All True Premises + Valid Structure =

Truth v2

Propositions are true if they accurately represent what is the case, otherwise they are false.

Strength

In an inductive argument, the truth of the premises would make the conclusion probably true.

Cogency

This inductive argument is strong and all its premises are true. (If an argument is inductive but either is weak or has at least one false premise, then it is an uncogent argument.)

Cogent Argument

All True Premises + Strong Inductive Support

Formal Fallacy

This fallacy has a problem with their structure. Any argument that has the form of a formal fallacy is invalid.

Informal Fallacy

This fallacy has a problem with their content.

Cognitive Bias

The way we naturally categorize and make sense of the world around us.

Alief

An automatic belief-like attitude that can explain how our instinctual responses can conflict with our reasoned-out beliefs.

Heuristic

A rule of thumb, a ready strategy, or a shortcut.

Algorithm Bubble

The curated and personalized version of online reality that a website shows you when you log on.

Availability Heuristic

A process where in the mind generalizes based on what is available to it rather than on what is objectively true.

ad hominem fallacy

is committed when one attacks the person making an argument rather than the argument itself.

genetic fallacy

is committed when one argues that the origin of an idea is a reason for rejecting (or accepting) that idea.

straw figure fallacy

is committed when one misrepresents another’s argument then attacks the misrepresented (weaker) argument rather than the actual (stronger) argument.

red herring fallacy

is committed when one introduces an irrelevant topic.

appeal to authority fallacy

is committed when one appeals to an unqualified authority in support of one’s claim.

appeal to force fallacy

is committed when one uses a threat to compel agreement with one’s claim.

appeal to popularity fallacy

is committed when one appeals to the popularity of a belief as a reason to affirm its truth.

appeal to consequences fallacy

is committed when one appeals to the bad (or good) consequences of accepting a claim as a reason to reject (or accept) it as true.

fallacy of equivocation

is committed when one’s argument mistakenly uses the same word in two different senses.

appeal to ignorance fallacy

is committed when someone reasons from our lack of knowledge that a claim is false (or true) to the assertion the claim is true (or false).

slippery slope fallacy

is committed when someone argues, without sufficient reason, one event will lead to a series of events ultimately ending in some further (usually disastrous) event.

Texas Sharpshooter fallacy

is committed when one selectively uses, or “cherry-picks,” only the evidence supporting their desired conclusion.

post hoc fallacy

is committed when someone claims some event causes another just because the first event (the alleged cause) occurs before the second event (the alleged effect).

hasty generalization fallacy

is committed when someone generalizes too quickly about a group of people, things, or events.

“level” or “layer”

of an argument map is one horizontal row of a carefully drawn argument map.

Main Conclusion

 Final conclusion of the argument

Main Premise

One among the set of premises that directly support the main conclusion

Sub-Inference

An inference from a premise to another premise

sub-premise

A premise in a sub-inference

sub-conclusion

A conclusion in a sub-inference