RWS: Lesson 7

Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking

a process that involves a series of complex thought processes which allows an individual to make reasoned judgements, asses the way we think, and solve problems effectively.

The Old Version of Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain

Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge

The New Version of Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain

Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering

QUALITIES OF A CRITICAL THINKER

Inquisitive, Investigative, Open-minded, and Evaluates information

Importance of Critical Thinking IN READING

critical thinking makes you recognize different texts and react to them intelligently.

Importance of Critical Thinking IN WRITING

a critical approach provides you with the skills to create well-written text.

Fallacies of Reasoning

1. Hasty Generalization

2. Argumentum ad Ignoratiam

3. Slippery Slope

4. Circular Reasoning

5. Argumentum ad Populum

6. Fallacy of Composition

7. Argumentum ad Baculum

8. Argumentum ad Hominem

9. False Dilemma

10. Complex Question

11. Appeal to Force

12. Appeal to Pity

13. Appeal to Consequences

14. Bandwagon

15. Anonymous Authority

16. False Analogy

17. Accident

18. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hock

19. Wrong Direction

20. Complex Cause

21. Irrelevant Conclusion

22. Straw Man

23. Affirming the Consequent

24. Denying the Antecedent

25. Inconsistency

Hasty Generalization

this occurs when a sample is not significant enough to support a generalization about a population.

Argumentum ad Ignoratiam

this occurs when something is concluded to be true just because it is not proven to be false and vice versa.

Slippery Slope

this occurs when a series of increasingly superficial and unacceptable consequences is drawn.

Circular Reasoning

this occurs when the reasoning just goes back to itself.

Argumentum ad Populum

this occurs when an idea is proved based on popular belief or because it has been stated by an elite of the society.

Fallacy of Composition

this occurs when it’s claimed that a whole is true because a part of it is true.

Argumentum ad Baculum

tis occurs when the argument appeals to the human emotions specifically fear, by the use of threat and force.

Argumentum ad Hominem

this occurs when the personality of the person is attacked rather than the validity of the arguments.

False Dilemma

this occurs when an arguer presents his/her argument as one of only two options despite the presence of multiple possibilities.

Complex Question

when two or more points are rolled into one and the reader is expected to either accept and reject both at the same time, when one point may be satisfactory while the other is not.

Appeal to Force

this occurs when a threat, instead of reasoning, is used to argue.

Appeal to Pity

this occurs when the element of pity is used instead of logical reasoning.

Appeal to Consequences

this occurs when unpleasant consequences of believing something are pointed out to show that the belief is false.

Bandwagon

this occurs when an argument is considered to be valid because it is what the majority thinks.

Anonymous Authority

the authority in question is not mentioned or named.

False Analogy

this occurs when a writer assumes that two concepts that are similar in other ways.

Accident

this occurs when a general rule is applied to a situation, even when it should be an exception.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

this occurs when the arguer claims that since event A happened before event B, A is the cause of B.

Wrong Direction

this occurs when the direction between the cause and effect is reversed.

Complex Cause

this occurs when the explanation for an event is reduced to one thing when there are other factors which also contributed to the event.

Irrelevant Conclusion

this occur when an argument which is supposed to prove something concludes something else instead.

Straw Man

this occurs when the position of the opposition is twisted so that is easier to refute.

Affirming the Consequent

in any argument of the form: if A is true, then B is true; if B is true, therefore A is true.

Denying the Antecedent

in any argument of the form: if A is true, then B is true; if A is not true, then B is not true.

Inconsistency

it occurs when arguments contradict one another.