phil 105 FINAL

phil 105 FINAL

Good Critical Thinker

1. won’t believe a claim unless it is supported by a good argument/evidence

2. when making claims to others, provide good arguments/evidence to support claims

Bad Critical Thinker

1. believes a claim that is not supported by a good argument/evidence

2. when making claims to others, don’t provide good arguments/evidence to support claims

What is an argument?

1. A sentence with at least 1 premise, followed by/ending with 1 conclusion

2. A set of 2 or more sentences where one of the sentences is the conclusion, and all the other sentences are premises (at least one premise)

the parts of an argument

1. premises = reasons/evidence that support the conclusion

2. conclusion = the claim or sentence that you are trying to prove to be true

truth

when what a sentence says matches the facts of reality

belief

when a person thinks that a sentence is true

premise indicator words

because, due to the fact that, given that, since

imperative sentence

command

interrogative sentence

question

assertoric sentence

a sentence that is either true or false (of primary importance to logic)

deductively valid argument

1. if all of the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true

2. ex) all dogs are mammals. labradoodles are dogs. therefore, labradoodles are mammals

sound argument

• a deductively valid argument with all true premises

• ex) all humans are mortal. socrates is a human. therefore, socrates is mortal

argument that is valid but not sound

ex) all humans have walked on mars. elon musk is a human. hence, elon musk has walked on mars

inductively strong argument

1. if all of the premises are true, then the conclusion is highly likely to also be true

2. ex) the sun has come up every morning for billions of years. therefore, the sun will come up tomorrow

inductively weak argument

1. a logical argument where the conclusion is unlikely to be true based on the given premises, even if the premises are true

2. ex) all the swans I've seen are white. therefore, all swans must be white

disjunctive syllogism

1. argument from elimination; an “either…or…” sentence

2. 2 premises and 1 conclusion (2nd premise HAS to deny/negate the 1st)

3. ex) either A or B. Not A. Therefore, B

4. ex) it’s either vanilla or chocolate. it is not vanilla. therefore, it’s chocolate

Modus ponens

1. If A, then B. A. Therefore, B

2. ex) if I jump in, then I’ll get wet. I jumped in, so I got wet

3. B HAS to AFFIRM A

Modus tollens

1. If A, then B. Not B. Not A

2. ex) if the rain falls, there will be water on the sidewalk. there’s no water on the sidewalk, therefore, it didn’t rain

3. B HAS to NEGATE/DENY A

Chain argument

1. If A, then B. If B, then C. If A, then C

2. ex) if I run, I’ll sweat. if I sweat, I’ll need to shower. therefore, if I run, I’ll need to shower

Standard form of an argument

when the conclusion is listed at the bottom with a line separating it from the premises (listed in descending order with numeric labeling)

Milgram experiment

1. at Yale University

2. studied how far the “teacher” would go against the “learner” by following orders/shocking them

3. showed: the better critical thinkers refused to continue and gave their reasoning. a significant majority was willing to follow orders from authority, even if it brought harm to another person

Zimbardo/Stanford Prison Experiment

1. college Students

2. got out of hand quickly; the “guards” were very abusive to the “prisoners” (many mental breakdowns took place)

3. supposed to last 2 weeks, lasted 6 days

4. showed: the power of social roles and the influence of situational factors on human behavior

the 3 stages of cognitive development

dualism, relativism, commitment

Dualism

1. the truth is all black and white, and authority figures have the answers to all questions

2. tends to be in babies-tweens

Relativism

1. truth is all just personal opinions, and all opinions are equal and should not be judged

2. tends to be in teens-young adults

Commitment

1. one commits to their own views based on reason and the best available evidence

2. tends to be in adults

confirmation bias

only seeking information that reinforces what you already believe

analytic skills (quality of good critical thinker)

being able to provide logical support for your beliefs instead of having unfounded opinion

effective communication (quality of good critical thinker)

speaking, writing, and listening well, and having awareness of different communication styles

inquiry/research skills (quality of good critical thinker)

the ability to gather, evaluate, and compile evidence for the purposes of research

flexibility (quality of good critical thinker)

the ability to change one’s mind of plans and being open to alternative ideas

open-minded skepticism (quality of good critical thinker)

one will not believe something unless it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but keeps an open mind until then

method of doubt (quality of good critical thinker)

assume to be false anything that can possibly be doubted

collaborative learning (quality of good critical thinker)

the ability to work well with people to come up with shared solutions to our common problem

creative problem solving (quality of good critical thinker)

the ability to come up with imaginative solutions to complex problems

Why is critical thinking important for being a citizen in a democracy?

1. think by themselves to make a decision about how to vote

2. choose among several courses of action

3. evaluate knowledge claims

4. understand complex social issues

How can critical thinking benefit you in terms of making a rational life plan and self-esteem?

1. allows you to make good decisions in your life that will lead to success

2. ability to solve problems you may encounter in life

3. helps you more effectively and fairly weigh options, assess consequences, and arrive at better choices

the three-tier model of critical thinking

experience, interpretation, analysis

experience

one describes what the experience was without yet trying to understand why or how it happened

interpretation

one tries to give an explanation of why or how the event happened

analysis

one reconsiders their previous interpretation to see if an alternative explanation is more reasonable

The obstacles to critical thinking

avoidance, anger, denial, ignorance, conformity, struggling

avoidance

avoiding people or information that conflicts with your views

anger

instead of critically analyzing an opposing view, one gets angry at the person who presents the view

denial

one simply denies alternative views instead of analyzing their merit

ignorance

one deliberately remains uninformed to avoid taking a position or action

conformity

one adopts the popular/majority view in order to fit in and not stand out

struggling

endlessly debating what action or position to take and never reaching a conclusion

the types of narrow-mindedness

absolutism, egocentrism, ethnocentrism, anthropocentrism

absolutism

one is unable to stand up to authority and always assumes that they are absolutely correct

egocentrism

thinking you are the center of everything, better and smarter than others, and have low respect for others' views

ethnocentrism

unjustified belief in the superiority of one’s race, group, or culture

anthropocentrism

mankind is the center of everything, so animals and nature don’t matter

rationalization

one acts without critical thought and later tries to give a rational explanation

doublethink

when you believe two opposite things at the same time

language

a system of communication that involves a set of symbols which can be either spoken, written, or nonverbal

the different functions of language

informative, directive, expressive, ceremonial

informative

to make statements that are either true or false

directive

the use of imperatives to direct or influence actions

expressive

communicates feelings and attitudes, and is used to bring about an emotional impact

ceremonial

used in formal or official settings

denotative meaning

expresses essential attributes of something like an official dictionary definition

connotative meaning

based on past experience and associations, and can be either positive or negative

stipulative definition

given to new terms that emerge in our language

theoretical definition

used to explain the nature of scientific terms

operational definition

the use of a boundary or threshold in order to create standardization

persuasive definition

used to get others to accept one’s point of view

the 5 criteria for evaluating a definition

1. neither too broad nor too narrow

2. states all essential attributes

3. not circular

4. avoids overly technical and obscure language

5. avoids emotional language

the 5 rhetorical devices

euphemism, dysphemism, sarcasm, hyperbole, 2 types of deception

euphemism

one replaces a negative or neutral word with a positive one in order to sugarcoat the truth

dysphemism

one replaces a positive or neutral word with a negative one to create disapproval

sarcasm

the use of irony, ridicule, or taunting to deflect critical thought or make light of someone or something

hyperbole

the use of exaggeration or overstatement to distort the truth

active deception

deliberately saying something false in order to mislead

passive deception

withholding the truth

the 4 communication styles

Aggressive, Passive, Assertive, Passive-Aggressive

Aggressive

one wants to get their way at all costs, even if this damages their relationships

Passive

one wants to avoid confrontation at all costs and backs down easily

Assertive

one calmly and confidently says what they want or need, but knows when to back off to avoid hurting relationship

Passive-Aggressive

one will not say openly and honestly what they want or need, but use indirect strategies of manipulation to get their way

knowledge

information we believe, which is true, and for which we have justification

rationalism

most human knowledge comes from reason, ideas, and abstract thought

empiricism

most human knowledge comes from the 5 senses and observation

evidence

something that can prove or disprove a claim

some reliable sources of evidence are

1. Direct perception

2. Testimony

3. Memory

4. Inference

false memory

when a person thinks they have a memory of something that did not actually happen

4 qualities that can be used to assess the quality of an expert’s testimony

Education, experience, reputation, accomplishments

anecdotal evidence

evidence that is based on one person’s personal experience

hearsay

testimony that passes through several people before reaching you

the CRAAP test

1. currency, relevance, accuracy, authority, purpose

2. a method used to evaluate the credibility of information sources

different research resources

Internet, library, academic journals, government documents, expert interviews, dictionary/encyclopedia

War of the Worlds

1. a dramatization of H.G. Wells’ novel that stimulated a news bulletin reporting a Martian invasion of Earth, leading some listeners to believe it was a real event and causing widespread panic due to the realistic presentation

2. showed: demonstrated the power of media to manipulate public perception and highlighting the importance of critical thinking when consuming media

3. October 30, 1938

memorable events error

• placing more importance on uncommon events than they actually deserve

• ex) plane crashes and shark attacks

misperception of random data

one thinks that they see order or a pattern in something that is actually random

probability error

making an incorrect calculation of the odds of something

self-fulfilling prophecy

when your expectation of an event ends up causing the event to happen

the “one of us versus one of them” error

dividing people into groups of “us” and “them” and showing less respect to “them”

diffusion of responsibility and Kitty Genovese

1. in a group setting when no individual feels personally responsible for taking an action, no action gets taken

2. murdered in 1964; numerous witnesses reportedly heard her cries for help but did not intervene because they believed others would act instead

Asch experiment

1. 1 standard line compared to 3 other lines

2. group pressure

3. showed: people are often willing to ignore their own perception of reality and give a wrong answer to fit in with the majority, demonstrating the powerful influence of social pressure in group setting

fallacy

when an argument contains a logical flaw or error