logic and critical thinking slideshare

PHIL102: Introduction to Critical Thinking and Logic

Course introduction.

• Time: 40 hours
• College Credit Recommended ($25 Proctor Fee) -->
• Free Certificate

The course touches upon a wide range of reasoning skills, from verbal argument analysis to formal logic, visual and statistical reasoning, scientific methodology, and creative thinking. Mastering these skills will help you become a more perceptive reader and listener, a more persuasive writer and presenter, and a more effective researcher and scientist.

The first unit introduces the terrain of critical thinking and covers the basics of meaning analysis, while the second unit provides a primer for analyzing arguments. All of the material in these first units will be built upon in subsequent units, which cover informal and formal logic, Venn diagrams, scientific reasoning, and strategic and creative thinking.

Course Syllabus

First, read the course syllabus. Then, enroll in the course by clicking "Enroll me". Click Unit 1 to read its introduction and learning outcomes. You will then see the learning materials and instructions on how to use them.

Unit 1: Introduction and Meaning Analysis

Critical thinking is a broad classification for a diverse array of reasoning techniques. In general, critical thinking works by breaking arguments and claims down to their basic underlying structure so we can see them clearly and determine whether they are rational. The idea is to help us do a better job of understanding and evaluating what we read, what we hear, and what we write and say.

In this unit, we will define the broad contours of critical thinking and learn why it is a valuable and useful object of study. We will also introduce the fundamentals of meaning analysis: the difference between literal meaning and implication, the principles of definition, how to identify when a disagreement is merely verbal, the distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions, and problems with the imprecision of ordinary language.

Completing this unit should take you approximately 5 hours.

Unit 2: Argument Analysis

Arguments are the fundamental components of all rational discourse: nearly everything we read and write, like scientific reports, newspaper columns, and personal letters, as well as most of our verbal conversations, contain arguments. Picking the arguments out from the rest of our often convoluted discourse can be difficult. Once we have identified an argument, we still need to determine whether or not it is sound. Luckily, arguments obey a set of formal rules that we can use to determine whether they are good or bad.

In this unit, you will learn how to identify arguments, what makes an argument sound as opposed to unsound or merely valid, the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning, and how to map arguments to reveal their structure.

Completing this unit should take you approximately 7 hours.

Unit 3: Basic Sentential Logic

This unit introduces a topic that many students find intimidating: formal logic. Although it sounds difficult and complicated, formal (or symbolic) logic is actually a fairly straightforward way of revealing the structure of reasoning. By translating arguments into symbols, you can more readily see what is right and wrong with them and learn how to formulate better arguments. Advanced courses in formal logic focus on using rules of inference to construct elaborate proofs. Using these techniques, you can solve many complicated problems simply by manipulating symbols on the page. In this course, however, you will only be looking at the most basic properties of a system of logic. In this unit, you will learn how to turn phrases in ordinary language into well-formed formulas, draw truth tables for formulas, and evaluate arguments using those truth tables.

Completing this unit should take you approximately 13 hours.

Unit 4: Venn Diagrams

In addition to using predicate logic, the limitations of sentential logic can also be overcome by using Venn diagrams to illustrate statements and arguments. Statements that include general words like "some" or "few" as well as absolute words like "every" and "all" – so-called categorical statements – lend themselves to being represented on paper as circles that may or may not overlap.

Venn diagrams are especially helpful when dealing with logical arguments called syllogisms. Syllogisms are a special type of three-step argument with two premises and a conclusion, which involve quantifying terms. In this unit, you will learn the basic principles of Venn diagrams, how to use them to represent statements, and how to use them to evaluate arguments.

Completing this unit should take you approximately 6 hours.

Unit 5: Fallacies

Now that you have studied the necessary structure of a good argument and can represent its structure visually, you might think it would be simple to pick out bad arguments. However, identifying bad arguments can be very tricky in practice. Very often, what at first appears to be ironclad reasoning turns out to contain one or more subtle errors.

Fortunately, there are many easily identifiable fallacies (mistakes of reasoning) that you can learn to recognize by their structure or content. In this unit, you will learn about the nature of fallacies, look at a couple of different ways of classifying them, and spend some time dealing with the most common fallacies in detail.

Completing this unit should take you approximately 3 hours.

Unit 6: Scientific Reasoning

Unlike the syllogistic arguments you explored in the last unit, which are a form of deductive argument, scientific reasoning is empirical. This means that it depends on observation and evidence, not logical principles. Although some principles of deductive reasoning do apply in science, such as the principle of contradiction, scientific arguments are often inductive. For this reason, science often deals with confirmation and disconfirmation.

Nonetheless, there are general guidelines about what constitutes good scientific reasoning, and scientists are trained to be critical of their inferences and those of others in the scientific community. In this unit, you will investigate some standard methods of scientific reasoning, some principles of confirmation and disconfirmation, and some techniques for identifying and reasoning about causation.

Completing this unit should take you approximately 4 hours.

Unit 7: Strategic Reasoning and Creativity

While most of this course has focused on the types of reasoning necessary to critique and evaluate existing knowledge or to extend our knowledge following correct procedures and rules, an enormous branch of our reasoning practice runs in the opposite direction. Strategic reasoning, problem-solving, and creative thinking all rely on an ineffable component of novelty supplied by the thinker.

Despite their seemingly mystical nature, problem-solving and creative thinking are best approached by following tried and tested procedures that prompt our cognitive faculties to produce new ideas and solutions by extending our existing knowledge. In this unit, you will investigate problem-solving techniques, representing complex problems visually, making decisions in risky and uncertain scenarios, and creative thinking in general.

Completing this unit should take you approximately 2 hours.

Study Guide

This study guide will help you get ready for the final exam. It discusses the key topics in each unit, walks through the learning outcomes, and lists important vocabulary terms. It is not meant to replace the course materials!

Course Feedback Survey

Please take a few minutes to give us feedback about this course. We appreciate your feedback, whether you completed the whole course or even just a few resources. Your feedback will help us make our courses better, and we use your feedback each time we make updates to our courses.

If you come across any urgent problems, email [email protected].

Certificate Final Exam

Take this exam if you want to earn a free Course Completion Certificate.

To receive a free Course Completion Certificate, you will need to earn a grade of 70% or higher on this final exam. Your grade for the exam will be calculated as soon as you complete it. If you do not pass the exam on your first try, you can take it again as many times as you want, with a 7-day waiting period between each attempt.

Once you pass this final exam, you will be awarded a free Course Completion Certificate .

Saylor Direct Credit

Take this exam if you want to earn college credit for this course . This course is eligible for college credit through Saylor Academy's Saylor Direct Credit Program .

The Saylor Direct Credit Final Exam requires a proctoring fee of $5 . To pass this course and earn a Credly Badge and official transcript , you will need to earn a grade of 70% or higher on the Saylor Direct Credit Final Exam. Your grade for this exam will be calculated as soon as you complete it. If you do not pass the exam on your first try, you can take it again a maximum of 3 times , with a 14-day waiting period between each attempt.

We are partnering with SmarterProctoring to help make the proctoring fee more affordable. We will be recording you, your screen, and the audio in your room during the exam. This is an automated proctoring service, but no decisions are automated; recordings are only viewed by our staff with the purpose of making sure it is you taking the exam and verifying any questions about exam integrity. We understand that there are challenges with learning at home - we won't invalidate your exam just because your child ran into the room!

Requirements:

• Desktop Computer
• Chrome (v74+)
• Webcam + Microphone
• 1mbps+ Internet Connection

Once you pass this final exam, you will be awarded a Credly Badge  and can request an official transcript .

Saylor Direct Credit Exam

This exam is part of the Saylor Direct College Credit program. Before attempting this exam, review the Saylor Direct Credit page for complete requirements.

Essential exam information:

• You must take this exam with our automated proctor. If you cannot, please contact us to request an override.
• The automated proctoring session will cost $5 .
• This is a closed-book, closed-notes exam (see allowed resources below).
• You will have two (2) hours to complete this exam.
• You have up to 3 attempts, but you must wait 14 days between consecutive attempts of this exam.
• The passing grade is 70% or higher.
• This exam consists of 50 multiple-choice questions.

Some details about taking your exam:

• Exam questions are distributed across multiple pages.
• Exam questions will have several plausible options; be sure to pick the answer that best satisfies each part of the question.
• Your answers are saved each time you move to another page within the exam.
• You can answer the questions in any order.
• You can go directly to any question by clicking its number in the navigation panel.
• You can flag a question to remind yourself to return to it later.
• You will receive your grade as soon as you submit your answers.

Allowed resources:

Gather these resources before you start your exam.

• Blank paper

What should I do before my exam?

• Gather these before you start your exam:
•   A photo I.D. to show before your exam.
•   A credit card to pay the automated proctoring fee.
•   (optional) Blank paper and pencil.
•   (optional) A glass of water.
• Make sure your work area is well-lit and your face is visible.
• We will be recording your screen, so close any extra tabs!
• Disconnect any extra monitors attached to your computer.
• You will have up to two (2) hours to complete your exam. Try to make sure you won't be interrupted during that time!
• You will require at least 1mbps of internet bandwidth. Ask others sharing your connection not to stream during your exam.
• Take a deep breath; you got this!

Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking

(10 reviews)

Matthew Van Cleave, Lansing Community College

Copyright Year: 2016

Publisher: Matthew J. Van Cleave

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by "yusef" Alexander Hayes, Professor, North Shore Community College on 6/9/21

Formal and informal reasoning, argument structure, and fallacies are covered comprehensively, meeting the author's goal of both depth and succinctness. read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

Formal and informal reasoning, argument structure, and fallacies are covered comprehensively, meeting the author's goal of both depth and succinctness.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

The book is accurate.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

While many modern examples are used, and they are helpful, they are not necessarily needed. The usefulness of logical principles and skills have proved themselves, and this text presents them clearly with many examples.

Clarity rating: 5

It is obvious that the author cares about their subject, audience, and students. The text is comprehensible and interesting.

Consistency rating: 5

The format is easy to understand and is consistent in framing.

Modularity rating: 5

This text would be easy to adapt.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The organization is excellent, my one suggestion would be a concluding chapter.

Interface rating: 5

I accessed the PDF version and it would be easy to work with.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

The writing is excellent.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

This is not an offensive text.

Reviewed by Susan Rottmann, Part-time Lecturer, University of Southern Maine on 3/2/21

I reviewed this book for a course titled "Creative and Critical Inquiry into Modern Life." It won't meet all my needs for that course, but I haven't yet found a book that would. I wanted to review this one because it states in the preface that it... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

I reviewed this book for a course titled "Creative and Critical Inquiry into Modern Life." It won't meet all my needs for that course, but I haven't yet found a book that would. I wanted to review this one because it states in the preface that it fits better for a general critical thinking course than for a true logic course. I'm not sure that I'd agree. I have been using Browne and Keeley's "Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking," and I think that book is a better introduction to critical thinking for non-philosophy majors. However, the latter is not open source so I will figure out how to get by without it in the future. Overall, the book seems comprehensive if the subject is logic. The index is on the short-side, but fine. However, one issue for me is that there are no page numbers on the table of contents, which is pretty annoying if you want to locate particular sections.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

I didn't find any errors. In general the book uses great examples. However, they are very much based in the American context, not for an international student audience. Some effort to broaden the chosen examples would make the book more widely applicable.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

I think the book will remain relevant because of the nature of the material that it addresses, however there will be a need to modify the examples in future editions and as the social and political context changes.

Clarity rating: 3

The text is lucid, but I think it would be difficult for introductory-level students who are not philosophy majors. For example, in Browne and Keeley's "Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking," the sub-headings are very accessible, such as "Experts cannot rescue us, despite what they say" or "wishful thinking: perhaps the biggest single speed bump on the road to critical thinking." By contrast, Van Cleave's "Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking" has more subheadings like this: "Using your own paraphrases of premises and conclusions to reconstruct arguments in standard form" or "Propositional logic and the four basic truth functional connectives." If students are prepared very well for the subject, it would work fine, but for students who are newly being introduced to critical thinking, it is rather technical.

It seems to be very consistent in terms of its terminology and framework.

Modularity rating: 4

The book is divided into 4 chapters, each having many sub-chapters. In that sense, it is readily divisible and modular. However, as noted above, there are no page numbers on the table of contents, which would make assigning certain parts rather frustrating. Also, I'm not sure why the book is only four chapter and has so many subheadings (for instance 17 in Chapter 2) and a length of 242 pages. Wouldn't it make more sense to break up the book into shorter chapters? I think this would make it easier to read and to assign in specific blocks to students.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

The organization of the book is fine overall, although I think adding page numbers to the table of contents and breaking it up into more separate chapters would help it to be more easily navigable.

Interface rating: 4

The book is very simply presented. In my opinion it is actually too simple. There are few boxes or diagrams that highlight and explain important points.

The text seems fine grammatically. I didn't notice any errors.

The book is written with an American audience in mind, but I did not notice culturally insensitive or offensive parts.

Overall, this book is not for my course, but I think it could work well in a philosophy course.

Reviewed by Daniel Lee, Assistant Professor of Economics and Leadership, Sweet Briar College on 11/11/19

This textbook is not particularly comprehensive (4 chapters long), but I view that as a benefit. In fact, I recommend it for use outside of traditional logic classes, but rather interdisciplinary classes that evaluate argument read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 3 see less

This textbook is not particularly comprehensive (4 chapters long), but I view that as a benefit. In fact, I recommend it for use outside of traditional logic classes, but rather interdisciplinary classes that evaluate argument

To the best of my ability, I regard this content as accurate, error-free, and unbiased

The book is broadly relevant and up-to-date, with a few stray temporal references (sydney olympics, particular presidencies). I don't view these time-dated examples as problematic as the logical underpinnings are still there and easily assessed

Clarity rating: 4

My only pushback on clarity is I didn't find the distinction between argument and explanation particularly helpful/useful/easy to follow. However, this experience may have been unique to my class.

To the best of my ability, I regard this content as internally consistent

I found this text quite modular, and was easily able to integrate other texts into my lessons and disregard certain chapters or sub-sections

The book had a logical and consistent structure, but to the extent that there are only 4 chapters, there isn't much scope for alternative approaches here

No problems with the book's interface

The text is grammatically sound

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

Perhaps the text could have been more universal in its approach. While I didn't find the book insensitive per-se, logic can be tricky here because the point is to evaluate meaningful (non-trivial) arguments, but any argument with that sense of gravity can also be traumatic to students (abortion, death penalty, etc)

No additional comments

Reviewed by Lisa N. Thomas-Smith, Graduate Part-time Instructor, CU Boulder on 7/1/19

The text covers all the relevant technical aspects of introductory logic and critical thinking, and covers them well. A separate glossary would be quite helpful to students. However, the terms are clearly and thoroughly explained within the text,... read more

The text covers all the relevant technical aspects of introductory logic and critical thinking, and covers them well. A separate glossary would be quite helpful to students. However, the terms are clearly and thoroughly explained within the text, and the index is very thorough.

The content is excellent. The text is thorough and accurate with no errors that I could discern. The terminology and exercises cover the material nicely and without bias.

The text should easily stand the test of time. The exercises are excellent and would be very helpful for students to internalize correct critical thinking practices. Because of the logical arrangement of the text and the many sub-sections, additional material should be very easy to add.

The text is extremely clearly and simply written. I anticipate that a diligent student could learn all of the material in the text with little additional instruction. The examples are relevant and easy to follow.

The text did not confuse terms or use inconsistent terminology, which is very important in a logic text. The discipline often uses multiple terms for the same concept, but this text avoids that trap nicely.

The text is fairly easily divisible. Since there are only four chapters, those chapters include large blocks of information. However, the chapters themselves are very well delineated and could be easily broken up so that parts could be left out or covered in a different order from the text.

The flow of the text is excellent. All of the information is handled solidly in an order that allows the student to build on the information previously covered.

The PDF Table of Contents does not include links or page numbers which would be very helpful for navigation. Other than that, the text was very easy to navigate. All the images, charts, and graphs were very clear

I found no grammatical errors in the text.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

The text including examples and exercises did not seem to be offensive or insensitive in any specific way. However, the examples included references to black and white people, but few others. Also, the text is very American specific with many examples from and for an American audience. More diversity, especially in the examples, would be appropriate and appreciated.

Reviewed by Leslie Aarons, Associate Professor of Philosophy, CUNY LaGuardia Community College on 5/16/19

This is an excellent introductory (first-year) Logic and Critical Thinking textbook. The book covers the important elementary information, clearly discussing such things as the purpose and basic structure of an argument; the difference between an... read more

This is an excellent introductory (first-year) Logic and Critical Thinking textbook. The book covers the important elementary information, clearly discussing such things as the purpose and basic structure of an argument; the difference between an argument and an explanation; validity; soundness; and the distinctions between an inductive and a deductive argument in accessible terms in the first chapter. It also does a good job introducing and discussing informal fallacies (Chapter 4). The incorporation of opportunities to evaluate real-world arguments is also very effective. Chapter 2 also covers a number of formal methods of evaluating arguments, such as Venn Diagrams and Propositional logic and the four basic truth functional connectives, but to my mind, it is much more thorough in its treatment of Informal Logic and Critical Thinking skills, than it is of formal logic. I also appreciated that Van Cleave’s book includes exercises with answers and an index, but there is no glossary; which I personally do not find detracts from the book's comprehensiveness.

Overall, Van Cleave's book is error-free and unbiased. The language used is accessible and engaging. There were no glaring inaccuracies that I was able to detect.

Van Cleave's Textbook uses relevant, contemporary content that will stand the test of time, at least for the next few years. Although some examples use certain subjects like former President Obama, it does so in a useful manner that inspires the use of critical thinking skills. There are an abundance of examples that inspire students to look at issues from many different political viewpoints, challenging students to practice evaluating arguments, and identifying fallacies. Many of these exercises encourage students to critique issues, and recognize their own inherent reader-biases and challenge their own beliefs--hallmarks of critical thinking.

As mentioned previously, the author has an accessible style that makes the content relatively easy to read and engaging. He also does a suitable job explaining jargon/technical language that is introduced in the textbook.

Van Cleave uses terminology consistently and the chapters flow well. The textbook orients the reader by offering effective introductions to new material, step-by-step explanations of the material, as well as offering clear summaries of each lesson.

This textbook's modularity is really quite good. Its language and structure are not overly convoluted or too-lengthy, making it convenient for individual instructors to adapt the materials to suit their methodological preferences.

The topics in the textbook are presented in a logical and clear fashion. The structure of the chapters are such that it is not necessary to have to follow the chapters in their sequential order, and coverage of material can be adapted to individual instructor's preferences.

The textbook is free of any problematic interface issues. Topics, sections and specific content are accessible and easy to navigate. Overall it is user-friendly.

I did not find any significant grammatical issues with the textbook.

The textbook is not culturally insensitive, making use of a diversity of inclusive examples. Materials are especially effective for first-year critical thinking/logic students.

I intend to adopt Van Cleave's textbook for a Critical Thinking class I am teaching at the Community College level. I believe that it will help me facilitate student-learning, and will be a good resource to build additional classroom activities from the materials it provides.

Reviewed by Jennie Harrop, Chair, Department of Professional Studies, George Fox University on 3/27/18

While the book is admirably comprehensive, its extensive details within a few short chapters may feel overwhelming to students. The author tackles an impressive breadth of concepts in Chapter 1, 2, 3, and 4, which leads to 50-plus-page chapters... read more

While the book is admirably comprehensive, its extensive details within a few short chapters may feel overwhelming to students. The author tackles an impressive breadth of concepts in Chapter 1, 2, 3, and 4, which leads to 50-plus-page chapters that are dense with statistical analyses and critical vocabulary. These topics are likely better broached in manageable snippets rather than hefty single chapters.

The ideas addressed in Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking are accurate but at times notably political. While politics are effectively used to exemplify key concepts, some students may be distracted by distinct political leanings.

The terms and definitions included are relevant, but the examples are specific to the current political, cultural, and social climates, which could make the materials seem dated in a few years without intentional and consistent updates.

While the reasoning is accurate, the author tends to complicate rather than simplify -- perhaps in an effort to cover a spectrum of related concepts. Beginning readers are likely to be overwhelmed and under-encouraged by his approach.

Consistency rating: 3

The four chapters are somewhat consistent in their play of definition, explanation, and example, but the structure of each chapter varies according to the concepts covered. In the third chapter, for example, key ideas are divided into sub-topics numbering from 3.1 to 3.10. In the fourth chapter, the sub-divisions are further divided into sub-sections numbered 4.1.1-4.1.5, 4.2.1-4.2.2, and 4.3.1 to 4.3.6. Readers who are working quickly to master new concepts may find themselves mired in similarly numbered subheadings, longing for a grounded concepts on which to hinge other key principles.

Modularity rating: 3

The book's four chapters make it mostly self-referential. The author would do well to beak this text down into additional subsections, easing readers' accessibility.

The content of the book flows logically and well, but the information needs to be better sub-divided within each larger chapter, easing the student experience.

The book's interface is effective, allowing readers to move from one section to the next with a single click. Additional sub-sections would ease this interplay even further.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

Some minor errors throughout.

For the most part, the book is culturally neutral, avoiding direct cultural references in an effort to remain relevant.

Reviewed by Yoichi Ishida, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Ohio University on 2/1/18

This textbook covers enough topics for a first-year course on logic and critical thinking. Chapter 1 covers the basics as in any standard textbook in this area. Chapter 2 covers propositional logic and categorical logic. In propositional logic,... read more

This textbook covers enough topics for a first-year course on logic and critical thinking. Chapter 1 covers the basics as in any standard textbook in this area. Chapter 2 covers propositional logic and categorical logic. In propositional logic, this textbook does not cover suppositional arguments, such as conditional proof and reductio ad absurdum. But other standard argument forms are covered. Chapter 3 covers inductive logic, and here this textbook introduces probability and its relationship with cognitive biases, which are rarely discussed in other textbooks. Chapter 4 introduces common informal fallacies. The answers to all the exercises are given at the end. However, the last set of exercises is in Chapter 3, Section 5. There are no exercises in the rest of the chapter. Chapter 4 has no exercises either. There is index, but no glossary.

The textbook is accurate.

The content of this textbook will not become obsolete soon.

The textbook is written clearly.

The textbook is internally consistent.

The textbook is fairly modular. For example, Chapter 3, together with a few sections from Chapter 1, can be used as a short introduction to inductive logic.

The textbook is well-organized.

There are no interface issues.

I did not find any grammatical errors.

This textbook is relevant to a first semester logic or critical thinking course.

Reviewed by Payal Doctor, Associate Professro, LaGuardia Community College on 2/1/18

This text is a beginner textbook for arguments and propositional logic. It covers the basics of identifying arguments, building arguments, and using basic logic to construct propositions and arguments. It is quite comprehensive for a beginner... read more

This text is a beginner textbook for arguments and propositional logic. It covers the basics of identifying arguments, building arguments, and using basic logic to construct propositions and arguments. It is quite comprehensive for a beginner book, but seems to be a good text for a course that needs a foundation for arguments. There are exercises on creating truth tables and proofs, so it could work as a logic primer in short sessions or with the addition of other course content.

The books is accurate in the information it presents. It does not contain errors and is unbiased. It covers the essential vocabulary clearly and givens ample examples and exercises to ensure the student understands the concepts

The content of the book is up to date and can be easily updated. Some examples are very current for analyzing the argument structure in a speech, but for this sort of text understandable examples are important and the author uses good examples.

The book is clear and easy to read. In particular, this is a good text for community college students who often have difficulty with reading comprehension. The language is straightforward and concepts are well explained.

The book is consistent in terminology, formatting, and examples. It flows well from one topic to the next, but it is also possible to jump around the text without loosing the voice of the text.

The books is broken down into sub units that make it easy to assign short blocks of content at a time. Later in the text, it does refer to a few concepts that appear early in that text, but these are all basic concepts that must be used to create a clear and understandable text. No sections are too long and each section stays on topic and relates the topic to those that have come before when necessary.

The flow of the text is logical and clear. It begins with the basic building blocks of arguments, and practice identifying more and more complex arguments is offered. Each chapter builds up from the previous chapter in introducing propositional logic, truth tables, and logical arguments. A select number of fallacies are presented at the end of the text, but these are related to topics that were presented before, so it makes sense to have these last.

The text is free if interface issues. I used the PDF and it worked fine on various devices without loosing formatting.

1. The book contains no grammatical errors.

The text is culturally sensitive, but examples used are a bit odd and may be objectionable to some students. For instance, President Obama's speech on Syria is used to evaluate an extended argument. This is an excellent example and it is explained well, but some who disagree with Obama's policies may have trouble moving beyond their own politics. However, other examples look at issues from all political viewpoints and ask students to evaluate the argument, fallacy, etc. and work towards looking past their own beliefs. Overall this book does use a variety of examples that most students can understand and evaluate.

My favorite part of this book is that it seems to be written for community college students. My students have trouble understanding readings in the New York Times, so it is nice to see a logic and critical thinking text use real language that students can understand and follow without the constant need of a dictionary.

Reviewed by Rebecca Owen, Adjunct Professor, Writing, Chemeketa Community College on 6/20/17

This textbook is quite thorough--there are conversational explanations of argument structure and logic. I think students will be happy with the conversational style this author employs. Also, there are many examples and exercises using current... read more

This textbook is quite thorough--there are conversational explanations of argument structure and logic. I think students will be happy with the conversational style this author employs. Also, there are many examples and exercises using current events, funny scenarios, or other interesting ways to evaluate argument structure and validity. The third section, which deals with logical fallacies, is very clear and comprehensive. My only critique of the material included in the book is that the middle section may be a bit dense and math-oriented for learners who appreciate the more informal, informative style of the first and third section. Also, the book ends rather abruptly--it moves from a description of a logical fallacy to the answers for the exercises earlier in the text.

The content is very reader-friendly, and the author writes with authority and clarity throughout the text. There are a few surface-level typos (Starbuck's instead of Starbucks, etc.). None of these small errors detract from the quality of the content, though.

One thing I really liked about this text was the author's wide variety of examples. To demonstrate different facets of logic, he used examples from current media, movies, literature, and many other concepts that students would recognize from their daily lives. The exercises in this text also included these types of pop-culture references, and I think students will enjoy the familiarity--as well as being able to see the logical structures behind these types of references. I don't think the text will need to be updated to reflect new instances and occurrences; the author did a fine job at picking examples that are relatively timeless. As far as the subject matter itself, I don't think it will become obsolete any time soon.

The author writes in a very conversational, easy-to-read manner. The examples used are quite helpful. The third section on logical fallacies is quite easy to read, follow, and understand. A student in an argument writing class could benefit from this section of the book. The middle section is less clear, though. A student learning about the basics of logic might have a hard time digesting all of the information contained in chapter two. This material might be better in two separate chapters. I think the author loses the balance of a conversational, helpful tone and focuses too heavily on equations.

Consistency rating: 4

Terminology in this book is quite consistent--the key words are highlighted in bold. Chapters 1 and 3 follow a similar organizational pattern, but chapter 2 is where the material becomes more dense and equation-heavy. I also would have liked a closing passage--something to indicate to the reader that we've reached the end of the chapter as well as the book.

I liked the overall structure of this book. If I'm teaching an argumentative writing class, I could easily point the students to the chapters where they can identify and practice identifying fallacies, for instance. The opening chapter is clear in defining the necessary terms, and it gives the students an understanding of the toolbox available to them in assessing and evaluating arguments. Even though I found the middle section to be dense, smaller portions could be assigned.

The author does a fine job connecting each defined term to the next. He provides examples of how each defined term works in a sentence or in an argument, and then he provides practice activities for students to try. The answers for each question are listed in the final pages of the book. The middle section feels like the heaviest part of the whole book--it would take the longest time for a student to digest if assigned the whole chapter. Even though this middle section is a bit heavy, it does fit the overall structure and flow of the book. New material builds on previous chapters and sub-chapters. It ends abruptly--I didn't realize that it had ended, and all of a sudden I found myself in the answer section for those earlier exercises.

The simple layout is quite helpful! There is nothing distracting, image-wise, in this text. The table of contents is clearly arranged, and each topic is easy to find.

Tiny edits could be made (Starbuck's/Starbucks, for one). Otherwise, it is free of distracting grammatical errors.

This text is quite culturally relevant. For instance, there is one example that mentions the rumors of Barack Obama's birthplace as somewhere other than the United States. This example is used to explain how to analyze an argument for validity. The more "sensational" examples (like the Obama one above) are helpful in showing argument structure, and they can also help students see how rumors like this might gain traction--as well as help to show students how to debunk them with their newfound understanding of argument and logic.

The writing style is excellent for the subject matter, especially in the third section explaining logical fallacies. Thank you for the opportunity to read and review this text!

Reviewed by Laurel Panser, Instructor, Riverland Community College on 6/20/17

This is a review of Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, an open source book version 1.4 by Matthew Van Cleave. The comparison book used was Patrick J. Hurley’s A Concise Introduction to Logic 12th Edition published by Cengage as well as... read more

This is a review of Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, an open source book version 1.4 by Matthew Van Cleave. The comparison book used was Patrick J. Hurley’s A Concise Introduction to Logic 12th Edition published by Cengage as well as the 13th edition with the same title. Lori Watson is the second author on the 13th edition.

Competing with Hurley is difficult with respect to comprehensiveness. For example, Van Cleave’s book is comprehensive to the extent that it probably covers at least two-thirds or more of what is dealt with in most introductory, one-semester logic courses. Van Cleave’s chapter 1 provides an overview of argumentation including discerning non-arguments from arguments, premises versus conclusions, deductive from inductive arguments, validity, soundness and more. Much of Van Cleave’s chapter 1 parallel’s Hurley’s chapter 1. Hurley’s chapter 3 regarding informal fallacies is comprehensive while Van Cleave’s chapter 4 on this topic is less extensive. Categorical propositions are a topic in Van Cleave’s chapter 2; Hurley’s chapters 4 and 5 provide more instruction on this, however. Propositional logic is another topic in Van Cleave’s chapter 2; Hurley’s chapters 6 and 7 provide more information on this, though. Van Cleave did discuss messy issues of language meaning briefly in his chapter 1; that is the topic of Hurley’s chapter 2.

Van Cleave’s book includes exercises with answers and an index. A glossary was not included.

Reviews of open source textbooks typically include criteria besides comprehensiveness. These include comments on accuracy of the information, whether the book will become obsolete soon, jargon-free clarity to the extent that is possible, organization, navigation ease, freedom from grammar errors and cultural relevance; Van Cleave’s book is fine in all of these areas. Further criteria for open source books includes modularity and consistency of terminology. Modularity is defined as including blocks of learning material that are easy to assign to students. Hurley’s book has a greater degree of modularity than Van Cleave’s textbook. The prose Van Cleave used is consistent.

Van Cleave’s book will not become obsolete soon.

Van Cleave’s book has accessible prose.

Van Cleave used terminology consistently.

Van Cleave’s book has a reasonable degree of modularity.

Van Cleave’s book is organized. The structure and flow of his book is fine.

Problems with navigation are not present.

Grammar problems were not present.

Van Cleave’s book is culturally relevant.

Van Cleave’s book is appropriate for some first semester logic courses.

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Reconstructing and analyzing arguments

• 1.1 What is an argument?
• 1.2 Identifying arguments
• 1.3 Arguments vs. explanations
• 1.4 More complex argument structures
• 1.5 Using your own paraphrases of premises and conclusions to reconstruct arguments in standard form
• 1.6 Validity
• 1.7 Soundness
• 1.8 Deductive vs. inductive arguments
• 1.9 Arguments with missing premises
• 1.10 Assuring, guarding, and discounting
• 1.11 Evaluative language
• 1.12 Evaluating a real-life argument

Chapter 2: Formal methods of evaluating arguments

• 2.1 What is a formal method of evaluation and why do we need them?
• 2.2 Propositional logic and the four basic truth functional connectives
• 2.3 Negation and disjunction
• 2.4 Using parentheses to translate complex sentences
• 2.5 “Not both” and “neither nor”
• 2.6 The truth table test of validity
• 2.7 Conditionals
• 2.8 “Unless”
• 2.9 Material equivalence
• 2.10 Tautologies, contradictions, and contingent statements
• 2.11 Proofs and the 8 valid forms of inference
• 2.12 How to construct proofs
• 2.13 Short review of propositional logic
• 2.14 Categorical logic
• 2.15 The Venn test of validity for immediate categorical inferences
• 2.16 Universal statements and existential commitment
• 2.17 Venn validity for categorical syllogisms

Chapter 3: Evaluating inductive arguments and probabilistic and statistical fallacies

• 3.1 Inductive arguments and statistical generalizations
• 3.2 Inference to the best explanation and the seven explanatory virtues
• 3.3 Analogical arguments
• 3.4 Causal arguments
• 3.5 Probability
• 3.6 The conjunction fallacy
• 3.7 The base rate fallacy
• 3.8 The small numbers fallacy
• 3.9 Regression to the mean fallacy
• 3.10 Gambler's fallacy

Chapter 4: Informal fallacies

• 4.1 Formal vs. informal fallacies
• 4.1.1 Composition fallacy
• 4.1.2 Division fallacy
• 4.1.3 Begging the question fallacy
• 4.1.4 False dichotomy
• 4.1.5 Equivocation
• 4.2 Slippery slope fallacies
• 4.2.1 Conceptual slippery slope
• 4.2.2 Causal slippery slope
• 4.3 Fallacies of relevance
• 4.3.1 Ad hominem
• 4.3.2 Straw man
• 4.3.3 Tu quoque
• 4.3.4 Genetic
• 4.3.5 Appeal to consequences
• 4.3.6 Appeal to authority

Answers to exercises Glossary/Index

Ancillary Material

About the book.

This is an introductory textbook in logic and critical thinking. The goal of the textbook is to provide the reader with a set of tools and skills that will enable them to identify and evaluate arguments. The book is intended for an introductory course that covers both formal and informal logic. As such, it is not a formal logic textbook, but is closer to what one would find marketed as a “critical thinking textbook.”

About the Contributors

Matthew Van Cleave ,   PhD, Philosophy, University of Cincinnati, 2007.  VAP at Concordia College (Moorhead), 2008-2012.  Assistant Professor at Lansing Community College, 2012-2016. Professor at Lansing Community College, 2016-

Contribute to this Page

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Lecture Notes on Logical reasoning conceptualization and critical thinking

Logical reasoning, conceptualization and critical thinking are essential for scientific thinking and research. The lecture notes exposes students to the importance of these three categories of knowledge for learning and knowing.

Related Papers

Open textbook

Matthew Van Cleave

An intro level text covering the basics of reasoning and argumentation, including some basic formal logic, and targeted at beginning undergraduates. I wrote it for a course I taught at Lansing Community College that covered both logic and critical thinking. It is an "open textbook" under a Creative Commons license (CC BY 4.0). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Dr Jason J Braithwaite

Informal Logic

Donald Hatcher

After critiquing the arguments against using formal logic to teach critical thinking, this paper argues that for theoretical, practical, and empirical reasons, instruction in the fundamentals of formal logic is essential for critical thinking, and so should be included in every class that purports to teach critical thinking.

Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities

Galina Jasečková

A characteristic feature of modern society is the ever-expanding information space. Hidden information attacks harm the lives of individuals and society in general. In this regard, studies of critical thinking seem particularly important to us. Therefore, critical thinking is interpreted in the academic discourse mainly in connection with the effort to cope with the growing amount of misinformation and hate speech. While teachers and policymakers consider critical thinking an important educational goal, many are unclear about developing this competency in a school setting. For many key competencies, the question is whether and how they can be acquired through planned educational courses/programs. Although there are specific training programs for critical thinking as a core competency, their design and effectiveness are scientifically controversial. Instruction in critical thinking becomes extremely important because it allows individuals to gain a more comprehensive understanding of...

Oxford Handbooks Online

Kevin Dunbar

Sabina Saldanha

The Nairobi Journal of Literature

susan wandera

Veornita Sims

Edwin Brandon , Norma Sirbrathhie

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Jamie C Watson

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Mudasir Tantray

Khánh Linh Nguyễn

Dan Bouhnik

PIPIN DANA PELITA

Susan Wolcott

Hassan Syed

Aidyn Aldaberdikyzy

Ricardo Arieira

Mark Weinstein

Abdiya Al-Askari

Thomas Bean

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Martin Goedhart

Peter A Facione

Pablo Pablo

Kennedy Wafula

Pencka Gancheva

ELAF RIYADH KHALIL ايلاف رياض خليل

Redefining Scientific Thinking for Higher Education

Charlie Thame

Science Education

Amos Dreyfus

Nina Hardiana

Michael Shaughnessy

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• My presentations

Auth with social network:

Download presentation

We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

THINKING. Critical Thinking

Published by Noelia Jasper Modified over 10 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "THINKING. Critical Thinking"— Presentation transcript:

By Anthony Campanaro & Dennis Hernandez

Critical Thinking Skills Academic Support Unit Adapted from: Practicing College Learning Strategies 3 rd edition Carolyn H. Hopper.

Critical and Creative Thinking Becoming an Active Learner Chapter 4.

CT is a self-directed process by which we take deliberate steps to think at the highest level of quality. CT is skillful, responsible thinking that is.

Studying Life Science Chapter 1.

‘ the 6 thinking styles’ by Dr. Edward de Bono (Ch. 8, the team handbook, p 6-7) Pooja Kishore Emily Vaughn Team: Fo’Sho!

Welcome Critical Thinking Academic Success Center

Evaluating Thinking Through Intellectual Standards

Creating Critical Thinkers Samantha Emswiler M.A. Philosophy, University of Miami.

Critical Thinking Presented by Holly Klingler, M.A., M.L.I.S.

Critical Thinking  Sitting on top of your shoulders is one of the finest computers on the earth.  But, like any other muscle in your body, it needs to.

Critical Thinking  Your brain, like any other muscle in your body, it needs to be exercised to work its best.  That exercise is called THINKING. I think,

The Essence of Critical Thinking the reasoned identification and evaluation of evidence to guide decision making analysis the form and content of evidence.

Book cover art to be inserted Chapter 9 Critical Thinking and Creative Problem Solving.

Unlocking the mind to critical thinking. “Thinking about Thinking”

Minnesota State Community and Technical College Critical Thinking Assignment Example and Assessment.

INTRODUCTION TO CRITICAL THINKING. “There are multiple decisions which you have to make entirely by yourself. You can’t lean on anybody else. And a good.

Chapter 1 Dev Ed Writing 990. “[n] obody is capable of free speech unless he [or she] knows how to use language, and such knowledge is not a gift: It.

Definitions – John Dewey

About project

© 2024 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.

Critical thinking definition

Critical thinking, as described by Oxford Languages, is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement.

Active and skillful approach, evaluation, assessment, synthesis, and/or evaluation of information obtained from, or made by, observation, knowledge, reflection, acumen or conversation, as a guide to belief and action, requires the critical thinking process, which is why it's often used in education and academics.

Some even may view it as a backbone of modern thought.

However, it's a skill, and skills must be trained and encouraged to be used at its full potential.

People turn up to various approaches in improving their critical thinking, like:

• Developing technical and problem-solving skills
• Engaging in more active listening
• Actively questioning their assumptions and beliefs
• Seeking out more diversity of thought
• Opening up their curiosity in an intellectual way etc.

Is critical thinking useful in writing?

Critical thinking can help in planning your paper and making it more concise, but it's not obvious at first. We carefully pinpointed some the questions you should ask yourself when boosting critical thinking in writing:

• What information should be included?
• Which information resources should the author look to?
• What degree of technical knowledge should the report assume its audience has?
• What is the most effective way to show information?
• How should the report be organized?
• How should it be designed?
• What tone and level of language difficulty should the document have?

Usage of critical thinking comes down not only to the outline of your paper, it also begs the question: How can we use critical thinking solving problems in our writing's topic?

Let's say, you have a Powerpoint on how critical thinking can reduce poverty in the United States. You'll primarily have to define critical thinking for the viewers, as well as use a lot of critical thinking questions and synonyms to get them to be familiar with your methods and start the thinking process behind it.

Are there any services that can help me use more critical thinking?

We understand that it's difficult to learn how to use critical thinking more effectively in just one article, but our service is here to help.

We are a team specializing in writing essays and other assignments for college students and all other types of customers who need a helping hand in its making. We cover a great range of topics, offer perfect quality work, always deliver on time and aim to leave our customers completely satisfied with what they ordered.

The ordering process is fully online, and it goes as follows:

• Select the topic and the deadline of your essay.
• Provide us with any details, requirements, statements that should be emphasized or particular parts of the essay writing process you struggle with.
• Leave the email address, where your completed order will be sent to.
• Select your prefered payment type, sit back and relax!

With lots of experience on the market, professionally degreed essay writers , online 24/7 customer support and incredibly low prices, you won't find a service offering a better deal than ours.

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING

Apr 07, 2019

400 likes | 1.1k Views

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING. Jonathan Dolhenty, Ph.D. Logic and Critical Thinking. Available at http://www.radicalacademy.com/logiccritthinking.htm. TRUTH AND THINKING. Truth is the object of thinking. Some truths are obvious; others are difficult to acquire.

Share Presentation

• common sense
• simply natural
• certain indicator words

Presentation Transcript

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING Jonathan Dolhenty, Ph.D.Logic and Critical Thinking. Available at http://www.radicalacademy.com/logiccritthinking.htm

TRUTH AND THINKING • Truth is the object of thinking. • Some truths are obvious; others are difficult to acquire. • Some judgments we make are simple; some judgments are complicated. • Some arguments, whether made by us or others, may be straightforward and easily understood; other arguments may be complex and consist of a series of smaller arguments, each needing to be critically examined and evaluated.

CRITICAL THINKING AND LOGIC • Every object of knowledge has a branch of knowledge which studies it. • EXAMPLES: • Planets, stars, and galaxies are studied by astronomy. • Chemistry studies the structure, composition, and properties of material substances and the transformations they undergo. • The origin, evolution, and development of human society is the object studied by sociology. • Economics, biology, geography, and grammar all have objects of knowledge which they investigate, describe, and try to explain. • WHAT ABOUT CRITICAL? • Critical thinking involves knowledge of the science of logic, including the skills of logical analysis, correct reasoning, and understanding statistical methods. • Critical thinking, however, involves more than just an understanding of logical procedures. • A good critical thinker must also understand the sources of knowledge, the nature of knowledge, and the nature of truth.

THE SCIENCE OF LOGIC • The object of knowledge involved in the science of logic is "thinking," but it is "thinking" approached in a special way. • Generally speaking, logic is that branch of knowledge which reflects upon the nature of "thinking" itself. • But this may confuse logic with other branches of knowledge which also have the nature of "thinking" as a part of their specific object of investigation.

“THINKING” AND LOGIC • Logic doesn't just deal with "thinking" in general. Logic deals with "correct thinking." • Training in logic should enable us to develop the skills necessary to think correctly, that is, logically. • A very simple definition would be: • Logic is the subject which teaches you the rules for correct and proper reasoning. • A more complete and "sophisticated" definition of logic, you can define it this way: • Logic is the science of those principles, laws, and methods, which the mind of man in its thinking must follow for the accurate and secure attainment of truth.

A KIND OF LOGIC: NATURAL LOGIC • “Natural Logic" or Common Sense • We all have an internal sense of what is logical and what is not, which we generally refer to as "common sense." • This "natural" logic we have learned from the moment of birth, through our personal experiences in the world and through our acquisition of language.

A KIND OF LOGIC: SCIENTIFIC LOGIC • Scientific logic is simply our natural logic trained and developed to expertness by means of well-established knowledge of the principles, laws, and methods which underlie the various operations of the mind in the pursuit of and attainment of truth.

LOGIC AS A SCIENCE AND AN ART • Logic as a science: • The science part is the knowledge of the principles, laws, and methods of logic itself. • Logic as an art: • Logic must be put into action or else the knowledge provided within the science of logic is of little use. • We can speak of the "art" of logic, that is, the practical application of the science of logic to our everyday affairs. • Logic as a science and an art • Logic is not intended merely to inform or instruct. • It is also a directive and aims at assisting us in the proper use of our power of reasoning. • In this sense, we can speak of logic as both a science and an art, a practical art meant to be applied in our ordinary affairs.

Why Study Logic? • Aim: To develop a system of methods and principles that we may use as criteria for evaluating the arguments of others and as guides in constructing arguments of our own. • Benefits: an increase in confidence that we are making sense when we criticize the arguments of others and when we advance arguments of our own.

THREE OPERATIONS OF THE MIND

Simple Apprehension, Judgment, Reason • Simple Apprehension: an operation of the mind whereby we abstract from the non-essential elements of a thing and recognize those essential elements which make it to be precisely that particular thing. • Judgment: an operation of the mind which unites two ideas by affirmation or separates by negation. • Reasoning / Mediate Inference: an operation of the mind that involves a process whereby from certain truths already known, we proceed to another which is different from those that are given but necessarily following from them.

Basic Concept: ARGUMENTS • Argument: a group of statements, one of which (the conclusion) is claimed to follow from the other or others (the premises). • Good arguments: those in which the conclusion really does follow from the premises • Bad arguments: those in which does not, even though it is claimed to

Basic Concept: Statement • Basis: Argument as a group of statement • Statement: a sentence that is either true or false; typically a declarative sentence. • Examples: • Hydrogen is combustible. • World War II began in 1939. • Some ducks are fish. • Abraham Lincoln was beheaded.

Basic Concept: Truth - Value • Truth value of the statement: the attribute by which a statement is either true or false. • Examples: • Hydrogen is combustible. (true) • World War II began in 1939. (true) • Some ducks are fish. (false) • Abraham Lincoln was beheaded. (false)

Basic Concept: Non-Statements • Sentences which cannot be said to be either true or false. • What is the atomic weight of carbon? (question) • Let’s go to the park today. (proposal) • We suggest that you travel by bus. (suggestion) • Turn to the left at the next corner. (command) • Ouch! (exclamation)

Components of an Argument: Premise(s) and conclusion • Premises: the statement that set forth the evidence. • Conclusion: the statement that is claimed to follow from the evidence. • Example: • All cats are animals. • Felix is a cat. • Therefore, Felix is an animal. • N.B. the first two statements are the premises; the third is the conclusion. • The claim that the conclusion follows from the premises is indicated by the word “therefore”.

Schema of an Argument:

Recognizing Arguments • One of the most important tasks in the analysis of arguments is being able to distinguish premises from conclusion. • If what is thought to be a conclusion is really a premise, and vice versa, the subsequent analysis cannot possibly be correct. • Frequently, arguments contain certain indicator words that provide clues in identifying premises and conclusion.

Conclusion Indicator • A word that provides a clue to identifying a conclusion. • Examples • Therefore hence whence • Wherefore thus consequently • Accordingly so it follows that • Entails that as a result We may conclude • Implies that it must be that We may infer • Whenever a statement follows one of these indicators, it can usually be identified as the conclusion. • By process of elimination the other statements in the argument are the premises. • Example: This is pen is out of ink. Consequently, it will not write.

Premise Indicator • A word that provides a clue to identifying a premise. • If an argument does not contain a conclusion indicator, it may contain a premise indicator. • Examples: • for the reason that in that seeing that • As indicate by for since • Because as inasmuch as • may be inferred from given that owing to • Any statement following one of these indicators can usually be identified as a premise. • Example: This locket is worth a lot of money, since it is made of platinum.

Basic Concept: Inference & Proposition • An inference, in the technical sense of the term, is the reasoning process used to produce an argument. • A proposition, in the technical sense, is the meaning or information content of a statement.

Passages lacking an inferential claim (1) • Passages lacking an inferential claim contain statements that could be premises or conclusions (or both) but what is missing is a claim that a reasoning process is being expressed. • Warnings/ pieces of advice: kinds of discourse aimed at modifying someone’s behavior. • Ex. “Watch out that you don’t slip on the floor.” • Ex. “I suggest you take philosophy in the first semester.” • Each of these could serve as the conclusion of an argument; but in their present context, there is no claim that they supported or implied by reasons of evidence. • Statements of beliefs or opinion: expressions of what someone happen to believe or think at a certain time. • Ex. I think a nation such as ours, with its high moral traditions and commitments, has a further responsibility to know how to became drawn into this conflict, and to learn the lessons it has to teach us for the future. • Alfred Hassler, Saigon, U.S,A.

Passages lacking an inferential claim (2) • Loosely associated statements: may be about the same general subject, but they lack a claim that one of them is proved by the others. • Ex. Not to honor men of worth will keep the people from contention; not to value goods that are hard to come by will keep them from theft; not to display what is desirable will keep them from being unsettled of mind. • Lao-Tzu, Thoughts from the Tao Te Ching • Report: consists of a group of statements that convey information about some situation or event. Ex. News Report • Expository passage: a kind of discourse that begins with a topic sentence followed by one or more sentences that develop the topic sentence. • Illustration: consists of a statement about certain subject combined with a reference to one or more specific instances intended to exemplify that statement. • Ex. Chemical elements, as well as compounds, can be represented by molecular formulas. Thus, oxygen is represented by “O2”, sodium chloride by “NaCl”, and sulfuric acid by “H2SO4”.

Conditional Statements • A conditional statement is an “if… then…” statement. • Ex. If it rains, the soil is wet. • It is made up of two component statements: if = antecedent; then = consequent • Occasionally, “then” is left out • Conditional statements are not arguments because there is no claim that either the antecedent or the consequent presents evidence. • In other words, there is no assertion that either the antecedent or the consequent is true. Rather, there is only the assertion that if the antecedent is true, then so is the consequent. • A conditional statement may serve as premise or the conclusion of an argument.

Explanations • An explanation consists of a statement or a group of statements intended to shed light on some phenomenon that is usually accepted as a matter of fact. • Ex. Cows can digest grass, while humans cannot, because their digestive systems contain enzymes not found in humans. • 2 parts: • Explanandum: the statement that describes the event or phenomenon to be explained. • Explanans: the statement or group of statements that purports to do the explaining. • Explanations are sometimes mistaken for arguments because they often contain the indicator word “because”. Yet explanations are not arguments for the following reason: In an explanation, the explanans is intended to show why something is the case, whereas in an argument the premises are intended to prove that something is the case.

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM Premises Explanans Conclusion Explanandum

• More by User

Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking Some notes on the midterm If you think we missed credit, please submit your defense by email to [email protected] by Nov. 1. Please address each question separately according to the grading criteria . We do make mistakes, so don't be afraid to address your concerns.

858 views • 17 slides

CRITICAL THINKING

CRITICAL THINKING. The Discipline The Skill The Art. Assumptions . Purpose -Teach critical thinking process as it applies to completing WIC nutritional counseling Assumes audience knows: Basic nutrition and risk factors

1.15k views • 19 slides

Critical Thinking. Introduction to the Unit Keith Jones. Critical Thinking. Critical Thinking 10 Credit Point M Level Dr Keith Jones Core Unit for all the MSc/MA Pathways. Introduction & Rationale.

1.76k views • 19 slides

Critical Thinking. Foundations of Science. Let’s think about it. What makes people effective critical thinkers?. Critical Thinking. Critical Thinkers… Are flexible Identify biases & assumptions Maintain an air of skepticism Separate facts from opinions Don’t oversimplify

511 views • 4 slides

Critical Thinking. Richard M. Schwartzstein, MD Executive Director, Carl J. Shapiro Institute for Education and Research Faculty Associate Dean for Medical Education Professor of Medicine Harvard Medical School. Critical Thinking. Do you do it?. Critical Thinking. Do you do it?

891 views • 47 slides

Critical Thinking. The Brain. One trillion cells compose the brain. 100 billion of them are neurons. This makes the number of possible journeys through the brain almost infinite. Your Comments…. “The unexamined life is not worth living.”. Socrates. Plato.

872 views • 32 slides

Critical Thinking. Sitting on top of your shoulders is one of the finest computers on the earth. But, like any other muscle in your body, it needs to be exercised to work its best. That exercise is called THINKING. I think, therefore I am. - Rene Descartes. What is critical thinking?.

1.19k views • 17 slides

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING. The Way to the Good Reasoning and Making Good Argument. 時間： 92 年 10 月 18 日 地點：東吳大學外雙溪 主講：米建國 東吳大學哲學系. What Is Critical Thinking?. Think it twice: Don’t take things for granted so easily.

2.96k views • 19 slides

Critical thinking

Student Services . Critical thinking. Orientation 2011 Angela Dierks. www.bbk.ac.uk/mybirkbeck . Student Services . Critical thinking in everyday life. You think critically all the time for example when deciding not to buy a particular product

760 views • 13 slides

Critical Thinking. GEA 101 Fall 2012. introduction. Course Particulars. Instructor: Dr. Michael Johnson Office: Room HSH219, Ho Sin Hang Building Office Hours: Wednesdays 15:00 to 16:00 Email: [email protected] Office Telephone: 2616 7455. Course Website.

687 views • 44 slides

Critical Thinking and our Inclination Toward Faulty Logic

Critical Thinking and our Inclination Toward Faulty Logic. Arendt. Critical Thinking & our inclination toward Faulty Logic. You have the right to question what you see, hear, and read.

672 views • 35 slides

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING. Lecture 11 – Scientific Reasoning I. REVIEW. First, let’s go over homework from last time. REVIEW. Last time we talked about the relationship between correlation and causation.

729 views • 43 slides

Critical Thinking: An Introduction. Logic and Logical Fallacies

Critical Thinking: An Introduction. Logic and Logical Fallacies. Lecture II. Truth Tables and Logical Operators. Face it…some things are either true or false (specifying this formally is called “propositional calculus”) A “proposition” is a meaningful statement

785 views • 23 slides

Critical Thinking. “The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing” - Albert Einstein. Critical Thinking in Your Life. Personal Life What constitutes a healthy diet? Which investment is better for my family? Why? Professional Life

1.3k views • 17 slides

Logic and Critical Thinking

Logic and Critical Thinking. CCC8001 2 nd Term 2013. introduction. Course Particulars. Instructor: Dr. Michael Johnson Office: Room HSH219, Ho Sin Hang Building Office Hours: Monday s 15:00 to 16:00 Email: [email protected] Office Telephone: 2616 7052.

1.17k views • 49 slides

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING by Karey Perkins

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING by Karey Perkins. RHETORICAL APPEALS: USING LOGOS, ETHOS, PATHOS. LOGOS = LOGIC and REASON= Soundness of facts, evidence, statistics, and reasoning; soundness of authority’s statements outside self; well-documented evidence

914 views • 71 slides

PHIL 002, Section 5 Logic and Critical Thinking

PHIL 002, Section 5 Logic and Critical Thinking. About this course. About this course. There’s so many of us!!!. About this course. There’s so many of us!!! Instructional staff. About this course. There’s so many of us!!! Instructional staff

298 views • 15 slides

PHIL 102-01 Logic and Critical Thinking Fall 2006

PHIL 102-01 Logic and Critical Thinking Fall 2006. About this course. About this course. There’s so many of us!!!. About this course. There’s so many of us!!! Instructional staff. About this course. There’s so many of us!!! Instructional staff

329 views • 20 slides

Dr. Andreas Yumarma. LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING. First Meeting. Sense of Logic. Study of the methods and principles used to distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning (Irving M. Copy & Carl Cohen, 1990)

499 views • 11 slides

Critical thinking about critical thinking

Critical thinking about critical thinking. Paula Owens and John Hopkin. Workshop description Based on two practical activities, this workshop will explore what critical thinking means in the context of geography, apply it to some examples and consider how to apply it in the classroom

981 views • 28 slides

Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking

Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking. DEFINITION. Definitions. A definition is an attempt to explain the meaning of a word by using a different word or phrase that has the same meaning. The word being defined is called the definiendum (Latin for “to be defined”).

483 views • 32 slides