Critical Thinking Study Question Collaboration Page

Critical Thinking Study Question Collaboration

Chapter 1: Thinking about Thinking

What are some of the opportunities and obstacles of trying to become a better critical thinking in the information age?

The information age provides many obstacles and opportunities for becoming a better critical thinker. With the information age knowledge is more readily available and ways of research (gaining knowledge) have improved. With more education and greater availability of knowledge come more knowledge workers and more data to study. Thus, many kinds of research have become less expensive and once again the "production" of information benefits. However, this "knowledge industry" is attempting to answer some very difficult questions and often falls short. This idea of fast results, due to the demand for more information, proves to be one of the downfalls with the information age. Things have become oversimplified, largely by the media, in attempts to keep up with all of the information. With this oversimplification, information has become distorted. Therefore, despite the progress of research, the accuracy and truth in information is much harder to sort out. -Allie

How has the progress of research and "knowledge work" contributed to and complicated the pursuit of truth?

Understand and explicate terms and phrases such as: the Mozart effect, birth order theories, thinking in stereo, emotional flooding, and terms related to describing reflective style and persona.

Birth order theories: the idea that the order in which siblings are born affects their personalities including school performance, intelligence, sexual orientation, allergies, and civil disobedience. For example, first borns tend to be more conservative and obedient of authority than last borns, who tend to be rebellious. - Kat

What is epistemology? What are some of the values and limitations of logic in becoming a better thinker? What is the relationship between logic and good thinking?

Epistemology: the study of the origins and grounds for knowledge - Kat

There are several values and limitations of logic in becoming a better thinker. Some values are the precision and rigor which logic allows in arguments, which are essential portions of good, truth seeking, and reflective discussion. Ultimately, this leads to better thinking. However, some limitations of logic include cultural boundaries because the definition of logic can vary. Likewise, these differences, both in culture and definition, require interpretation to understand and cannot be settled with logic alone. Thus, thinking logically, or "rationally," as well as "reasonably," leads to good thinking. -Allie

What does it mean to make your thought an object of thought?

To think "in stereo" on a meta-level by asking critical questions about what you are thinking about - Kat

Making one's thought an object of thought means to practice thinking "in stereo." That is, to include influences, explanations, motivations, and interpersonal effects in one's thinking about whatever is being discussed. -Allie

What are the three main critical thinking virtues?

The three ideals are: "sympathetic understanding", "seeking knowledge", and "inviting appraisal." - Kat

Sympathetic Understanding- enter into empathetic understanding, asking questions, repeat the person's positions back to them to make sure they understand what they are saying, as well as yourself.

Seeking Knowledge- Stating you don't know something or questioning that something is wrong, or intruducing that you want to know something more about the topic.

Inviting Appraisal- Asking "Do you agree?" etc. -Steph

Chapter 2: Making Reflective Moves

1. Understand and explicate terms and phrases such as: presumption, conversational implicature, burden of proof, rationales, claims, and logic chopping.

Presumption: a commonly held belief or a claim that is taken or implied to be true within the context of the deliberation; determined by the interests and sociological and historical factors of the individuals participating in the deliberation; presumptions should be questioned but not immediately (it will kill the conversation)

Conversational implicature: the idea that words alone do not determine what is actually being conveyed; we imply more than we actually say; do not assume that someone is implying something - seek clarification

Burden of proof: the obligation of a speaker (or a writer) to provide credible reasons for the claims he or she makes; it can shift like a tennis match; the shifts depend on whether the individuals accept, modify, or reject a claim

Rationales: premises or reasons that imply or explain a conclusion

Claims: statements that are either true or false

Logic chopping: when a person strips another's speech down to only the main points and ignores everything else (context, the speaker's tone/feelings/experiences) - Kat

Test answer - Alfino

Explain and be prepared to distinguish arguments from explanations. Arguments: when the conclusion is in doubt; justify beliefs by asking the question "Why should I believe this?"

Explanations: when the conclusion is not in doubt; show how something came to be/the cause of something by asking the question "Why did this happen?" - Kat

Review the key features of basic reconstructions and be prepared to give a basic reconstruction of a short argument. A reconstruction represents, in a concise fashion, the rationales in a piece of writing or a speach. (Rationales have reasons and explanations) The goal of a reconstruction is to check understanding. The Steps are as follows:

1.Identify the general conclusion

  -State the simple conclusion and then refine.

  -It is usually stated in your own words.

2.Identify and organize sub-arguments

  -What is a reason for what?

  -Everything should point to something else as a reason or explanation for that view.

3. Write up the reconstruction in a good, clear, logical prose.

  -Keep your personal views and opinions out of the reconstruction.

--Steph

Review the principles of fair interpretation.

Understand the difference between Conversational Interpretive Strategies and Rationale Engagement Strategies and be prepared to apply them in particular cases.

Conversational Interpretive Strategies (CIS) - the dynamics of the group/people; the "moves" you need to/should make in a reflective deliberation

Rationale Engagement Strategies (RES) - concerns the actual reasoning of the deliberation; there are three ways to do this:

   1. Questioning the truth of premises

   2. Questioning the connection between the premises and conclusion

   3. Reframing the argument

- Kat

Chapter 3: Sherlock’s Logic – Deductive and Inductive Inferences in Everyday Reflection

Understand and explicate the terms and phrases such as: deductive argument, inductive argument, validity, the Principle of

Induction, categorical logic, propositional logic, the square of opposition, truth tables,

Deductive argument - used when the conclusion has absolute certainty; structure is as follows:

   1. If A, then B

   2. A

   C. B

Inductive argument - used to show the probability/likelihood that the conclusion is true; often utilizes past experiences, memories, and patterns (ex: the sun rising every day)

- Kat

Within categorical logic, understand and apply terms such as: contradictories, contraries, subcontraries, subalterns.

Within propositional logic, understand the main components of the logical system (claims or propositions, connectives, parentheses, brackets, and braces), the five main valid argument patterns, and how the valid argument patterns determine validity.

In propositional logic, apply the valid argument patterns to simple formalized arguments to determine validity.

From the part of the chapter on induction, describe the difference between inductive argument structures and deductive ones. In what situations would one choose inductive reasoning over deductive? What is a hasty generalization?

Explain the nature and structure of analogical arguments. How do they persuade?

Chapter 4: Tell me Why . . .Or How . . . Explanation and Causation in Reflective Practice

Give examples of the wide range of types of explanatory questions.

What are the main features of good explanations?

What are the competing explanatory accounts of the redness of Mars?

What’s the difference between a “why” question and a “how” question?

Do explanations need to connect to “ultimate purposes”? Be prepared to present both points of view.

Can you see “causation”?

What’s the difference between a necessary and sufficient condition?

Identify four of Mill’s methods and be prepared to explain each.

What is “inverse” and “direct” variation?

What is a “correlation coefficient”?

What is the fallacy of “complex cause”? “common cause”?

Chapter 5: “We Don’t Get Fooled Again” – Uses and Misuses of Numerical and Statistical Information

What are some of the difficulties that people face when trying to use and discuss numeric and statistical information?

What is “innumeracy”?

Idenify the main kinds of problems understanding and thinking about numeric and statistical information, including problems of context, large numbers, compounding, linearity, baseline, surveys and sampling, odds, probability, correlation, and cause.

Why is it that wasting a billion dollars might not be such a big deal for the Federal Government?

Identify and explain these terms: representative sample, depressive realism, sample space, sampling error, the law of large numbers, gambler’s fallacy, bell curve, multiple regression analysis,

What is the Sports Illustrated jinx? Do you think it’s real? Why or why not?

Chapter 6 – The Way Up is the Way Down – Thinking Through Complexity.

Give an example of how sciences simplify things to build models and be prepared to say something about the limits of a simple model of causality.

What is network theory?

What does “six degrees of separation” mean? Links, nodes, “weak link” (significance of), Konigsburg Bridge Problem, Baltimore syphilis epidemic, competing theories, network theory approach, Colorado Springs epidemic, possibilities for intervention, Hush Puppies, sig. of,

Complex systems: inerrelatedness, 1965 New York City power outage (sig. of), coupling/decoupling.

Be prepared to give your own examples of complex networks.

Buffering, redundant systems, pos/neg feedback (examples of).

The Beer Game (sig. of), Partner system for police (sig. of).

Political ideologies as clusters in a political network.

Gottman’s work, significance, critical variables, Intransparency.

Dorner’s work. Characteristics of good managers

Chaos vs. Complexity. Characteristics of chaotic system.

The weather.

Practical lessons from chaos theory for critical thinking.

Thin-slicing. Sig. of.

Intuition, sig. and problems of.

What do researchers on socio-linguistics and conflict tell us about the role of gender in deliberative communication?