CHARACTERISTICS OF CRITICAL THINKING

1. Common misconceptions of critical thinking:

a. Critical thinking is nothing but the activity of making criticisms. Critical thinking is not
just all about making criticisms since one can make criticisms even without critical
thinking. Critical thinking is primarily concerned with correct thinking. And so, if a one’s
faulty reasoning is corrected using critical thinking then that is critical thinking in the
form of criticism or critique. There are instances, however, when a person’s reasoning
may be correct but it is criticized for reasons that are irrelevant to the content of the
reasoning (fallacy). Example: criticisms that focus on the personality of the person
making the reasoning (ad hominem) (Dela Cruz et al, 2017).
b. Critical thinking is nothing but logical thinking. Critical thinking is more than just logical
thinking since it does not just deal with the coherence of the structure of reasoning
(logic) but also deals with the relevance of the content of reasoning (truth or falsity of
data). A logically coherent reasoning may be based on false data or wrong information.
The determination of whether the data or content of one’s reasoning are true or false is
a necessary part of critical thinking (Dela Cruz et al, 2017).
c. Critical thinking is nothing but the formal study of some formal reasoning skills that
are hardly useful in dealing with real-life issues. One of the formal reasoning skills
studied and developed in critical thinking is the skill of evaluating arguments. It is not
true that skills like evaluating arguments are hardly useful in dealing with the everyday
life issues since we make decisions everyday whether on practical or theoretical level,
subjective or personal and objective issues which determine the courses of our actions
and affect the quality of our life. And decision-making entails that we be able to
evaluate arguments involved in making our decision. One might have experienced
arguing with oneself before making very serious decision (Dela Cruz et al, 2017).

2. What is Critical Thinking?

a. Gerald Smith defines critical thinking as “a form of higher-order thinking – consciously
controlled reflective thinking thought that draws on, but can be distinguished from,
lower-order cognitive processes like perception, attention, and memory.”
b. Robert Ennis defines critical thinking as “reasonably reflective thinking that is focused
on deciding what to believe or do.”
c. For B. N. Moore and R. Parker, “Critical thinking is the careful application of reason in
the determination of whether a claim is true…it is not so much as coming up with claims
that constitute critical thinking; it’s the evaluation of claims.”
d. Brian Denis Egan, in the light of its important role in problem-solving and decision-
making writes about critical thinking:
“Critical thinking is the methodical analysis of reasoning. It is about understanding
the implications of inputs (data) and influences (bias) to the reasoning process.
Critical thinking allows us to take control of our thinking rather than letting it
become hijacked by convenience, mindset, assumptions, and bias. Critical
thinkers are able to ensure that they think (reason) with the greatest clarity and
precision of which they are capable. They are able to approach problem solving
with a level of detachment that permits a thorough and balanced analysis. Critical

1
 thinkers take the time necessary to make excellent decisions. Critical thinkers
seek first to understand. They take the time to find out what they do not know
before reaching conclusions, and they make more effective decisions as a result.”

3. Critical Thinking as Good Thinking

a. Critical thinking is not just a mere act of criticizing, thinking logically, and engaging in
impractical (useless) skills. It relates to other forms of thinking which include imagining,
doubting, recalling, and analyzing, among others (Facione, 2004).
b. Critical thinking is classified as good thinking because it is considered as a desirable form
of thinking in line with other forms of good thinking like creative or innovative thinking,
meditative thinking, and instinctive thinking (Facione, 2004).
c. But what makes critical thinking good thinking? Critical thinking is good thinking when it
enables us to achieve a given purpose or objective. The idea is that if we regard thinking
as a kind of tool or instrument, then it is only good if we are able to achieve the goal for
which it is intended for. Good thinking in this manner means strategic thinking (Dela
Cruz et al, 2017).
d. Critical thinking is a strategic kind of thinking when one’s goals are to analyze and
examine arguments or to assess the reasoning put forward to justify certain claims. In
other words, critical thinking is good thinking when is used to analyze and evaluate
reasoning or argumentation in order to come up with sound judgments or good
decisions (Dela Cruz et al, 2017).
4. Claims, and Issues (Moore, B.N. & Parker R., 2005)
a. Claims are basic elements in critical thinking; they are the things we say, aloud or in
writing, to convey information – to express our opinions or beliefs.
b. Claims or statements are the kinds of things that are true or false. “Cebu City is the most
populous city in Cebu,” is a true claim. Cebu city has the most populous metropolitan
area in the Philippines,” is a false claim since Davao City is larger than Cebu City.
c. The examination and evaluation of claims, including their relationships to each other, is
the principal job of critical thinking.
d. There are, however, claims that require little or no critical evaluation. They are so
obviously true or false that nobody would see any need for a close examination. But
there are many claims should be given a close look and evaluation – claims about
important personal decisions, about societal matters, about the nature of the world.
e. Whenever a claim is put into question – that is, when we ask questions about its truth or
falsity – we raise an issue. Claims, construed as issues and supported (or not) by
arguments, are the central focus of critical thinking.
f. An issue is nothing more than a question or the question is simply whether a given claim
is true or not.
g. Two ways of stating an issue: (1) Is Charles taller than Philip? (2) Whether Charles is
taller than Philip. We answer the question or settle the issue by determining whether
the claim is true or false.

5. Argumentation, Reasoning, and Critical Thinking (Dela Cruz et al, 2017)

a. The goal of critical thinking is the evaluation of reasoning or argumentation.

2
 b. The fundamental goal of reasoning (argumentation) is to provide sufficient reason to
one’s claim or position on a certain issue.
c. There are two basic misconceptions about argumentation (reasoning): first, is the ideas
that the fundamental goal of argumentation is persuasion; second, is the idea that
argumentation is the same as explanation.
i. To be able to persuade other people to accept one’s argument or reasoning is
an effect of reasoning but it is not the primary goal of reasoning.
ii. Persuasiveness is a psychological matter (state of mind) influenced by things
having no relevant connection to reasoning such as: appeals to force, pity,
popular beliefs, ignorance, and irrelevant attacks on the person doing the
reasoning or advancing the argument.
iii. As a consequence, correct reasoning may not be persuasive or persuasive
reasoning may be incorrect.
iv. Explanation clarifies, elaborates or qualifies a certain claim but does not justify
it. Reasoning, therefore, is not the same as an explanation; though the skill
explanation is one of the skills of critical thinking.

6. Core Critical Thinking Skills (Dela Cruz et al, 2017)

a. Interpretation. It enables us “to comprehend and express the meaning or significance of
a wide variety of experiences, situations, data, events, judgments, conventions, beliefs,
rules, procedures, or criteria.” It includes the subskills of categorizing, decoding
significance, and clarifying meanings.
b. Analysis. It allows us “to identify the intended and actual inferential relationships
among statements, questions, concepts, descriptions, or other forms of representation
intended to express belief, judgment, experiences, reasons, information, or opinions.”
The subskills of analysis skill include examining ideas, and analyzing arguments.
c. Inference. It is the skill that permits us “to identify and secure elements needed to draw
reasonable conclusions; to form conjectures and hypotheses; to consider relevant
information and to deduce the consequences flowing from data, statements, principles,
evidence, judgments, beliefs, opinions, concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms
of representation.” Its subskills include questioning evidence, conjecturing alternatives,
and drawing conclusions.
d. Evaluation. It allows us “to assess the credibility of statements or other representations
which are accounts of descriptions of a person’s perception, experience, situation,
judgement, belief, or opinion; and of assessing the logical strength of the actual or
intended inferential relationships among statements. Evaluation skill includes assessing
the credibility of claims and assessing the quality of arguments.
e. Explanation. It is the skill that enables us “to present in a cogent and coherent way the
results of one’s reasoning;” or more specifically, “to state the results of one’s reasoning;
to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological,
criteriological, and contextual considerations upon which one’s results were based; and
to present one’s reasoning in the form of cogent arguments.” This skill includes stating
results, justifying procedures, and presenting argument.

3
 f. Self-regulation. It is a skill which enables “self-consciously monitoring one’s cognitive
activities, the elements used in those activities, and the results produced, particularly by
applying skills in [the] analysis, and evaluation to one’s own inferential judgments with a
view toward questioning, confirming, validation, or correcting either one’s reasoning or
one’s results.” This skill includes self-examination and self-correction as subskills.

Some helpful ways to motivate the application of critical thinking skills (Dela Cruz et. al. 2017, p37):

Interpretation -What does it mean?

-What’s happening?
-How should we understand that (e.g. what s/he just said)?
-What is the best way to characterize/categorize/classify this?
-In this context, what was intended by saying/doing that?
-How can we make sense out of this (experience, feeling, statement)?
Analysis -Please tell us again your reasons for making that claim.
-What is your conclusion/What is it that you are clarifying?
-Why do you think that?
-What are the pro and con arguments?
-What assumptions must we make to accept that conclusion?
-What is you basis for saying that?
Inference -Given what we know so far, what conclusions can we draw?
-Given what we know so far, what can we rule out?
-What does this evidence imply?
-If we abandoned/accepted that assumption, how would things change?
-What additional information do we need to resolve this question?
-If we believe these things, what would they imply for us going forward?
-What are the consequences of doing things that way?
-What are some alternatives we haven’t yet explored?
-Let’s consider each option and see where it takes us.
-Are there any undesirable consequences that we can and should foresee?
Evaluation -How credible is that claim?
-Why do we think we can trust what this person claims?
-How strong are those arguments?
-Do we have our facts right?
-How confident can we be in our conclusion, given what we know?
Explanation -What were the specific findings/results of the investigation?
-Please tell us how you conducted that analysis.
-How did you come to that interpretation?
-Please take us through your reasoning one more time.
-Why do you think that (was the right answer/was the solution)?
-How would you explain why this particular decision was made?
Self-regulation -Our position on this issue is still too vague; can we be more precise?
-How good was our methodology; and how well did we follow it?
-Is there a way we reconcile these two apparently conflicting conclusions?
-How good is our evidence?
-Ok, before we commit, what are we missing?
-I’m finding some of our definitions a little confusing; can we revisit what we mean
by certain things before making any final decision?

4
Activity 2.2: Application of the Core Critical Thinking Skills in Everyday Life (Dela Cruz et. al. 2017, p39)

Which activity did I use this

COGNITIVE SKILLS FUNCTION/S cognitive skill? How did I use
this cognitive skill for that
particular decision or activity?
Interpretation To comprehend and express
meanings
Analysis To identify inferential
relationships among statements
or beliefs
Inference To identify and gather
information necessary in
drawing reasonable conclusions
and forming conjectures and
hypotheses.
Evaluation To assess the credibility of
statements and the logical
strength of the inferential
relationships among them
Explanation To clearly and coherently
present the results of one’s
reasoning
Self-regulation To self-consciously monitor,
assess, and correct one’s own
reasoning

Activity 2.3: Insight and reflection writing

**Write your insights and reflection about the activity as you answer the question below:

**Based on the result of the activity “Application of the Core Critical Thinking Skills in Everyday Life,”
how important are core thinking skills in your daily life? How would you assess the relevance of critical
thinking skills in making everyday decisions?

7. Core Critical Thinking Attitudes

a. Cognitive skills are undoubtedly important for critical thinking, but critical thinking
requires something more. For it is possible for an individual to have such skills but s/he
is not yet a critical thinker. An example of which, is when a person who has acquired
such skills in his/her study and yet does not practice them in real life (Dela Cruz et. al.
2017, p38).
b. Human beings are not just thinking machines. They also have attitudes or dispositions
that help (or break) them approach life situations (Dela Cruz et. al. 2017, p39).
c. It is therefore the combination of these skills and dispositions that defines critical
thinking. A person may be very skillful in doing analysis, for instance, but if s/he is close-
minded and does not explore alternative views, s/he is not considered a critical thinker
(Dela Cruz et. al. 2017, p39).

5
 d. Facione (2013, pp. 10-12) identifies the following core critical thinking attitudes: (1)
truth-seeking, (2) inquisitive, (3) open-minded, (4) analytical, (5) systematic, (6)
judicious, and (7) confident in reasoning.
i. Truth seeking means being concerned with becoming and remaining well-
informed of the truth of the matter/issue.
ii. Inquisitiveness, which closely ties up with truth-seeking, is being curious about
the real nature of things and being inclined to ask intelligent and relevant
questions to acquire a deeper understanding of things.
iii. Open-mindedness means being considerate of divergent views or being flexible
in considering alternative views and opinions, and having the willingness to
reconsider and revise one’s views in light of better or superior views.
iv. Analytical attitude means having the disposition to understand complex
concepts by means of simple concepts.
v. Systematic attitude means being coherent and organized in one’s reasoning.
vi. (And) being confident in reasoning is having trust in the process of reasoned
inquiry and having self-confidence in one’s own ability to reason.
e. In sum, these dispositions make-up what Siegel (1990, as cited in Smith 2003, pp. 26-27)
calls the “critical spirit,” referring to the over-all attitude of the critical thinker as s/he
applies his/her critical thinking skills.

8. DECISION MAKING: Analysis and intuition

a. Everyday we make loads of decisions in life. Consequently, decision-making methods are
important in the sense that they help us make sound decisions especially those
decisions that truly matter or life changing.
b. There are two basic kinds of thinking processes or systems at work when we are
reasoning, passing judgments, or making decisions. These two thinking processes or
systems have come to be called, in the literature or among most experts in the field, as
System 1 and System 2.
c. System 1 thinking (intuitive thinking) is characterized as the form of thinking that is
intuitive, heuristic, unconscious, implicit and fast.
d. System 2 thinking (strategic analysis) is analytic, rule-based, conscious, explicit and slow.
e. The are two widely acknowledged thinking forms in decision-making, namely strategic
analysis and intuitive thinking.
f. Strategic Analysis:
i. Stages of problem solving or decision making (required for analysis):
1. Identification of the problem
2. Obtaining necessary information
3. Production of possible solutions
4. Evaluation of such solutions
5. Selection of a strategy for performance
ii. Methods of strategic analysis
1. SWOT (Strength, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats). Was
conceived originally to aid decision-makers in the areas of business and
industry. But due to its universal application, it is also widely used in

6
 many other areas, such as education and health development, and even
personal development. Strengths include the advantages; weaknesses
include areas that still require improvements and things that need to be
avoided; opportunities include possible areas of growth or
development in the future; and threats include obstacles to achieving
one’s objectives or external factors that are beyond one’s control that
could put one’s strategy at risk.
2. PEST (political, economics, social, and technological) analysis examines
the effects of relevant external factors on what is being decided on. The
political includes the legal laws and practices, or how the government
can affect the decision-making; the economic includes factors like
financial resources and value of money in relation to interests rates
(credit) and inflation; the social includes factors like demographics
(population and distribution according to income and others) and
culture; and the technological include factors related to current
advancements in technology like the internet, computers, and popular
gadgets. Basically, PEST can be used with SWOT in the sense that results
of PEST analysis provides concrete data for specific factors (ex. Political)
for SWOT analysis.
3. CBA (Cost-benefit analysis) or Benefit-cost analysis (BCA), is a systematic
method or process of calculating the strengths (benefits, advantages)
and weaknesses (costs, disadvantages) of each of the alternative
(options) solutions to a given problem in monetary values.
4. CEA (Cost-effectiveness analysis) generally proceeds in the same way as
CBA in the sense that it is likewise a systematic method for weighing the
strengths and weaknesses of the alternatives in a given problem. The
difference is that while in CBA all outcomes, which come in the form of
costs and benefits, are measured in monetary terms, and in CEA, not all
outcomes, not all costs and benefits, are measured in monetary values
but are instead measured in terms of effectiveness.
5. SEU (Subjective Expected Utility analysis) is the kind of analysis
examined in Decision Theory, the discipline that “provides a rational
framework for choosing between alternative courses of action when the
consequences resulting from the choice are imperfectly known” (North
1968, 200).

References:

Cohen, C. & Copi, I. (2005). Logic: Language, deduction and induction. 12th Edition. International Edition.
Singapore: Prentice Hall.

7
Dela Cruz, A.R., Fadrigon, C., & Mabaquiao, N. Jr. (2017). Trends, networks, and critical thinking in the
21st century culture. Quezon City: Phoenix.

Egan, B.N. (2005). The role of critical thinking in effective decision-making. Global Knowledge Network,
Inc., 1-15. Online: https://articulosbm.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/criticalthinking.pdf

Ennis, R.H. (1991). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14 (1), 5-24.

Facione, P. (2013). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Online: http://spu.edu/depts/health-
sciences/grad/documents/ctbyfacione.pdf. 1-27.

Mabaquiao, N. Jr. (2016). Making life worth living: An introduction to the philosophy of the human
person. Quezon City: Phoenix.

Moore, B.N. & Richard, P. (2005). Critical thinking. 7th Edition. International Edition. McGraw Hill.

North, Warner. 1968. A tutorial introduction to decision theory. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science
and Cybernetics, Vol. SSC-4, No. 3, pp. 200-210.