CHAP 1: INTRODUCTION TO CRITICAL THINKING

I. What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking: general term given to a wide range of cognitive skills and
intellectual features needed to
 effectively identify, analyze, and evaluate arguments and truth claims
 discover and overcome personal prejudices and biases
 formulate and present convincing reasons in support of conclusions
 make reasonable, intelligent decisions about what to believe and what
 to do
II. CRITICAL THINKING STANDARDS
1.Clarity (sự rõ ràng) 5. Consistency (chắc
2. Accuracy (sự đúng chắn nhất trí)
đắn) 6. Completeness (sự
3. Precision (sự chính hoàn chỉnh)
xác) 7. Logical correctness
4. Relevance (liên quan) (lập luận logic)
8. Fairness(công bằng)
III. Benefits of Critical Thinking
 Academic Performance
Understand the arguments and beliefs of others

Critically evaluating those arguments and beliefs

Develop and defend one's own well-supported arguments and beliefs.

 Workplace
Helps us to reflect and get a deeper understanding of our own and others’ decisions

Encourage open-mindedness to change

Aid us in being more analytical in solving problems

 Daily life
Helps us to avoid making foolish personal decisions.

Promotes an informed and concerned citizenry capable of making good decisions on important social, political and
economic issues.

Aids in the development of autonomous thinkers capable of examining their assumptions, dogmas: giáo điều, and
prejudices.
 IV. BARIERS TO CRITICAL THINKING
Egocentrism: the tendency to see reality as centered on oneself (tự cho mình là
đúng, coi giá trị tư tưởng của mình cao hơn người khác)
 Self-interested thinking: a form lợi ích như cầu của tất cả mọi
of egocentrism, the tendency to người)
accept and defend one’s belief  Self- serving bias: a form of
that accord with one’s own egocentrism, the tendency to
self-interest (nghĩ về nhu cầu overrate oneself
lợi ích của bản thân trên những
Socialcentrism: group- centered thinking
 Group bias: a from of  Conformism (tâm lý bầy đàn, a
sociocentrism, the tendency to dua): a formof sociocentrism,
see one’s culture or group as the tendency to conform, often
being better than others unthinking, to authority or
togroup standards of conduct
and beief
Unwarranted assumptions (giả định khôn cơ sở): things we take for granted
without good reason
 Stereotypes (rập khuôn, vơ đua cả nắm): a formof unwarranted assumptions,
generalizations about a group of people in which identical characteristics are
assigned to all or virtually all members of the group, often without regard to
whether such attributions are accurate
Relativistic thinking: thinking that is based on the idea that there is no “ objective”
or “ absolute” truth because truth is simply a matter of opinion
 Moral relativism: claims that is morally right and good varies from
individual to individual or from culture to culture
Wishfil thinking: believing sth because it makes one feel good, not because there
is good reason for thinking that itis true
Chap2
A fact is a thing that is occurred, to exist, or to be true.
A statement is a sentence that makes good grammatical sense when it is prefaced
with the words
"It is true that..." or "It is false that...”
 Argument: a group of statements one or more of which called premises are
intended to prove or support another statement, a claim defended with
reasons.
 Conclusion: statement in an argument that the premises are intended to
prove support
 Premises: statements in an argument offered as evidence or reasons why we
should accept another statement
 Statement: is a sentence that can be viewed as either true or false, can
sometimes be exspressed as a phrase or an incomplete clause, rather than as
a complete declarative sentence
o rhetorical question: o ought imperative: a
sentence that has the sentence that has the form
grammatical form of a of an imperative or
question but is meant to be command but is intended
understood as a statement to assert a value or ought
judgement about what is
good or bad, or should
statement, or ought to do.
 indicator words: are words or phrases that provide clues that premises or
conclusions are being put forward ex. (therefore, consequently, thus,
because, and since)
 premise indicators: indicate  conclusion indicators:
that premises are being indicate that conclusions
offered, since, for, seeing are being offered
that, in asmuch as, because, (therefore, consequently,
given that, considereing thus, because, and since)
that, in view of the fact
that, judging form, as
indicated by, on account of
  NONARGUMENTATIVE DISCOURSE

 reports: to convey information about a subject

 unsupported assertions: statements about what a speaker or writer
happens to believe
 conditional statements: are if-then statements, if a statement is true if
another statement is true
 antecedent: the first part of  chain arguments: the
the statement following the antecedent (the if part) of
word if the first statement is linked
 consequent: the second part to the consequent (the then
the statement following the part)
word then
 illustrations: intended to provide examples of a claim, rather than prove
or support the claim
 explanations: tries to show why something is the case not to prove that
it is the case
 explanandum: the statement that is explained
 explanans: the statement that does the explaining
o the common-knowledge test: is a o the authors intent test: is it the
statement that the passage seeks to speakers or writters intent to prove
prove or explain a matter of or establish that something is the
common knowledge case, this is to provide reasons or
evidence for accepting a claim as
o the past-event test: the statement
true, to offer an account of why
that the passge is seeking to prove
some event has occured
or explain an event that occured in
the past o the principle charity test: requires
that we always interpret unclear
passages generously and in
particular that we never interpret a
passage generously and that we
never interpret a passage as a bad
 argument when the evidence
CHAPTER 3:
Deductive arguments claim that
 If the premises are true, then
the conclusion must be true.
 The conclusion follows
necessarily from the premises.
 The premises provide
conclusive evidence for the
truth of the conclusion.
 It is impossible for all the
premises to be true and the
conclusion false.
 It is logically inconsistent to
assert the premises and deny
the conclusion, meaning that if
you accept the premises, you
must accept the conclusion.
There are four tests that can be used to determine whether an
argument is deductive or inductive:
1. The Indicator Word Test
Common deduction indicator words include words or
phrases like necessarily,
logically, it must be the case that, and this proves
that.
▪ Common induction indicator words include words
or phrases like probably, likely, it is plausible to
suppose that, it is reasonable to think that, and it's a
good bet that.
2. The Strict Necessity Test
reasonalbly permits us to interpret
it as not an argument at all.
Inductive arguments claim that
 If the premises are true, then
the conclusion is probably true.
 The conclusion follows
probably from the premises.
 The premises provide good (but
not conclusive) evidence for the
truth of the conclusion.
 It is unlikely for the premises to
be true and the conclusion
false.
 Although it is logically
consistent to assert
the premises and deny the
conclusion, the conclusion is
probably true if the premises
are true.
The strict necessity test asks whether the conclusion
follows from
the premises with strict logical necessity. If it does,
then the
argument is deductive.
▪ Otherwise, the argument is inductive
3. The Common Pattern Test
The common pattern test asks whether the argument
exhibits a pattern of
reasoning that is characteristically deductive or When interpreting an unclear argument or passage,
inductive. always

▪ If the argument exhibits a pattern of reasoning that ▪ Give the speaker or writer the benefit of the doubt
is characteristically deductive,
▪ Never attribute to an arguer a weaker argument
then the argument is probably deductive. when the evidence reasonably permits us to attribute
to him or her a stronger one
If A, then B
▪ And never interpret a passage as a bad argument
A → Pattern: Modus Ponens when the evidence reasonably
Therefore, B permits us to interpret it as not an argument at all
4. The Principle of Charity Test

The are five common patterns of deductive reasoning:

1. Hypothetical syllogism: A syllogism is a three-line argument, that is, an argument that consists of
exactly two premises and a conclusion.

▪ Syllogism contains at least one hypothetical or conditional (i.e., if-then) premise.

Modus Ponens Denying the antecedent

If A, then B − If A, then B

A Not A

Therefore, B Therefore, not B

Chain Arguments Affirming the consequent

If A, then B − If A, then B

If B, then C B

Therefore, If A, then C Therefore, A

Modus Tollens

− If A, then B

Not B

Therefore, not A

2. Categorical syllogism
A categorical syllogism may be defined as a three line argument in which each

statement begins with the word ALL, SOME, or NO.

3. Argument by elimination
An argument by Elimination seeks to logically rule out various possibilities until only a single possibility remains

▪ Signals with EITHER/NEITHER

4. Argument based on mathematics

Mathematics is a model of logical, step-by-step reasoning. They claim to prove

their conclusion based on precise mathematical concepts and reasoning. In an

argument based on mathematics, the conclusion is claimed to depend largely or

entirely on some mathematical calculation or measurement.

5.Argument from definition

In Argument from definition, the conclusion is presented as being “true by definition”, that is, as following simply
by definition some key word or phrase used in the argument.

EX: Janelle is a cardiologist. Therefore, Janelle is a doctor.

The are six common patterns of inductive reasoning:

1. Inductive generalization 4. Causal argument

EX: Most men are unromantic. A causal argument asserts or denies that something is
the cause of
Therefore, Mr. Hao Phong is no way a romantic guy.
something else.
2. Predictive argument
EX: James is not gay. I saw him dating beautiful girls
A prediction is a statement about what may or will from different classes
happen in the future.
at International University.
▪ In a Predictive argument, a prediction is defended
with reasons. − I can’t log on. The network must be down.

EX: It has rained in Vancouver every February since 5. Statistical argument

weather records have been kept.
Ex: Eighty-three percent of St. Stephen’s students are
Therefore, it will probably rain in Vancouver next Venezuelan.
February.
Beatrice is a St. Stephen’s student.
3. Argument from authority
So, Beatrice is probably Venezuelan.
EX: There are bears in these woods. My neighbor
Frank said that he saw 6. Argument from analogy

one last week. Ex: Dam sen Park has a thrilling roller- coaster ride.

Suoi tien Park, like Dam sen Park, is great

amusement park.

Therefore, probably Suoi tien Park also has a

thrilling roller-coaster

ride.
How to decide whether an argument is valid or not?
1. By definition 2. Invented situation

Check to see Invent a scenario in which

▪ the premises are actually true ▪ the premises are true

▪ and the conclusion is actually false. ▪ and the conclusion is false.

→ the argument is invalid ▪ → If you can, then the argument is invalid

sound: có nghĩa

Unsound: vô nghĩa

Strong inductive argument consists of probably true conclusion

Weak inductive argument consists of a conclusion that doesn’t follow the premises

Cogent Argument: Premises true, Conclusion true

Uncogent Arument: Premises false, Conclusion true

CHAP 9:
1. A categorical statement makes a claim about the RELATIONSHIP
between two or more categories or classes of things.
Standard-form categorical statements:
1. All S are P 3. Some S are P

2. No S are P 4. Some S are not P

 2. Useful tips for translating
Rephrase all nonstandard subject and predicate terms so that they refer to classes

Ex: All actors are vain.

→ All actors are vain people.

Rephrase all nonstandard verbs to are/ are not

Ex: Some students walk to school.

Some students are persons who walk to school.

(verb → are persons who + verb) (Pp/ adj. → are noun(s) that + be pp/ adj.)

Fill in any unexpressed quantifiers be charitable with implicit ideas

Ex: o Koalas are marsupials.

All koalas are marsupials.

o Californians are health nuts.

Some Californians are health nuts.

Translate singular statement as ALL or NO statement

PROPER NAME/

DEMONSTRATIVES

ALL for positives

NO for negatives

All persons identical with ... are persons who...

No persons identical with ... are persons who...

Translate stylistic variants into the appropriate categorical form

Common stylistic variants of “ All S are P”

 CHAP 10
 Conjunctions: and, but, yet, while, whereas, although, though, however
A conjunction is TRUE if and only if BOTH of the simplerclaims are true.
1. valid

2.valid

3. invalid

4. invalid

5.valid
 Negation: NOT
1. valid

2.valid

3.Valid

4.valid

5. Invalid
Disjunction: OR
A disjunction is FALSE if and only if both of the impler claims are false

1.valid
2.wrong
3. valid
4. valid
5.valid
Conditional: A conditional is FALSE if and only if the first claim is
true and the second false.
1.invalid

2.wrong

3.valid

4.invalid

5.valid