Lecturenotes - ch01 - A (2) (1) (3 Files Merged)

Critical Thinking: A Student’s
Introduction
Chapter 1
Introduction to Critical
Thinking
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.

Critical Thinking, 1
“Critical” here does not mean “negative”

• Critical means involving or exercising skilled judgment or
observation
A good critical thinker has cognitive skills and

intellectual dispositions needed to:
• Effectively identify, analyze, and evaluate arguments and
truth claims
• Discover and overcome personal preconceptions and
biases
© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-2
Critical Thinking, 2
• Formulate and present convincing reasons in support of

conclusions
• Make reasonable, intelligent decisions about what to
believe and what to do

Critical Thinking Standards, 1
Clarity
• Critical thinkers strive for clarity of language and thought
Precision
• Critical thinkers understand that it is necessary to insist
on precise answers to precise questions by cutting
through the confusions and uncertainties
• Example: “Is abortion wrong?” is vague. “Should abortion
be legal?” and “Is having an abortion ever moral?” are
more specific questions.

Accuracy
• Critical thinkers have a passion for accurate, timely
information
• One can’t reason correctly with false information
Relevance
• Irrelevance can distract people from the point but never
helps to truly prove the point
• See Lincoln’s example on page 4

Consistency
• Critical thinking avoids:
• Practical inconsistency: Saying one thing and doing another
• Logical inconsistency: Believing two things that can’t be
simultaneously true
Logical correctness
• Sound reasoning or making valid inferences
• Deriving that, and only that, which can be justifiably
derived from statements or premises
Completeness
• Thinking is better when it is deep rather than shallow,
thorough rather than superficial
Fairness
• Critical thinking demands that our thinking be open-
minded, impartial, and free of distorting biases and
preconceptions
• One must not dismiss something just because it’s new or
it’s contrary to something one already believes

Benefits of Critical Thinking: In the
Classroom, 1
Focus in college is less on memorization and more

on active, intelligent evaluation of ideas and
information
Students learn to:
• Understand the arguments and beliefs of others
• Critically evaluate arguments and beliefs
• Develop and defend one’s own well-supported
arguments and beliefs

Classroom, 2
In college, professors will have you evaluate

beliefs/arguments of others and develop your own
• Critical thinking is the skill you need to accomplish this
effectively

Workplace
Critical thinking will allow people to better perform

in their jobs.
• Since most job skills can be—and will be—taught “on-
site,” employers are more concerned with hiring
someone who can:
• Solve problems
• Think creatively
• Gather and analyze information
• Draw appropriate conclusions from data
• Communicate his/her ideas clearly and effectively

Benefits of Critical Thinking: In Life
Critical thinking can help us:
• Avoid making bad personal decisions

• Make informed political decisions
• Attain personal enrichment
• As Socrates said, the unexamined life is not worth living
• Critical thinking, honestly and courageously pursued, can
help free us from the unexamined assumptions and biases
of our upbringing and our society
• Lead self-directed, “examined” lives

Barriers to Critical Thinking:
Egocentrism, 1
The tendency to see reality as centered on oneself

Forms of egocentrism
• Self-interested thinking: Tendency to accept and defend
beliefs that harmonize with one’s self-interest
• Your wants and needs are not objectively more important
than anyone else's; they certainly don’t determine truth
• Critical thinking is objective

Egocentrism, 2
• Superiority bias: The tendency to overrate oneself

• Most people think they are above average; most people
are thus wrong
• Critical thinking requires one to be honest about his/her
abilities

Sociocentrism, 1
Group-centered thinking
Ways in which sociocentrism distorts critical thinking
• Group bias: The tendency to see one’s own group
(example, nation) as being inherently better than all
others
• Tribalism: Strong feelings of loyalty to, and identification
with, one’s tribe or social group

Sociocentrism, 2
• Conformism: Allowing beliefs to be shaped by outside

forces such as:
• Groups (See Solomon Asch’s experiment)
• Authority (See Stanley Milgram’s experiment)

Barriers to Critical Thinking: Unwarranted
Assumptions and Stereotypes, 1
Assumption: Something one takes for granted or

believes to be true without any proof or conclusive
evidence
Unwarranted assumption: Taking something for
granted without “good reason”
• Stereotype: Assuming that all people within a group (for
example, sex or race) share all the same qualities
• Assuming that a particular individual that belongs to a
group has certain qualities simply because he/she belongs
to that group
Barriers to Critical Thinking: Unwarranted
Assumptions and Stereotypes, 2
• Stereotypes are arrived at through hasty generalization, in

which one draws a conclusion about a large class of things
from a small sample
Being aware of an unwarranted assumption does

not justify it; but it is the first step in eliminating it

Relativistic Thinking, 1
Relativism is the view that there is no objective or

factual truth, but that truth varies from individual to
individual, or from culture to culture
Forms of relativism
• Subjectivism: The view that truth is a matter of individual
opinion; what one thinks is true is true for that person
• Moral subjectivism: The view that what is morally right and
good for an individual, A, is what A thinks is morally right
and good
Relativistic Thinking, 2
• Cultural relativism: The view that what is true for person

A is what person A’s culture or society believes to be true
• Cultural moral relativism: The view that what is morally
right and good for an individual, A, is whatever A’s society
or culture believes is morally right and good

Exercise 1.4 (Shows why Relativism Is
False), 1
Discuss the following cases assuming that you are a

cultural relativist:
• Case 1: You are a member of culture C studying cultures
A and B. B loves war, A is pacifistic. Culture B invades
Culture A.
• Notice that you can’t morally criticize B as a cultural
relativist

False), 2
• Case 2: You are a member of culture B, and B thinks that

pacifism is immoral and embraces enslaving other
cultures and enslaves A
• Notice that—since you belong to B—you can’t criticize B’s
moral values (their accepting it makes it right). Also, you
must think it immoral to be a pacifist and yet must also
think that the pacifism of those in A is moral (since they
approve of it). That is a contradiction.

False), 3
• Case 3: Culture B consists of two subcultures: the Alphas

and the Betas. The majority group, the Alphas, deems
child sacrifice as morally right; you belong to a minority
in B that disagrees. B invades A and forces them to
participate in their practices.
• Notice that you must both accept and reject infant
sacrifice (you belong to two groups/cultures that have
contradictory positions)

Problems with Cultural Moral
Relativism
Makes it impossible for one to:

• Criticize other cultures’ moral beliefs and values, even
those that intuitively seem to be terribly wrong
• Criticize one’s own societies’ prevailing moral beliefs and
values
Rules out the idea of moral progress

Can lead to conflicting moral duties

More on Cultural Moral Relativism
The main reasons people are attracted to cultural

moral relativism are not good reasons at all
• The fact that it is hard to discover what is true—even if it is
impossible to discover what is true—does not mean that
there is no truth or that truth is determined by
opinion/consensus
• We probably won’t be able to discover whether or not God
exists; but whether he does or not is not a matter of opinion
• Cultural moral relativism does not promote tolerance
• Suggests that if you live in an intolerant society, you are
morally obligated to be intolerant
Wishful Thinking
Believing what you want to be true (without

evidence or despite evidence to the contrary)
For example, people fear the unknown and invent
comforting myths to render the universe less
hostile and more predictable
• Belief in tabloid headlines
• Healing crystals and quack cures
• Communication with the dead
• “It won’t happen to me” beliefs

Qualities of a Critical Thinker, 1
• Strives for clarity, precision, accuracy, and other

intellectual standards that characterize careful,
disciplined thinking
• Sensitive to the ways in which critical thinking can
be skewed by egocentrism, wishful thinking, and
other psychological obstacles to rational belief
• Intellectually honest (admits ignorance and limits)
• Listens with an open mind

Qualities of a Critical Thinker, 2
• Bases beliefs on facts and evidence

• Is aware of the biases and preconceptions that
shape the way he/she perceives the world
• Thinks independently
• Is able to get to the heart of an issue, without
being distracted by details
• Possesses intellectual courage to face and assess
fairly ideas that challenge his/her beliefs
• Pursues truth and has intellectual perseverance
Introduction
Chapter 2
Recognizing Arguments

Arguments and Statements
Argument: Group of statements intended to prove

or support another statement
• Premises: Statements in an argument offered as
evidence or reasons why one should accept the
conclusion
• Conclusion: Statement that the premises support/prove
Statement: Sentence/utterance that can be viewed

as either true or false

Statement Test
Does it make sense to put “it is true that” or “it is

false that” in front of a sentence?
• If so, it is a statement
• If not, it is not a statement

Statements, 1
Examples
• Red is a color
• Abortion is morally wrong
• Canada is in South America
More than one statement may be expressed in a

sentence

Statements, 2
Not all sentences are statements

• Examples of sentences that are not statements
• What time is it? (question)
• Close the window! (command)
• Oh, my goodness! (exclamation)
Statements can be about subjective matters of

personal experience as well as objectively verifiable
matters of fact

Tricky Statements, 1
Rhetorical question: Sentence that has the

grammatical form of a question but is meant to be
understood as a statement
• Examples
• Don’t you know smoking will kill you?
• (Meaning: Smoking will kill you)
• How am I supposed to do that?
• (Meaning: I can’t do that)

Tricky Statements, 2
Ought imperative: Sentence that has the form of a

command but is intended to assert what ought to
be done
• Examples
• “Do X!” really means “You should do X”
• “Don’t blow-dry your hair in the tub!” really means “You
should not blow-dry your hair in the tub”

Identifying Premises and Conclusions
Indicator words provide clues that premises or

conclusions are being put forward
• Premise indicators: Since, for, seeing that, inasmuch as,
in view of the fact that, because, as, and given that
• Conclusion indicators: Therefore, hence, so, it follows
that, wherefore, thus, and consequently
Indicators:
• May be misleading
• May be absent in some cases
Finding Conclusions When Indicators
Are Absent
• Find the main issue and determine the position of

the writer or speaker on that issue
• Look at the beginning or the end of the passage;
the conclusion is usually found in one of those
places
• A statement is probably the conclusion if the
word “therefore” fits well before it
• The “because” trick (fill in the blanks): The arguer
believes (conclusion) because (premise(s))
What Is Not an Argument? 1
Reports: Convey information about a subject.

• Examples
• “More people moved to the south this year”
• “Oil prices dropped today, thus so did gas prices”
• Notice that, even though there is a conclusion indicator, this
is still a report

Unsupported assumptions: When someone puts

forth what he/she believes but does not intend for
any of his/her statements to support another
• Examples
• “People aren’t afraid of dying; they are afraid of not living”
• “People like this course because of the professor”
• Notice the presence of a premise indicator, but this is not a
premise

Conditional (“if-then”) statements

• Example: If it rains, the picnic will be canceled
• Most common forms: If A then B. B if A.
• Antecedent: Part of the statement that follows the word
“if”
• Consequent: Part of the statement that follows the word
“then”
• Do not always take the “if-then” form
• Example: In the event of rain, the picnic will be canceled

• Conditional statements are not arguments

• Conditional: “If I was taller, I would play basketball”
• Argument: “I am tall, so I would make a good basketball
player”
• Some conditional statements do involve a process of
reasoning
• Example: If Rhode Island were larger than Ohio, and Ohio
were larger than Texas, then Rhode Island would be larger
than Texas
• This statement asserts that if the first two statements are
true, then the third statement is also true
• Chain arguments: Arguments can be composed entirely

of conditional statements
• Take the form “If A then B. If B then C. Therefore, if A then
C.”
• Example
• If Bob is taller than Chris, then Bob is taller than Ann
• If Bob is taller than Ann, then Bob is taller than Lori
• Thus, if Bob is taller than Chris, then Bob is taller than Lori

Illustrations: Do not prove or support the claim but

provide examples of the claim
• Example: “Many wildflowers are edible. For example,
daisies and day lilies are delicious in salads.”
• Some arguments can look like illustrations because they
use “counterexamples”
• Example: “Many people think that all Star Trek fans are zit-
faced nerds. But that is not true. For example, Christian
Slater is a Star Trek fan, and he is not a zit-faced nerd.”

• When it is difficult to differentiate between an argument

and an illustration, one must use the principle of charity
• Principle of charity: When interpreting an unclear passage,
always give the speaker or writer the benefit of the doubt
Explanation: Tries to show why something is the

case, not to prove that it is the case
• Titanic sank because it struck an iceberg (explanation)
• Capital punishment should be abolished because
innocent people may be mistakenly executed (argument)
• Parts of an explanation
• Explanandum: Statement that is explained
• Explanans: Statement that does the explaining
• Format (fill in the blanks): Explanandum because
Explanans
• “I ski because I think it is fun” (explanation)
• “You should ski because it is fun” (argument)

Tests to Distinguish Arguments and
Explanations, 1
Common-knowledge test
• If the statement that a passage is seeking to prove or
explain is a matter of common knowledge, it is probably
an explanation
• Most people don’t present arguments for things people
already believe
• Example: “TV is very influential in society because most
people watch it”

Explanations, 2
Past-event test
• If the statement that a passage is seeking to prove or
explain is an event that occurred in the past, it is
probably an explanation
• Usually, people don’t argue that “X occurred”
• Example: “The U.S. entered World War two because of
Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor”

Explanations, 3
Author’s intent test

• If the person making the statement is trying to “prove”
something, then the passage is an argument
• Example: “You want a college degree because you want a
better life”
• If the person making the statement is trying to explain
why something is true, then the passage is an explanation
• Example: “Kevin is majoring in political science because he
wants to go to law school”

Explanations, 4
Principle of charity test

• One must interpret unclear passages generously
• One must never interpret a passage as a bad argument
when the evidence reasonably permits one to interpret it
as not an argument at all
• The test: If you have a choice between interpreting a
statement as a “bad argument” or an “unsatisfactory
explanation,” do the latter
• A bad argument is a worse mistake

Introduction
Chapter 3
Basic Logical Concepts

Introduction
In evaluating any argument, one should always ask

two key questions:
• Are the premises true?
• Do the premises provide good reasons to accept the
conclusion?
We will only focus on the latter question in chapter 3

Example, 1
Take this argument

• Premise 1: If the moon is made of green cheese, then you
will score perfectly on the next exam
• Premise 2: The moon is made of green cheese
• Conclusion: Therefore, you will score perfectly on the
next exam

Example, 2
Even though premises 1 and 2 are false, they still

provide good reasons to accept the conclusion.
Why?
• Because, if they were true, the conclusion would have to
be true
• If a green cheese moon really did ensure that you ace the
next exam, and it really was green cheese, then you really
would ace the next exam
• So, you will never be able to show that premises don’t
provide “good reasons” for a conclusion by pointing out
that they are false
• Save “truth evaluation” for chapter 8
Deduction and Induction, 1
Deductive arguments try to prove their conclusions

with rigorous, inescapable logic
• Example
• All humans are mortal
• Socrates is a human
• Therefore, Socrates is mortal

Deduction and Induction, 2
Inductive arguments try to show that their

conclusions are plausible or likely given the premises
• Example
• Every ruby so far discovered has been red
• So, probably all rubies are red

Deduction and Induction: Avoid a
Misconception, 1
Misconception
• Deduction moves from general premises to particular
conclusions
• Induction moves from particular premises to general
conclusions

Misconception, 2
Arguments can be presented in this manner:

• Deduction: All males are mortal. (general premise) I am a
male. Therefore, I am mortal. (particular conclusion)
• Inductive: The last two winter days were cold. (particular
premise) Therefore, all winter days are cold. (general
conclusion)

Misconception, 3
But arguments can be presented in this manner as

well:
• Deductive: Lincoln was president from 1861 to 1865.

(particular premise) Therefore, all persons born during
Lincoln’s presidency were born in the nineteenth century.
(general conclusion)
• Inductive: I have got A’s in all my classes so far. (general
premise) Therefore, I will get an A in this class. (particular
conclusion)
Differences between Deductive and
Inductive Arguments, 1
Deductive arguments claim Inductive arguments claim

that: that:
• If the premises are true, then the • If the premises are true, then the
conclusion must be true conclusion is probably true
• The conclusion follows • The conclusion follows probably
necessarily from the premises from the premises
• It is impossible for all the • It is unlikely for the premises to
premises to be true and the be true and the conclusion false
conclusion false

Differences between Deductive and
Inductive Arguments, 2
Deductive arguments claim Inductive arguments claim

that: that:
• It is logically inconsistent to assert • Although it is logically consistent
the premises and deny the to assert the premises and deny
conclusion the conclusion, the conclusion is
probably true if the premises are
true

Tests to Determine Whether an
Argument Is Deductive or Inductive, 1
Indicator word test

• Indicator words can be used to communicate when an
argument is deductive or inductive
• Examples of deduction indicator words: Certainly,
definitely, this entails that, and conclusively
• Examples of induction indicator words: Probably, likely,
one would expect that, odds are that, and it is reasonable
to assume that
• Indicator words are not always present, and they are
sometimes used loosely or improperly
• For example, a speaker may say “it certainly follows” but
be exaggerating, knowing that it only “probably follows”
Strict necessity test

• An argument’s conclusion either follows with strict logical
necessity from its premises or it does not
• If it does, the argument should always be treated as
deductive
• If it doesn’t, the argument should be treated as inductive
• Examples
• Alan is a father. Therefore, Alan is a male. (deductive)
• Jill is a six-year-old girl. Therefore, Jill cannot run a mile in
one minute flat. (inductive)
• Exceptions to the strict necessity test

• An argument in which the conclusion does not follow
necessarily from the premises should nonetheless be
treated as deductive in the following situations:
• The language or context makes clear that the arguer
intended to offer a logically conclusive argument, but the
argument, in fact, is not logically conclusive
• The argument has a pattern of reasoning that is
characteristically deductive, and nothing else about the
argument clearly indicates that the argument is meant to be
inductive
• Examples of exceptions
• Magellan's ships sailed around the world. It necessarily
follows, therefore, that the earth is a sphere.
• If I am in Dubai, then I'm in the UAE. I am not in Dubai.
Therefore, I am not in In UAE.

Common pattern test

• There are many common patterns that valid arguments
“use”
• For example: If P then Q. P. Therefore, Q.
• This argument pattern is called modus ponens
• If an argument follows this pattern, it is deductive
• We will learn other patterns shortly

Principle of charity test

• When interpreting an unclear argument or passage,
always give the speaker or writer the benefit of the
doubt
• Never attribute to an arguer a weaker argument when the
evidence reasonably permits us to attribute to him or her a
stronger one
• Never interpret a passage as a bad argument when the
evidence reasonably permits us to interpret it as not an
argument at all

• Example: Andy told me that he ate at Maxine’s yesterday,

but it burned down a month ago. It is certain, therefore,
that he is either lying or mistaken.
• Since it is not possible that Maxine’s was rebuilt quickly,
this argument is deductively invalid
• Assume that the author intended it to be inductive

Common Patterns of Deductive
Reasoning
• Hypothetical syllogism
• Categorical syllogism
• Argument by elimination
• Argument based on mathematics
• Argument from definition

Hypothetical Syllogism, 1
Three-line argument that contains at least one

hypothetical or conditional premise
Varieties of hypothetical syllogisms

• If A then B. A. Therefore, B. (modus ponens)
• If P then Q. If Q then R. Therefore, if P then R. (chain
argument)
• If A then B. Not B. Therefore, not A. (modus tollens)

Hypothetical Syllogism, 2
• Patterns of deductive reasoning that are not logically

reliable
• If A then B. Not A. Therefore, not B. (denying the
antecedent)
• If A then B. B. Therefore, A. (affirming the consequent)
• These should be treated as deductive because they have a
pattern of reasoning that is characteristically deductive

Categorical Syllogism
Three-line argument in which each statement

begins with the word all, some, or no
Forms
• All a’s are b’s. All b’s are c’s. Therefore, all a’s are c’s.
• Some a’s are b’s. All b’s are c’s. Therefore, some a’s are
c’s.
Example
• All oaks are trees
• All trees are plants
• So, all oaks are plants
Argument by Elimination, 1
Seeks to logically rule out various possibilities until

only a single possibility remains
• Example 1
• Either Joe walked to the library or he drove
• But Joe didn’t drive to the library
• Therefore, Joe walked to the library

Argument by Elimination, 2
• Example 2
• If Dutch or Jack committed the murder, then the weapon
was a rope
• The weapon was not a rope
• So, neither Dutch nor Jack committed the murder
• Therefore, Celia committed the murder

Arguments Based on Mathematics
Argument in which the conclusion depends largely

or entirely on some mathematical calculation or
measurement
Example
• Eight is greater than four
• Four is greater than two
• Therefore, eight is greater than two

Arguments from Definition
An argument in which the conclusion is presented

as being “true by definition,” that is, as following
simply from the meaning of some key word or
phrase used
Examples
• Bob is a bachelor. Therefore, Bob is unmarried.
• Janelle is a cardiologist. Therefore, Janelle is a doctor.

Common Patterns of Inductive
Reasoning
• Inductive generalization
• Predictive argument
• Augment from authority
• Causal argument
• Statistical argument
• Argument from analogy

Inductive Generalization, 1
Drawing a generalization as a likely conclusion

based on information about some members of a
particular class
• Generalization: Statement that attributes characteristics
to all or most members of some group or class
Common form
• So far, the b’s I have seen have had property p.
Therefore, all b’s must have property p.

Inductive Generalization, 2
Example
• All dinosaur bones so far discovered have been over 65
million years old
• Therefore, probably all dinosaur bones are more than 65
million years old

Predictive Argument, 1
An argument in which a prediction is defended

with reasons
• Prediction: A statement about what someone thinks will
happen in the future
Common form
• So far, all the b’s I have seen have had property P
• Therefore, the next b I see will have property P

Predictive Argument, 2
Example
• Most U.S. presidents have been tall
• Therefore, probably the next president will be tall
In some cases, predictions can be argued for

deductively
• Example
• If Amy goes, then Ted goes
• Amy will go
• Therefore, Ted will go
Argument from Authority, 1
Asserts a claim and then supports that claim by

citing some presumed authority or witness who has
said that the claim is true
Common form
• P said that A was true. Therefore, A is true.
Example
• The Encyclopedia said that bats eat bugs; therefore, it is
likely that bats eat bugs

Argument from Authority, 2
Normally treated as inductive because one can

never be absolutely certain that a supposed
authority or witness is accurate or reliable
• Arguments from authority can sometimes be deductive
• Example
• Whatever the Bible teaches is true
• The Bible teaches that we should love our neighbors
• Therefore, we should love our neighbors

Causal Argument
Asserts or denies that something is the cause of

something else
• Example: I can’t log in. The network must be down.
Not all causal arguments are inductive

• Example
• Whenever iron is exposed to oxygen, it rusts
• This iron pipe has been exposed to oxygen and water
• Therefore, it will rust

Statistical Argument, 1
Rests on statistical evidence (evidence that some

percentage of some group or class has some
particular characteristic)
Example
• 83% of Notre Dame students are Catholic
• Bob is a Notre Dame student
• Therefore, Bob is probably Catholic

Statistical Argument, 2
Because statistical evidence is used to support claims

that are presented as probable, statistical arguments
are usually inductive
• Statistical evidence can also be used in deductive reasoning
• Example
• If 65% of likely voters polled support Senator Beltway, then
Senator Beltway will win in a landslide
• Sixty-five percent of likely voters polled do support Senator
Beltway
• Therefore, Senator Beltway will win in a landslide

Argument from Analogy, 1
Argument in which the conclusion is claimed to

depend on an analogy (that is, a comparison or
similarity) between two or more things
Common form
• These things are similar in such-and-such ways
• Therefore, they are similar in some further way

Example
• Hershey Park has a thrilling roller-coaster ride
• Dorney Park, like Hershey Park, is a great amusement park
• Therefore, probably Dorney Park also has a thrilling roller-
coaster ride
Since being similar in one way does not guarantee

being similar in another, most analogies are
inductive

Some analogical arguments are deductive

• Example
• Automobiles cause thousands of deaths each year and
produce noxious and offensive fumes
• Smoking causes thousands of deaths each year and produces
noxious and offensive fumes
• Thus, if smoking is heavily regulated, automobiles should also
be heavily regulated
• But automobiles shouldn’t be heavily regulated
• Therefore, smoking shouldn’t be heavily regulated, either

Deductive Validity, 1
A valid deductive argument is an argument in

which it is impossible for all the premises to be true
and the conclusion false
• The following conditions apply in a valid deductive
argument:
• If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true
• The conclusion follows necessarily from the premises
• The premises provide logically conclusive grounds for the
truth of the conclusion
• It is logically inconsistent to assert all the premises as true
and deny the conclusion
It is not necessary to know whether an argument’s

premises or conclusion are true to know whether
the argument is valid
• Some valid arguments have obviously false premises and
a false conclusion
• Example: All squares are circles. All circles are triangles.
Therefore, all squares are triangles.

• Some valid arguments have false premises and a true

conclusion
• Example: All fruits are vegetables. Spinach is a fruit.
Therefore, spinach is a vegetable.
• Some valid arguments have true premises and a true
conclusion
• Example: If you’re reading this, you are alive. You are
reading this. Therefore, you are alive.
• No valid argument can have all true premises and a false
conclusion

Get it out of your head that a “valid argument”

means a “good argument”
• An argument can be a good argument and be invalid and
could be a bad argument but be valid
Invalid deductive argument: Deductive argument in

which the conclusion does not follow necessarily
from the premises

• Notice, in the following argument, even though the

premises and conclusion are true, it is invalid:
• All dogs are animals
• Lassie is an animal
• Therefore, Lassie is a dog
• What if “Lassie” here referred to an iguana? The premises
would still be true, and yet the conclusion would be false

• If you get rid of your assumption (which is not in the

argument) that we are talking about the TV dog, the
invalidity becomes clear. Let’s use a different name:
• All dogs are animals.
• Jub-Jub is an animal.
• Therefore, Jub-Jub is a dog.
Validity is important because it preserves truth

Deductive Validity: Sound and Unsound
Deductive Arguments
• Sound deductive argument: Deductive

argument that is both valid and has all true
premises
• Unsound deductive argument: Deductive
argument that either is invalid or has at least
one false premise, or both

Inductive Strength, 1
Strong inductive argument: Inductive argument in

which the conclusion follows probably from the
premises
• The following conditions apply in a strong inductive
argument:
• If the premises are true, the conclusion is probably true
• The premises provide probable, but not logically
conclusive, grounds for the truth of the conclusion
• The premises, if true, make the conclusion likely

• Example
• All recent U.S. presidents have been college graduates
• Thus, it is likely that the next U.S. president will be a
college graduate
Weak inductive argument: An inductive argument

in which the conclusion does not follow probably
from the premises
• Example
• All previous popes have been men
• Therefore, probably the next pope will be a woman
Inductively strong arguments can have combinations

of truth or falsity in the premises and conclusion
• Some inductively strong arguments have:
• False premises and a probably false conclusion
• Example: All previous U.S. presidents have been electricians.
Hence, it is likely that the next U.S. president will be an
electrician.
• False premises and a probably true conclusion
• Example: Every previous U.S. president has flown on Air Force
One. So, the next U.S. president probably will fly on Air Force
One.
• True premises and a probably true conclusion

• Example: No previous U.S. president has been a native Alaskan.
So, the next U.S. president probably will not be a native Alaskan.
• No strong inductive argument can have true premises and a
probably false conclusion
Weak inductive arguments can have any combination

of truth or falsity in the premises and conclusion
• Example: Most U.S. presidents have been married.
Therefore, probably the next U.S. president will be a
politician.
The examples show that inductive strength or

weakness of an argument has nothing to do with
the truth or falsity of its premises
• Depends on whether the conclusion would probably be
true if the premises were true
• If the answer is yes, the argument is strong
• If the answer is no, the argument is weak

Inductive Strength Comes in Degrees, 1
This argument…
• The last five presidents were male
• Therefore, the next president will be male
…is weaker than this one:

• All the presidents have been male
• Therefore, the next president will be male

Inductive Strength Comes in Degrees, 2
Recall that a deductive argument is either valid or

invalid
• No two valid arguments differ in “how valid” they are
Some inductively strong arguments are inductively

stronger than others

Cogency
• Even if an argument is inductively strong, it can

still have a false premise and be a “bad
argument”
• Cogent argument: An argument that is
inductively strong and has all true premises
• Uncogent argument: An inductive argument
that is either weak or has at least one false
premise, or both

Lecturenotes - ch01 - A (2) (1) (3 Files Merged)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecturenotes - ch01 - A (2) (1) (3 Files Merged)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Critical Thinking: A Student’s

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.

“Critical” here does not mean “negative”

A good critical thinker has cognitive skills and

• Formulate and present convincing reasons in support of

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-3

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-4

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-5

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-7

Focus in college is less on memorization and more

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-8

In college, professors will have you evaluate

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-9

Critical thinking will allow people to better perform

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-10

Critical thinking can help us:

• Avoid making bad personal decisions

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-11

The tendency to see reality as centered on oneself

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-12

• Superiority bias: The tendency to overrate oneself

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-13

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-14

• Conformism: Allowing beliefs to be shaped by outside

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-15

Assumption: Something one takes for granted or

• Stereotypes are arrived at through hasty generalization, in

Being aware of an unwarranted assumption does

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-17

Relativism is the view that there is no objective or

• Cultural relativism: The view that what is true for person

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-19

Discuss the following cases assuming that you are a

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-20

• Case 2: You are a member of culture B, and B thinks that

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-21

• Case 3: Culture B consists of two subcultures: the Alphas

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-22

Makes it impossible for one to:

Rules out the idea of moral progress

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-23

The main reasons people are attracted to cultural

Believing what you want to be true (without

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-25

• Strives for clarity, precision, accuracy, and other

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 1-26

• Bases beliefs on facts and evidence

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.

Argument: Group of statements intended to prove

Statement: Sentence/utterance that can be viewed

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 2-2

Does it make sense to put “it is true that” or “it is

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 2-3

More than one statement may be expressed in a

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 2-4

Not all sentences are statements

Statements can be about subjective matters of

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 2-5

Rhetorical question: Sentence that has the

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 2-6

Ought imperative: Sentence that has the form of a

© 2019 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. 2-7

Indicator words provide clues that premises or