CRITICAL THINKING AND LOGIC

• Critical thinking is often called informal logic.

• The central theme of critical thinking is logic
and all that is relevant to logic.
• Informal logic is often contrasted with what
is known as formal logic.
• Logic may be defined as the science of
reasoning.
• LOGIC can also be described as the
systematic study of inferences.
• Where inference is the act or process of
deriving logical conclusions from premises
known or assumed to be true or
• the act of reasoning from factual knowledge
or evidence.
• Where a premise is an assumption that
something is true.
• In logic, an argument requires a set of (at
least) two declarative sentences (or
"propositions") known as the premises along
with another declarative sentence (or
"proposition") known as the conclusion.
What is formal logic
• This is the study of the form of inferences or
arguments, which enable us to judge whether
an argument has a form that has been
recognised as a form of proper inferences,
• Wherein the conclusion is derived from the
premises following certain accepted rules or
methods of inference.
• Informal logic
• Although informal logic is not so concerned
with the formation that defines formal logic,
• It helps to assess inferences without being
involved with formalization.
• Informal logic was developed as a discipline
simply to enable us to assess, analyse and
improve ordinary language, or everyday
reasoning.

WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?
• This is a reason given to support a claim
• To attempt to persuade by giving good reasons
is to give an argument
• We tend to use arguments in situations such as:
giving our friends, family members and work
mates numerous reasons in support of what we
believe, what we do and what we think.
• An argument is always backed by reason or
evidence.
• Which of the following is an argument or
opinion?
• Logicians are humourless people
• In the past, I have met nearly ten children whose
parents speak different languages and all of them
were dyslexics. So all children of parents who
speak different languages are dyslexics
• So not everything that we say, write or read are
arguments.
• We need to remember that we may come to form
opinions by following a course of rational
deliberation. In such a case our opinions are based
on arguments, which in turn are based on reasons
or evidence.
• Note that also, not all opinions are backed by
arguments.
• So, all your opinions must be formed based on
evidence and arguments because opinions on
serious and controversial matters have to be
defended by rational arguments
 HOW TO RECOGNISE AN ARGUMENT
• An argument is a string of connected
statement of which some are premises on the
basis of which one of them, i.e., the
conclusion is established.
• The premises may be regarded as the set of
claims that a person puts forward in order to
support a further claim that is to be made,
which is the conclusion
PARTS OF ARGUMENT
• Every argument has two parts:
1. The claims that support the primary claim by
providing reason for accepting it; these are the
premises.
2. The principal claim which the argument is
trying to persuade us to accept; which is the
conclusion
Example:
All Bamaya dancers are from Savelugu
Dasana is a Bamaya dancer
So, Dasana is from Savelugu
 In the above argument,
• The principal claim is that Dasana is from
Savelugu
• The conclusion is that Dasana is from Savelugu
In order to support this claim, two other
supporting claims are made from which the
conclusion follows. These are premises and are:
• All Bamaya dancers are from Savelugu
• Dasana is a Bamaya dancer
• Indicator words for premises
• Since, because, for, it follows from, as is
indicated by, given that, is established by the
fact that, is implied by, etc,.
• Indicator words for conclusion
• Therefore, thus, so, hence, it follows that
then, in conclusion, accordingly, consequently,
as a result, implies, shows, establishes, etc,.
• Hidden premises
• Arguments that have hidden premises are
called enthymemes. These are premises that
are not spelt out in an argument.
• Consider an argument of the following kind:
Premises: It is morally wrong to treat humans as
mere objects
Conclusion: So genetically engineering human
being is morally wrong.
The hidden premise in this case is:
If we genetically engineer human beings then we
would be treating them as mere object
• Let us consider another example:
Premises: It is our moral duty to provide food for
future generation.
Conclusion: It follows that it is our moral duty to
genetically engineer crops.
The hidden premises in this case is:
Genetically engineering crops provide food for
future generation.
• Intermediate conclusion
Intermediate conclusions work as premises of a
subsequent argument that occurs within the
body of the original argument itself.
• For example:
• Sher Khan is a tiger
All tigers are carnivorous
So Sher Khan is also carnivorous
Since all canivorous animals have sharp teeth
Sher Khan too has sharp teeth
Now let us write this argument with the
intermediate conclusion clearly specified
Premise 1: Sher Khan is a tiger
Premise 2: All tigers are carnivorous
Conclusion 1 and premise 3: So Sher Khan is
also carnivorous
Premise 4: Since all canivorous animals have
sharp teeth
Conclusion 2: Sher Khan too has sharp teeth