Clc 1 - Critical Thinking

Front 1

The tendency to view everything in relationship to oneself

Back 1

egocentrism

Front 2

The assumption that one's own social group is inherently superior to all others

Back 2

sociocentrism

Front 3

4 characteristics of critical thinking:

Back 3

* self-directed
* self-disciplined
* self-monitored
* self-corrective

Front 4

In reasoning through any problem, a well-cultivated critical thinker: (5 answers)

Back 4

* Raises vital questions
* Gathers and assesses relevant information
* Reaches well-reasoned conclusions and solutions
* Thinks open-mindedly
* Communicates effectively with others

Front 5

Spontaneous and non-reflective

Contains insight, prejudice, good and bad reasoning

Indiscriminately combined

Back 5

First Order Thinking
(ordinary thinking)

Front 6

First-order thinking that is consciously realized (i.e., analyzed, assessed, and reconstructed)

Back 6

Second Order Thinking
(Critical Thinking)

Front 7

Viewing everything in one's experience in relation to one's self. It is the tendency to regard oneself and one's own opinions, values, or interests as most important.

Back 7

Egocentrism

Front 8

Opposite of fair-mindedness.These individuals feel no responsibility to represent viewpoints with which they disagree fairly and accurately.

Back 8

Intellectual Unfairness

Front 9

The commitment to consider all relevant opinions equally without regard to one's own sentiments or self interests.

Back 9

Fair-mindedness

Front 10

Fear of ideas or viewpoints that do not conform to one's own

Back 10

Intellectual Cowardice

Front 11

Flaws or errors in reasoning. A _____ in the premise of an argument invalidates the conclusion.

Back 11

Fallacies

Front 12

The act of routinely inhabiting the perspectives of others in order to genuinely understand them.

Back 12

Intellectual Empathy

Front 13

Openness to the possibility that one's belief are mistaken. _________ __________ leads to the willingness to reevaluate one's beliefs in the face of new evidence or persuasive counter arguments.

Back 13

Intellectual Humility

Front 14

Working one's way through intellectual complexities despite frustrations inherent in doing so

Back 14

Intellectual Perserverance

Front 15

Another term for critical thinking. It is the first-order thinking (or ordinary thinking) that is consciously realized (analyzed, assessed, and improved)

Back 15

Second Order Thinking

Front 16

The craft of winning an argument regardless of flaws in the reasoning for it.

Back 16

sophistry

Front 17

8 universal Elements of Reasoning in critical thinking:

Back 17

Purposes
Information
Questions
Concepts
Assumptions
Inferences
Implications
Points of View

Front 18

Our _____________________ affects how we answer questions

Back 18

Purpose

Front 19

How we ask ____________ affects the information we gather

Back 19

Question

Front 20

The __________________ we gather affects the inferences we make from it

Back 20

information

Front 21

Identify nine fundamental Universal Intellectual Standards

Back 21

* Clarity
* Accuracy
* Precision
* Relevance
* Depth
* Breadth
* Logic
* Significance
* Fairness

Front 22

What Intellectual Standard of Reasoning means? - Being near to true value or meaning of something

Back 22

Accuracy

Front 23

What Intellectual Standard of Reasoning means? - Being unambiguous and easily understood

Back 23

Clarity

Front 24

What Element of Reasoning means the particular perspective through which something is observed or thought through?

Back 24

Point of view

Front 25

General categories or ideas by which we interpret or classify information used in our thinking

Back 25

Concepts

Front 26

What Intellectual Standard of Reasoning means? - Being precise or exact

Back 26

Precision

Front 27

What Element of Reasoning states the goal or objective of reasoning?

Back 27

Purpose

Front 28

What Element of Reasoning logically follows from reasoning?

Back 28

Implication

Front 29

What Element of Reasoning means unstated or hidden beliefs that support our explicit reasoning; something we take for granted or presuppose?

Back 29

Assumptions

Front 30

A logical process of drawing conclusions

Back 30

Inference

Front 31

The mind drawing conclusions on the basis of reasons defines which process?

Back 31

Reasoning

Front 32

What Intellectual Standard means most important information relevant to our reasoning?

Back 32

Significance

Front 33

One of the 3 ways that the brain receives information. It means to memorize information without understanding it describes which of the following?

Back 33

Inert information

Front 34

In some cases, the conclusions we draw are based on assumptions that operate at a(n) ________ level.

Back 34

unconscious

Front 35

What are the three kinds of implications that may be involved in any situation?

Back 35

Possible, probable, necessary

Front 36

The process of questioning is the process of critical thinking.

Back 36

Socratic method

Front 37

Paul and Elder argue that there are three categories or types of questions, each requiring different kinds of reasoning. Name them.

Back 37

1. Questions of Fact
2. Questions of Preference
3. Questions of Judgement

Front 38

Characterized by:
Evidence and reasoning within single system

Serve as basis of knowledge

How to recognize: Only one answer

Back 38

Questions of Fact

Front 39

Characterized by:
Subjective choice

No judgment or assessment

How to recognize: Many possible answers based on subjective preferences

Back 39

Questions of Preference

Front 40

Characterized by:
Evidence and reasoning within multiple systems

Competing answers

Reasoned judgment

How to recognize: More than one answer, with some better than others

Back 40

Questions of Judgement

Front 41

1. These will be questions that could be answered differently by people with different view points, and;
2. Among competing answers, there may be one that is the best (based on the intellectual standards outlined by Paul and Elder).

Back 41

Keys to developing questions of judgment

Front 42

1. Figure out and regularly rearticulate, your most fundamental goals, purposes, and needs.
2. Take problems and decisions one-by-one.
3. Figure out the implications of alternatives.
4. Figure out the information you need and seek it.
5. Draw reasonable inferences from the information you analyze and interpret.
6. Figure out long and short-term options and limitations (time, money, power).
7. Consider pros and cons of options.
8. Be strategic in your decision-making.
9. Monitor the implications of your actions and shift strategy if need be.

Back 42

Nine Dimensions of Decision-Making for becoming an effective and rational decision-maker

Front 43

# Figure out and regularly reevaluate your goals, purposes, and needs.
# Identify your problems explicitly, then analyze them.
# Figure out the information you need, and actively seek that information.
# Carefully analyze, interpret, and evaluate the information you collect.
# Figure out your options for action and evaluate them.
# Adopt a strategic approach to the problem, and follow-through on that strategy.
# When you act, monitor the implications of your action as they begin to emerge.

Back 43

Seven Dimensions of Problem-Solving

Front 44

Paul and Elder point to two components in strategic thinking

Back 44

* Identification. Recognizing when your thinking is irrational or flawed.
* Intellectual action. Engaging and challenging your own thinking.

Front 45

In analyzing causation, look for a single shared factor.

Example: Tourists infected with a tropical disease all took the same flight home.

Back 45

Common Factor Method

Front 46

In analyzing causation, looking for a casual factor that is present in one situation but not another, similar, situation.

Example: Only tourists who visited a given village were infected with a tropical disease; those who did not were disease-free.

Back 46

Single Difference Method

Front 47

In analyzing causation, looking for a pattern of variation between a possible cause and a possible effect.This method doesn't involve the elimination of any circumstance. Changing the magnitude of one factor results in the change in the magnitude of another factor.

Example: Medical researches expose laboratory animals to different strains of a tropical microbe to see which are likely to cause sickness.

Back 47

Concomitant Variation

Front 48

In analyzing causation, successively ruling out non-casual factors until one correct casual factor remains

Example: To figure out why tourists were sick, blood tests ruled out five different diseases and singled out one tropical microbe that was causing the sickness.

Back 48

Process of elimination

Front 49

Description:
"Taking into the mind information, that, though memorized, we do not understand."

We think we understand this information, but we don't and can't use it.

Back 49

Inert Information

Front 50

Description:
"Taking into the mind, and actively using, information that is false, although we mistakenly think it is true."

We mislearn or partially learn information or accept illogical beliefs and then act on them.

Back 50

Activated Ignorance

Front 51

Description:
"Taking into the mind, and actively using information that is true and also, when understood insightfully, leads us by implication to more and more knowledge."

We bring significant ideas and knowledge into the mind and are able to apply them, systematically, to new situations.

Back 51

Activated Knowledge

Front 52

the unstated or hidden beliefs that support our explicit reasoning about something.

Back 52

Assumptions

Front 53

the outcome of reasoning

Back 53

Inference or conclusion

Front 54

five key factors in establishing the accuracy and validity of information

Back 54

1. Authority
2. Point of View
3. Transparency
4. Scope and Depth
5. Accuracy

Front 55

three types of thinkers

Back 55

1. Uncritical Persons
2. Skilled Manipulators
3. Fair Minded Critical Persons

Front 56

Dismissing an argument by attacking the person who offers it rather than by refuting its reasoning.

Back 56

ad hominem

Front 57

To justify support for a position by citing an esteemed or well-known figure who supports it. An appeal to authority does not address the merit of the position.

Back 57

appeal to authority

Front 58

Citing majority sentiment or popular opinion as the reason for supporting a claim. It assumes that any position favored by the larger crowd must be true or worthy.

Back 58

appeal to popularity

Front 59

Asserting a conclusion that is assumed in the reasoning. The reason given to support the conclusion restates the conclusion.

Back 59

begging the question

Front 60

Assuming only 2 alternatives when, in reality, there are more than 2. It implies that 1 of 2 outcomes is inevitable - either x or y.

Back 60

either or

Front 61

Drawing an invalid comparison between things for the purpose of either supporting or refuting some position. suggests that because two things are alike in some respect, they must be alike in other respects.

Back 61

A faulty analogy

Front 62

Inferring a general proposition about something based on too small a sample or an unrepresentative sample.

Back 62

hasty generalization

Front 63

Introducing an irrelevant point or topic to divert attention from the issue at hand. It is a tactic for confusing the point under debate.

Back 63

red herring

Front 64

Asserting that a solution is not worth adopting because it does not fix the problem completely.

Back 64

search for a perfect solution

Front 65

To suggest that a step or action, once taken, will lead inevitably to similar steps or actions with presumably undesirable consequences.

Back 65

slippery slope

Front 66

Distorting or exaggerating an opponent's argument so that it might be more easily attacked.

Back 66

straw man

Front 67

Defending or justifying our wrong position or conduct by pointing to a similar wrong done by someone else.

Back 67

two wrongs make a right

Front 68

Drawing a comparison between 2 things in order to show a meaningful resemblance between them. It implies that if 2 things are alike in one respect, they will be alike in other respects

Back 68

Analogy

Front 69

A hunch, "gut feeling," or premonition

Back 69

Intuition

Front 70

What we see first hand

Back 70

Personal Observation

Front 71

Justifying a position by citing an expert or authority who supports it

Back 71

Appeal to Authority

Front 72

A detailed account of a person or event; a striking or dramatic anecdote

Back 72

Case example

Front 73

An account of someone else's personal experience

Back 73

Testimonial

Front 74

A research method or instrument for measuring people's attitudes or beliefs

Back 74

Survey/Questionnaire

Front 75

A systematic set of observations collected through scientific methods

Back 75

Research Study

Front 76

evidence quantifies an observation or phenomenon - i.e., expresses it as a number or empirical measure.
* Devising empirical models/hypotheses about things
* Testing the models/hypotheses through controlled experiments
* Using statistically valid samples
* Developing instruments for measuring outcomes
* Collecting verifiable data

Back 76

Quantitative evidence

Front 77

evidence describes or recounts an observation or phenomenon. It communicates understanding and meaning - why and how something happened.

Back 77

Qualitative evidence

Front 78

to show that one thing caused another thing

Back 78

causation

Front 79

a plausible alternative explanation for why a certain outcome happened.

Back 79

rival cause

Front 80

Thinking systematically about one’s own thinking in order to improve it

Back 80

Critical Thinking

Front 81

3 Interrelated dimensions of critical thinking:

Back 81

1. Analyse
2. Evaluate
3. Improve (Reconstruct)

Front 82

believing that truth is acquired not through reasoning and inquiry but, rather, through some predetermined, nonintellectual faith

Back 82

Dogmatic Absolutism

Front 83

believing that there are no intellectual standards by which to judge anything as true or false.

Back 83

Subjective relativism

Front 84

What are the mind's 3 distinctive functions?

Back 84

1. Thinking
2. Feeling
3. Wanting

Front 85

* Making generalizations unsupported by evidence
* Letting stereotypes shape our thinking
* Viewing the world from one fixed vantage point
* Forming false beliefs
* Dismissing or attacking viewpoints that conflict with our own
* Thinking deceptively about our own experience

Back 85

Impediments to good thinking

Front 86

What kind of thinker is this?
* Socially conditioned beliefs
* Personal beliefs often grounded in prejudice
* Motivated by irrationality, personal vanity, intellectual arrogance
* Prone to emotional counter-attacks when thinking is questioned
* See themselves as "good" and opponents as "evil"

Back 86

Uncritical Persons
(Intellectually unskilled thinkers)

Front 87

What kind of thinker is this?
* Skilled in manipulation
* Pursue self-interest
* Employ manipulation, domination, demagoguery
* Try to keep other points of view from being heard

Back 87

Skilled Manipulators
(Weak-sense critical thinkers)

Front 88

What kind of thinker is this?
* Reject manipulation and controlling others
* Combine critical thinking skills with desire to serve public good
* Want all points of view expressed
* Want manipulative persuasion exposed

Back 88

Fair-Minded Critical Persons
(Strong-sense critical thinkers )

Front 89

____________________ includes anything which might be used to determine or demonstrate the truth of a claim.

Back 89

Evidence

Front 90

Name 2 types of evidence:

Back 90

Quantitative and Qualitative

Front 91

Name the sources of evidence that are commonly used to support factual claims

Back 91

1. Analogy
2. Intuition
3. Personal Observation
4. Appeal to Authority
5. Case example
6. Testimony
7. Survey/Questionnaire
8. Research Study
9. Personal Experience

Front 92

the science of collecting, organizing, and analyzing quantitative data.

Back 92

statistics

Front 93

Statistics express information

Back 93

in numerical form.

Front 94

An average can be expressed 3 different ways:

Back 94

mean, median, and mode

Front 95

______________ plots the relationship between two or more variables by using connected data points.

Back 95

line graph

Front 96

is derived by adding up all the values and dividing the sum by the total number of values

Back 96

mean

Front 97

represents the middle value in a series of values. Half of the values are above it, half are below it

Back 97

median

Front 98

is the value that appears most frequently in a series of values

Back 98

mode

Front 99

is a statistical expression that appears most commonly in reports about health risks (and interventions for limiting them).

Back 99

risk reduction

Front 100

emerges from our innate human tendency to view the world from a narrow, self-serving perspective. Its ultimate goals are gratification and self-validation.

Back 100

Egocentrism

Front 101

is egocentrism raised to a group level.

Back 101

Sociocentrism

Front 102

remembering only evidence and information that support our thinking

Back 102

egocentric memory

Front 103

feeling superior because of possessing "The Truth"

Back 103

egocentric righteousness

Front 104

adopting an overly narrow point of view and thinking in absolute

Back 104

egocentric myopia

Front 105

Overgeneralizing so that immediate event, whether favorable or unfavorable, influences thinking

Back 105

Egocentric immediacy

Front 106

Ignoring inconsistencies between belief and behavior and between public standards and private actions

Back 106

Egocentric hypocrisy

Front 107

involves developing the tools of critical thinking and applying them to whatever challenges you encounter now and in the future.

Back 107

Deep Learning

Front 108

thinking through ________ is the key to learning, understanding and applying knowledge.

Back 108

Content

Front 109

there are two other key insights into the question of thinking through content:

Back 109

1. all content is organized by concepts; and
2. all content is logically interdependent.

Front 110

The Basic Building Blocks of Reasoning

Back 110

Elements of Reasoning (Thought)

Front 111

What are the 8 Universal Elements of Reasoning?

IMPORTANT: Also known as the parts of thinking or fundamental structures of thought.

Back 111

1. Purposes
2. Questions
3. Assumptions
4. Implications
5. Information
6. Concepts
7. Inferences
8. Points of View

Front 112

The mind receives information in 3 distinct forms: (Name them.)

Back 112

1. Inert Information
2. Activated Ignorance
3. Activated Knowledge

Front 113

What are the 9 fundamental Intellectual Standards? (Standards of Thought)

Back 113

1. Clarity
2. Precision
3. Accuracy
4. Relevance
5. Depth
6. Breadth
7. Logic
8. Significance
9. Fairness

Front 114

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Could you elaborate further?
* Could you illustrate?
* Could you give me an example?

Back 114

Clarity

(Say what you mean, mean what you say)
BE CLEAR!

Front 115

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Could you give me details?
* Could you be more specific?

Back 115

Precision

(When we take something that is clear and add details.)

Front 116

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Is it true?
* How can we check this?

Back 116

Accuracy

( Recognizing inaccurate statements)

Front 117

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* How is the idea connected to the question?
* Do does this bear on the issue?

Back 117

Relevance

(Does it relate to.....the ability to consider facts that bear on the question.)

Front 118

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Does the answer deal with the complexities in the question?

Back 118

Depth

(complex questions require complex answers - only necessary if the question is not superficial)

Front 119

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Do we need to consider another point of view?
* Is there another way to look at this question?

Back 119

Breadth

(a line of reasoning lacks breadth when it considers only one side of a question - thinking broadly about an issue)

Front 120

Myopically

Back 120

Narrowmindedness

Front 121

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Does this really make sense?
* How does that follow the evidence?

Back 121

Logic

(When we think, we bring together a variety of thoughts in some order. When the combines thoughts are mutually supporting and make sense in combination, the thinking is logical.)

Front 122

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Which of these ideas or concepts are most important?
* How is that fact important in context?

Back 122

Significance

(Concentrating on the most important information in our reasoning and taking into account the most important ideas or concepts)

Front 123

Ask these questions when considering ____________.

* Am I using concepts justifiably?
* Am I using concepts unfairly to manipulate someone?

Back 123

Fairness

(When we think through our problems, we want to make sure that our thinking is justified)

Front 124

Meaning to think fairly in context

Back 124

justify

Front 125

Thinking through what element of reasoning would bring things questions?

* What is the aim of our thinking?
* What are we trying to accomplish?

Back 125

Purpose

Front 126

Thinking through what element of reasoning would bring things questions?

* What is the main problem we are trying to solve?
* Do we need to reformulate our question?

Back 126

Question at Issue

Front 127

Thinking through what element of reasoning would bring things questions?

* Do we need more details or info?
* Is the info accurate?

Back 127

Information

Front 128

Thinking through what element of reasoning would bring things questions?

* How are we interpreting the information we have received?
* How are we drawing conclusions and inferences about the information?

Back 128

Interpretation, Inferences, Conclusions

Front 129

Thinking through what Element of Reasoning would bring things questions?

* What is the main idea?
* Is there another way to think about this?

Back 129

Concepts, Ideas, Theories

Front 130

Thinking through what Element of Reasoning would bring things questions?

* What does the author assume?
* Are these assumptions justified, or should they be questioned?

Back 130

Assumptions

Front 131

Thinking through what Element of Reasoning would bring things questions?

* Where are we going?
* What is the end result likely to be?
* What happens if we continue on the path?

Back 131

Implications and Conclusions

Front 132

Thinking through what Element of Reasoning would bring things questions?

* How are we looking at this?
* Were all sides considered?

Back 132

Point of View

Front 133

An intellectual state results from studying a range of views with the overriding motivation to defend a predetermined choice. (Manipulators)
Job Types: Lawyers, Politicians, and PR experts

Back 133

Sophistic Objectivity

Front 134

What are the 5 keys in establishing accuracy and validity in information that we access?

Back 134

1. Authority
2. Point of View
3. Transparency
4. Scope and Depth
5. Accuracy

Front 135

When establishing accuracy and validity in information which key should be used when asking the following questions:

* Who stands behind the information?
* Is it from a primary or a secondary source?
* Is the info subject to peer review or an established editing process?

Back 135

Authority

Front 136

When establishing accuracy and validity in information which key should be used when asking the following questions:

* What are the biases or prejudices of the creators?
* Are they neutral or partisan?
* Do they try to pass off opinion as fact?

Back 136

Point of View

Front 137

When establishing accuracy and validity in information which key should be used when asking the following questions:

* How easy is it to trace the origin of the info?
* Are there citations and references?

Back 137

Transparency

Front 138

When establishing accuracy and validity in information which key should be used when asking the following questions:

* How broad and deep is the info?
* What questions can this help answer?
* What is missing?

Back 138

Scope and Depth

Front 139

When establishing accuracy and validity in information which key should be used when asking the following questions:

* Has the veracity or accuracy of the information been challenged?
* Does it match other info on the same topic?
How current is the info?

Back 139

Accuracy

Front 140

Casual relationship between conduct and result....cause and effect.

Back 140

causation