CHAPTER FOUR

BASIC CONCEPTS OF CRITICAL THINKING

Lesson 1: Meaning of Critical Thinking
Critical thinking can be defined as a wide range of cognitive skills and intellectual dispositions
needed to effectively identify, analyze, and evaluate arguments and truth claims. In this lesson, we
will learn the meaning and general picture of critical thinking.

Critical means involving or exercising skilled judgment or observation. In this sense, critical thinking
means thinking clearly and intelligently.

critical thinking is the general term given to a wide range of cognitive skills and intellectual
dispositions needed to effectively identify, analyze, and evaluate arguments and truth claims.

However, it does not automatically follow that being intelligent means being able think critically or
reason about information in a useful, effective and efficient manner. Being smart and intelligent is
not sufficient. Critical thinking is a process or journey that helps us to arrive at the most useful,
helpful, and most likely destinations when evaluating claims for scientific truth. Critical thinking,
thus, is thinking clearly, thinking fairly, thinking rationally, thinking objectively, and thinking
independently. It is a process that hopefully leads to an impartial investigation of the data and facts
that remains not swayed by irrelevant emotions. Therefore, the aim of critical thinking is to arrive at
well-reasoned, considered, and justifiable conclusions.

The American philosopher, John Dewey, has defined critical thinking as an active, persistent, and
careful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds, which
support it and the further conclusions to which it tends.

The other most famous contributors to the development of the critical thinking tradition is Robert
Ennis. He defined critical thinking as reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what
to believe or do.

Here is another important definition of critical thinking is given by Richard Paul: Critical thinking is
that mode of thinking – about any subject, content or problem – in which the thinker improves the
quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and
imposing intellectual standards upon them.

One last definition is worth reviewing. Michael Scriven has defined critical thinking as skilled and
active interpretation and evaluation of observations and communications, information and
argumentation.
Critical thinking is sometimes referred to as ‗criticocreative‘ thinking. This word is the combination
of two words: critical and creative. There are two related reasons for this. The first is that the term
‗critical thinking‘ is sometimes thought to sound rather negative, as though one‘s only interest is in
adversely criticizing other people‘s arguments and ideas.

Lesson 2: Standards of Critical Thinking

To identify a critical thinking from the uncritical, we refer to some standards.

Clarity, precision, accuracy, relevance, consistency, logical correctness, completeness, and fairness
are some of the most important intellectual standards of critical thinking.

1) Clarity
Clarity refers to clear understanding of concepts and clearly expressing them in a language that is
free of obscurity and vagueness. When we construct argument, we should take into consideration
or pay close attention to clarity.

2) Precision
Precision is a matter of being exact, accurate and careful. Most ideas are vague and obscures
though we think we have precise understanding of them.

3) Accuracy
Accuracy is about correct information. Critical thinking should care a lot about genuine information.
If the ideas and thoughts one processes are not real, then once decision based on wrong and false
information will likely to result in distorting realities.

Accuracy is about having and getting true information.

4) Relevance
The question of relevance is a question of connections. When there is a discussion or debate, it
should focus on relevant ideas and information.

Critical thinkers do not collect any information; they focus and carefully choose only the
information that has logical relation with the ideas at hands.

5) Consistency
Consistency is about the quality of always behaving in the same way or of having the same opinions
or standards.

There are two kinds of inconsistency that should be avoided. One is logical inconsistency, which
involves saying or believing inconsistent things (i.e., things that cannot both or all be true) about a
particular matter. The other is practical inconsistency, which involves saying one thing and doing
another.

6) Logical Correctness
To think logically is to reason correctly; that is, to draw well-founded conclusions from the beliefs
held. To think critically, we need accurate and well supported beliefs.

7) Completeness
In most contexts, we rightly prefer deep and complete thinking to shallow and superficial thinking.
Of course, there are times when it is impossible or inappropriate to discuss an issue in depth; no
one would expect, for example, a thorough and wide-ranging discussion of the ethics of the right to
self- determination in a short newspaper editorial.

8) Fairness
Critical thinking demands that our thinking be fair - that is, open minded, impartial, and free of
distorting biases and preconceptions.

Lesson 3: Codes of Intellectual Conduct for Effective Discussion

3.1 Principles of Good Argument

A discussion may involve two or more participants or it may simply be an internal discussion with
oneself.

1) The Structural Principle

The structural principle of a good argument requires that one who argues for or against a position
should use an argument that meets the fundamental structural requirements of a well-formed
argument. Such an argument does not use reasons that contradict each other, that contradict the
conclusion, or that explicitly or implicitly assume the truth of the conclusion.

A good argument should also provide us with reasons to believe that the conclusion deserves our
acceptance.

2) The Relevance Principle

This is the second principle of a good argument that requires that one who presents an argument
for or against a position should set forth only reasons whose truth provides some evidence for the
truth of the conclusion.

The premises of a good argument must be relevant to the truth or merit of the conclusion. There is
no reason to waste time assessing the truth or acceptability of a premise if it is not even relevant to
the truth of the conclusion.

3) The Acceptability Principle

This principle requires that one who presents an argument for or against a position should provide
reasons that are likely to be accepted by a mature, rational person and that meet standard criteria
of acceptability. The reasons set forth in support of a conclusion must be acceptable. A reason is
acceptable if it is the kind of claim that a rational person would accept in the face of all the relevant
evidence available.

4) The Sufficiency Principle

which requires that one who presents an argument for or against a position should attempt to
provide relevant and acceptable reasons of the right kind, that together are sufficient in number
and weight to justify the acceptance of the conclusion.

5) The Rebuttal Principle

This principle requires that one who presents an argument for or against a position should include in
the argument an effective
rebuttal to all anticipated serious criticisms of the argument that may be brought against it or
against the position it supports.

3.2 Principles of Critical Thinking

the principles of a critical thinking as parts of the codes of intellectual conduct.

1) The Fallibility Principle

The first principle of a critical thinking is the fallibility principle. This principle requires that each
participant in a discussion of a disputed issue should be willing to accept the fact that he or she is
fallible, which means that one must acknowledge that one‘s own initial view may not be the most
defensible position on the question.

To employ the fallibility principle in a discussion is consciously to accept the fact that you are
fallible, that is, that your present view may be wrong or not the most defensible view on the matter
in dispute.

2) The Truth Seeking Principle

This principle requires that each participant should be committed to the task of earnestly searching
for the truth or at least the most defensible position on the issue at stake.

We probably all want to hold only those opinions that really are true, but the satisfaction of that
interest comes at a price - a willingness to look at all available options and the arguments in support
of them

3) The Clarity Principle

It requires that the formulations of all positions, defences, and attacks should be free of any kind of
linguistic confusion and clearly separated from other positions and issues. Any successful discussion
of an issue must be carried on in language that all the parties involved can understand.
A position or a criticism of it that is expressed in confusing, vague, ambiguous, or contradictory
language will not reach those toward whom it is directed, and it will contribute little to resolving the
issue at hand.

4) The Burden of Proof Principle

This principle requires that the burden of proof for any position usually rests on the participant who
sets forth the position. If, and when, an opponent asks, the proponent should provide an argument
for that position.

Just as a person is generally held accountable for his or her own actions, one who makes a positive
or negative claim about something has what is called the burden of proof.

5) The Principle of Charity

This is the fifth principle of a critical thinking that requires that if a participant‘s argument is
reformulated by an opponent, it should be carefully expressed in its strongest possible version that
is consistent with what is believed to be the original intention of the arguer.

6) The Suspension of Judgment Principle

This principle requires that if no position is defended by a good argument, or if two or more positions
seem
be defended with equal strength, one should, in most cases, suspend judgment about the issue.

If suitable evidence is so lacking that one has no good basis for making a decision either way, it may
be quite appropriate to suspend judgment on the matter and wait until there is more of a basis for
decision.

7) The Resolution Principle

This principle requires that an issue should be considered resolved if the argument for one of the
alternative positions is a structurally sound, one that uses relevant and acceptable reasons that
together provide sufficient grounds to justify the conclusion and that also include an effective
rebuttal to all serious criticisms of the argument and/or the position it supports.

Lesson 4: Characteristics of Critical Thinking

4.1 Basic Traits of Critical Thinkers

A critical thinker simply is a person who exhibit some feature of critical thinking. There are some
dispositions and attitudes, skills and abilities, habits and values that every critical person should
manifest. In this section, we will see some of the key intellectual traits of critical thinkers.
Critical thinkers:
Are honest with themselves, acknowledging what they don't know, recognizing their limitations,
and being watchful of their own errors.
Regard problems and controversial issues as exciting challenges.
Strive for understanding, keep curiosity alive, remain patient with complexity, and are ready to
invest time to overcome confusion.
Base judgments on evidence rather than personal preferences, deferring judgment whenever
evidence is insufficient. They revise judgments when new evidence reveals error.
Are interested in other people's ideas and so are willing to read and listen attentively, even when
they tend to disagree with the other person.
Recognize that extreme views (whether conservative or liberal) are seldom correct, so they avoid
them, practice fair-mindedness, and seek a balance view.
Practice restraint, controlling their feelings rather than being controlled by them, and thinking

before acting.
4.2 Basic Traits of Uncritical Thinkers
Uncritical thinkers:
Pretend they know more than they do, ignore their limitations, and assume their views are error-
free.
Regard problems and controversial issues as nuisances or threats to their ego.
Are inpatient with complexity and thus would rather remain confused than make the effort to
understand.
Base judgments on first impressions and gut reactions. They are unconcerned about the amount
or quality of evidence and cling to their views steadfastly.
Are preoccupied with themselves and their own opinions, and so are unwilling to pay attention
to others' views. At the first sign of disagreement, they tend to think, "How can I refute this?"
Ignore the need for balance and give preference to views that support their established views.
Tend to follow their feelings and act impulsively.

Let us now compare and contrasts the key intellectual traits of critical thinkers with the relevant traits
of uncritical thinkers:
First, critical thinkers have a passionate drive for clarity, precision, accuracy, and other critical
thinking standards while uncritical thinkers often think in ways that are unclear, imprecise, and
inaccurate.
Second, critical thinkers are skilled at understanding, analyzing, and evaluating arguments and
viewpoints whereas uncritical thinkers often misunderstand or evaluate unfairly arguments and
viewpoints.
Third, critical thinkers are intellectually honest with themselves, acknowledging what they do not
know and recognizing their limitations while uncritical thinkers pretend they know more than they
do and ignore their limitations.
Fourth, critical thinkers base their beliefs on facts and evidence rather than on personal preferences
or self-interests, while uncritical thinkers often base beliefs on mere personal preferences or self-
interests. Again, critical thinkers are aware of the biases and preconceptions that shape the way
they perceive the world, whereas uncritical thinkers lack awareness of their own biases and
preconceptions.
Fifth, critical thinkers think independently and are not afraid to disagree with group opinion
whereas uncritical thinkers tend to engage in ―groupthink‖ uncritically following the beliefs and
values of the crowd.
Finally yet importantly, critical thinkers pursue truth, are curious about a wide range of issues and
have the intellectual perseverance to pursue insights or truths despite obstacles or difficulties
whereas uncritical thinkers are often relatively indifferent to truth and lack curiosity, tend not to
persevere when they encounter intellectual obstacles or difficulties.

Lesson 5: Barriers to Critical Thinking

Some of the most common barriers to critical thinking are: Lack of relevant background
information, poor reading skills, bias, prejudice, superstition, egocentrism (self-centered thinking),
sociocentrism (group-centered thinking), peer pressure, conformism, provincialism (narrow,
unsophisticated thinking), narrow-mindedness, closed-mindedness, distrust in reason, relativistic
thinking, stereotyping, unwarranted assumptions, scapegoating (blaming the innocent),
rationalization (inventing excuses to avoid facing our real motives).

Let us examine in detail five of these impediments that play an especially powerful role in hindering
critical thinking: egocentrism, sociocentrism, unwarranted assumptions, relativistic thinking, and
wishful thinking.
1) Egocentrism

Egocentrism is the tendency to see reality as centered on oneself. Egocentrics are selfish, self-
absorbed people who view their interests, ideas, and values as superior to everyone else‘s. All
of us are affected to some degree by egocentric biases. Egocentrism can manifest itself in a
variety of ways. Two common forms this are self-interested thinking and the superiority bias.

2) Sociocentrism
The second powerful barrier that paralyze the critical thinking ability of most people including
intellectuals is sociocentrism. It is group-centered thinking. Just as egocentrism can hinder
rational thinking by focusing excessively on the self, so sociocentrism can hinder rational
thinking by focusing excessively on the group. Sociocentrism can distort critical thinking in many
ways. Two of the most important are group bias and conformism.

Group bias is the tendency to see one‘s own group (nation, tribe, sect, peer group, and the like)
as being inherently better than others.

3) Unwarranted Assumptions and Stereotypes

The third factor that impedes critical thinking is unwarranted assumptions and stereotype. An
assumption is something we take for granted - something we believe to be true without any
proof or conclusive evidence. Almost everything we think and do is based on assumptions.

An unwarranted assumption is something taken for granted without good reason. Such
assumptions often prevent our seeing things clearly.
 stereotypes are arrived at through a process known as hasty generalization, in which one draws
a conclusion about a large class of things(in this case, people) from a small sample.

4) Relativistic Thinking
One of the strongest challenges to critical thinking is relativistic thinking. Relativism is the view
that truth is a matter of opinion. There are two popular forms of relativism: subjectivism and
cultural relativism. Subjectivism is the view that truth is a matter of individual opinion.
According to subjectivism, whatever an individual believes is true, is true for that person, and
there is no such thing as ―objective‖ or ―absolute‖ truth, i.e., truth that exists independent of
what anyone believes.

The other common form of relativism is cultural relativism. This is the view that truth is a matter
of social or cultural opinion. In other words, cultural relativism is the view that what is true for
person A is what person A‘s culture or society believes is true.

5) Wishful Thinking
Wishful thinking refers to a state of believing something not because you had good evidence for
it but simply because you wished it were true.

Lesson 6: Benefits of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking teaches you how to raise and identify fundamental questions and problems in
the community. It will teach you to reformulate these problems clearly and precisely. It will
teach you how to gather and assess relevant information, develop reasoned conclusions and
solutions, testing them against relevant criterion and standards. It teaches you how to be open
minded to alternative system of thought, recognize and assess your own assumptions,
implications and practical consequences, how to communicate effectively with others in figuring
out solutions to complex problems.