INTRODUCTION TO

Critical Thinking
Thinking Hard About Thinking
Agenda
• The Basics
What is critical thinking? ● Begin asking “why”? ● Basic critical thinking strategies
• Reading
Critical thinkers read critically ● Facts vs. opinion ● Arguing a points
• Arguments, Reasoning, and Fallacies
Deducting ● Inductive ● Abductive ● Arguments by analogy ● Common logical fallacies
• Writing
Writing is thinking ● Effective writers write critically
• What’s Next
Part 1: The Basics
Steven Pinker on Educated People

”
Educated people should be able to express complex ideas in clear
writing and speech. They should appreciate that objective
knowledge is a precious commodity, and know how to distinguish
vetted fact from superstition, rumor, and unexamined
conventional wisdom. They should know how to reason logically
and statistically, avoiding the fallacies and biases to which the
untutored human mind is vulnerable. They should think causally
rather than magically and know what it takes to distinguish
causation from correlation and coincidence. They should be
acutely aware of human fallibility, most notably their own, and
Steven Pinker appreciate that people who disagree with them are not stupid or
A cognitive psychologist, linguist, and evil. Accordingly, they should appreciate the value of trying to
professor in the Department of change minds by persuasion rather than intimidation or
Psychology at Harvard University
demagoguery.
Noam Chomsky on Well Educated Person

“
To be truly educated from this point of view means to be in a position to
inquire and to create on the basis of the resources available to you which
you’ve come to appreciate and comprehend. To know where to look, to know
how to formulate serious questions, to question a standard doctrine if that’s
appropriate, to find your own way, to shape the questions that are worth
pursuing, and to develop the path to pursue them. That means knowing,
understanding many things but also, much more important than what you
have stored in your mind, to know where to look, how to look, how to
question, how to challenge, how to proceed independently, to deal with the
challenges that the world presents to you and that you develop in the course
of your self education and inquiry and investigations, in cooperation and
solidarity with others. That’s what an educational system should cultivate from
kindergarten to graduate school, and in the best cases sometimes does, and Noam Chomsky
that leads to people who are, at least by my standards, well educated. American linguist, philosopher,
cognitive scientist, historian, social critic,
and political activist, also Professor
Emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology (MIT)
Einstein on Gedankenexperiment
• Gedankenexperiment, or Gedankenerfahrung (German: “thought experiment”) is a term used
by Albert Einstein to describe his unique approach of using conceptual rather than actual
experiments in creating the theory of relativity. It considers a hypothesis, theory, or principle for
the purpose of thinking through its consequences. He used another Gedankenexperiment to
begin building his theory of general relativity in 1907. As he explained in a lecture in 1922:

”
“I was sitting on a chair in my patent
office in Bern. Suddenly a thought
struck me: If a man falls freely, he
would not feel his weight. I was
taken aback. This simple thought
experiment made a deep impression
on me. This led me to the theory of
gravity.”
What is Critical Thinking?

“
The art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view of improving it. Critical thinkers raise
questions and problems; gather and assess relevant information; come up with well-reasoned
conclusions and solutions; keep an open mind and challenge preconceived ideas; and are self-
directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective.
-- Richard Paul & Linda Elder (2006)

“
… [the] ability to think clearly … to develop the mental habit of checking your own logic as well as the
logic of others.
-- Kaye (2009)

“
Three types of thinking: reasoning, making judgments, and problem solving.
-- Daniel Willingham (2007)

“
Critical thinking is disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence.
-- Dictionary.com
Why We Need to Think Critically?
• Thinking makes you act effectively in the world.
• Your mind is your most valuable asset. Critical thinking is the only
way to take advantage of its ability to lead you to the truth.
• Thinking makes you win the battles you undertake, and those could
be battles for good things. If you can think, and speak, and write;
nothing can get in your way!
• That is what you are at university for: teach people to be articulate
and to think critically!
Caveats…
• Critical thinking is not simply applies to anyone who likes to criticize
others
• Critical thinkers are not non-conformist groups and/or radical
political organizations that always criticize government or other
aspects of mainstream society

True critical thinking is about using good logic. By learning the basic principles of
good logic, you will be less likely to be fooled by bad logic. You will be more
readily able to develop intelligent positions on important issues.
Begin Asking Questions
• 5W1H: Who, What, Where, When, Why, How
• The problems with the “who,” “what,” “where,” what
“when,” and “how”:
• They have the right/exact answer when
• Those can be memorized
• No thinking required why
• It will be very different when you begin
asking “why” who where

how
Example
• Where is the capitol of Indonesia? Answer: Jakarta.
• Why chose Jakarta? Not Surabaya? Or Jogja?

• How long does it take to earn a college degree? Answer: 4 years or

144 credit hours.
• Why do we have to complete 144 credit hours? Not 140? Or 150?

• What is the official language of Singapore? Answer: English.

• Why don’t they use Malay/Bahasa just like their neighbors?
Exercise #1
Generate 10 “why” questions that you cannot possibly answer yet.
Critical Thinking
• Deliberately analyzing information and make better
judgments/decisions.
• It requires logic, reasoning, and creativity. Judgment
Rational
and
• It applicable to many different situations. It helps to decision
thinking
better understand world around us. making
• If someone come up with an idea, you can analyze it. You
can reject it. You can come up with better ideas.
Evaluating
information

We are constantly thinking, but not always critically – even when we are facing difficult problems or
important decisions.
Basic Critical Thinking Strategies
• Comparing: Explain similarities
e.g. WWI & WWII both included France, Germany Comparing Contrasting

• Contrasting: Explain differences

e.g. in WWI Paris fell, in WWII Paris never fell
• Analyzing: Break into parts
Analyzing Categorizing
e.g. WWI European theatre vs Pacific theatre
• Categorizing: Identify type
e.g. [ WWI & WWII ]
[ War in Afghanistan, Iraq War, Gulf War, Vietnam War ]
[ Civil War, Independence War ] Evaluating

• Evaluating: Tell the value

e.g. Good of WWI/II: stopped Nazism, ended great depression, industrialized nation;
Bad of WWI/II: millions killed, holocaust, atomic bombs, cold war.
Exercise #2

Comparing Contrasting
Pick 2 different objects. Follow the
aforementioned 5 steps to analyze it, e.g.
diary milk vs. almond milk, socialism vs.
Analyzing Categorizing democracy, YouTube vs. Netflix, BTS vs.
Blackpink, etc.

Evaluating
Part 2: Reading
Problems with Reading
• Less and less people are reading
nowadays.
• Reading for pleasure has always
been a minority occupation.
• We are suffering from fragmented
attention and multitasking.
• Only a small proportion of us buy
books. Of the people who buy
books, only a small proportion buy
A book is like a portrait as opposed to a photograph. In a photograph, it’s
difficult books. clicked and that’s it. In a portrait, you deal with layer on and another layer
on and work over for weeks. You still have the same single image but
• Reading is being expanded in there’s this depth to it. A book enables you to think and then rethink, so
surprising ways by such things as you can go deeper than in videos. It does not mean that there is no
educational utility in videos and podcasts (e.g. you cannot read a book
YouTube videos and podcasts. while driving or doing your dishes or running on a treadmill).
Effective Readers Read Critically
• We need to systematically analyze our reading.
• Avid readers almost intuitively know when something does or does not hold
water.
• Evaluate and examine the information carefully. Ask questions:
• What evidence do they use to support their ideas?
• What information do they perhaps leave out so they wouldn’t contradict their own
position?
• Are the conclusions based on facts or opinions?
• Are the facts relevant and accurate?
• Are the opinions justifiable?
• Are there logical flaws or fallacies?
Facts vs. Opinion

It’s
It’s very
30ºC This is objective
hot. This is very
outside. information. subjective.

It’s up to the reader

Someone may to examine the
finds it
It based on data information
comfortable.
and observation. carefully
Someone else
finds it hot.

You can verify it. Unverifiable.

Facts Can Be Inaccurate
Data shows that average course grade of Professor Ardi is 95, average
course grade of Professor Budi is 85.
• Professor Ardi’s students earned a higher average course grade than did Prof Budi’s
students. » Facts
• Professor Ardi is better instructor. » Opinion
• Professor Ardi’s students are smarter. » Opinion

Professor Ardi has more teaching experience than Professor Budi, in

addition, Professor Ardi’s students did better in the course.
• Professor Ardi is a better instructor than Professor Budi. » Opinion, even though
slightly stronger.
In Summary
• When information is presented as a fact, it is verifiable and
objective, based on statistics, data, observations, it could be right,
wrong, or misleading.
• It’s up to you to verify the evidence.
• When information is presented as an opinion, you cannot verify it. It
may be based on facts, but it’s entirely subjective.
Exercise #3
A recent McKinsey study of Southeast Asian operators found that 80 percent had heard about
the new technologies but almost 85 percent had not gone beyond pilots. Numerous large
Indonesian companies are moving toward Industry 4.0, but many of them face difficulties in
capturing the business impact and scaling up use cases. Low internet connectivity at mine sites,
limited awareness of digital ecosystems, relatively few local reference cases, and a lack of digital
skills also challenge success rates in Indonesia’s mining industry.

-- Jakarta Post, Monday, January 27, 2020

Is this a fact or opinion? How accurate/inaccurate is it?

Is Opinion Bad?
• Opinions are weak when they are based only on a guess or your
personal feeling or judgment.
• The more factual information you base your opinions on, the
stronger they are, and the more compelled you are to agree with
them.
• Both facts and opinions are important parts of sharing knowledge
and ideas.

ASSERTION » BELIEF
Example
In a study, researchers found that two-thirds of college seniors
failed a high-school grammar test. This points to the poor state
of higher education in the Indonesia.

• First sentence » Fact

• Second sentence » Opinion
• An opinion based on fact is still an opinion (even though it can be stronger)
• Questions to ponder: What was the test looks like? Can a grammar test be used to judge the
quality of higher education? Is there a better way to measure quality?
• This is somewhat weak opinion, because the evident does not support the opinion very well.
Words Choice
Common biased words (express opinions, judgments, interpretations, emotions)
Awful Disgusting Great Smart
Amazing Exciting Handsome Stupid
Bad Favorite Horrible Terrible
Beautiful Frightful Miserable Unbelievable
Best Fun More Ugly
Better Good Most Very

Qualifying words (usually a clue when the authors share opinions)

All Has to/Have to Never Seem
Always It is believed Often Should
Appear Likely Only Sometimes
Believe May Ought to The
Could Might Possible Think
Every Must Possibly Usually
Remember…
• An opinion based on facts is stronger than
an opinion based on just feelings or
personal judgment, but we still have to ask
questions about those facts.
• Do not simply agree on someone’s opinion,
as if it were factual, even if he/she is
superior to you.
• Be careful! Judgment is rapid, and
sometimes what really matters is agreeing
with people around us.
Arguing a Point
• A logical argument is a set of ideas that
support a point
A typical structure:
• e.g. You like Japanese food, so you’ll love Claims (premise) +
this sushi restaurant. Claims (premise) +
• Is this a good argument? Conclusions

Strong arguments support your ideas well.

Example
Bali has hot weather year-round and beautiful beaches, so it is the best place for a vacation.

• Analysis:
• Premise 1: Bali has hot weather year-round.
• Premise 2: Bali has beautiful beaches.
• Conclusion: Bali is the best place for a vacation.

Questions:
• What if you don’t like hot weather?
• What if you’d rather go skiing or climb a mountain?
• How do you find beautiful beaches?
• Aren’t there other places that has beautiful beaches?

Even if you agree with a conclusion, you should always analyze the argument.
Example
Cell phones pose serious risks to their users. Several studies have shown a correlation between cell
phone use and the development of brain tumors (Hardell et al., 2008). The International Agency for
Research on Cancer (IARC) classified cell phones as a possible cause of cancer.

• Analysis:
• Premise 1: The IARC classified cell phones as a possible cause of cancer.
• Premise 2: Several studies have shown a correlation between cell phone use and the development of brain tumors.
• Conclusion: Cell phones pose serious risks to their users.

• Questions:
• Are there problems with these premises?
• Is there sufficient evident to support the conclusion?
• How good were the studies?
• “Correlation” does not imply causation.
• Are there studies that found no correlation?
• “Possible” means evident is not definitive
Example
Yogyakarta is a great place to live. It has many parks and recreation areas where you can
relax and exercise. Its parks have vast green areas, including trees and wild flowers. The
Public Library was founded in 1946, making it one of the oldest libraries in the country.

• Analysis:
• Premise 1: parks and recreation areas
• Premise 2: parks have green areas
• Premise 3: the old library
• Conclusion: Jogja is a great place to live.
But….
• Library is not quite closely relevant to the conclusion. It does not provide appropriate support.
• Typically, when you are looking for great place to live, you will think about safety, public good
transportation, jobs, shops, etc.
• One relevant piece of evidence isn’t quite enough to support a conclusion.
Example
Yogyakarta is a very safe place to live. Take a quick stroll around town, and you will likely run into
friendly and helpful people. A study showed a 60% decrease in robberies and burglaries in recent
years. No violent crimes were reported last year.

• You should always evaluate the evidence

• What is the point here?
• Does the writer provide sufficient evidence?
• Is the data/information good?
• Is the evidence relevant to the conclusion?

• Analysis:
• Quick stroll and friendly/helpful people do not mean safety. It means niceness and kindness.
• No violent crimes last year, but what about previous years?
• No violent crimes, but what about other kind of crimes?
• 60% decrease seems good, but 60% of what number?
• If there were 1,000 crimes, 60% decrease still 400 crimes.
• Writer often includes statistics, data, etc. because people tend to believe this information.
• But, is it truly represent the information?
Lesson Learned
• It is not about ignoring or not believing every information we read/hear.
• Trusted sources (good academic journals, reputable news media, government officials) are very
likely to try their best to support their claims and provide sufficient and relevant information.
• But we don’t want to learn something that is not accurate
• We don’t want to be persuaded to believe something, unless they give us very good reasons
to do so
• We should always read critically, always make sure that conclusions are logical and accurate,
and supported by relevant information
Key Takeaways
• As a critical thinker, you must challenge
your assumption and other people’s
assumptions.
• Just because something is in writing,
doesn’t mean it’s a fact or the truth.
• Even if a conclusion is based on facts, it
doesn’t mean it is a good conclusion.
Exercise #4
• Take a look at local newspapers/magazines.
• Try to identify sentences/statements supported by a fact.
• Try to identify sentences/statements with strong opinion.
• Try to identify sentences/statements with weak opinion.
Part 3: Arguments, Reasoning, and
Fallacies
Basic Type of Arguments
1. Deducting
2. Inductive
3. Abductive
4. Arguments by Analogy
Deductive Arguments
Hypothesis -> Examinations -> Logical Conclusion
• A=B
• B=C
• Then A=C

For deductive to work, hypothesis must be correct, so that conclusion must be logical and true.
• Premise 1: All mangoes are fruits. (general)
• Premise 2: All fruits have seeds. (general)
• Conclusion: Mangoes have seeds. (specific)

The conclusion is logically true and realistically true.

Inductive Arguments
Examinations -> Data -> Conclusion: Broad generalization from specific observation. Generating conclusion
from specific to general is called inductive reasoning.
Take an example of a basket full of mangoes. You take a mango and find it raw. You take another
mango and also find it raw. You then conclude that all mangoes in the basket are raw.

• Premise 1: Mango is a fruit. (specific)

• Premise 2: The basket is full of fruits. (specific)
• Conclusion: The basket is full of mangoes. (general)

The conclusion is logically true, but not definitely true (may or may not be realistically true). Inductive
reasoning may not always produce a true conclusion, but scientists can use it to produce hypotheses to
investigate and they can use deductive reasoning to apply the hypotheses to specific questions about
science.
Abductive Arguments
Abductive arguments are a kind of ampliative argument: their premises don't guarantee their
conclusions. Abductive arguments involve an inference to the best explanation: their conclusions
are supposed to be the best explanations for their premises.
• Premise: Adhi’s cheeks turned red after I told him that Dian had a crush on him.
• Conclusion: Adhi was embarrassed to learn about Dian’s crush.

• This premise does not always guarantee the conclusion is true.

• Some other explanations might true. Maybe Adhi is having an allergy. Maybe he just gets
scratched by a cat -- but the conclusion is probably the best explanation, or at least it is a
strong contender.
• Abduction is not supposed to be deductively valid.
• Nevertheless, it extremely common in all walks of life and very important skill to be able to
make, spot, and evaluate abductive arguments.
Abductive Arguments
• Abduction is very common in crime.
• For example, the murder weapon was found in Evan’s trunk. Evan doesn’t have an alibi. He has the
motive and also failed the lie detector test.
• The best explanation for this evidence is that Evan is the murderer.
• Abduction is also quite crucial in science. Scientific hypotheses often rest on inferences to the
best explanation for some observed data.
• For example, that's how the planet Neptune was discovered. In the early 1800s, astronomers noticed
small discrepancies between the observed orbit of Uranus and the predictions that Newton’s theory
of motion made about what the orbit should be.
• The best explanation for these discrepancies was that they were caused by another planet that no
one had ever observed. And it turned out that this was correct. There was another planet, which we
know as Neptune today.
Abductive Arguments
Good abductive:
• Fit: The more an explanation fits in with everything we already know, the better it tends to be.
• Simple: Other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than a complicated one.
• Thorough: Make sure that you get all of the evidence that you can and then consider all of the
evidence before drawing your conclusion.

Abductive is a type of scientific reasoning that is neither inductive nor deductive. It usually starts
with an incomplete set of observations and goes from there to the likeliest possible explanation.
It is used for making and testing a hypothesis with whatever information is available.
Reasoning by Analogy
• Reasoning by analogy involves showing that your conclusion is true on the basis that two or
more things are similar.
• A good reasoning by analogy compare things that are really similar, making it a good
comparison, and that the similarity is relevant to conclusion.
• We are arguing on the basis of likeness or similarity. We are finding similarities rather than
differences.
• Remember: when we compare, we find likenesses; when we contrast, we find differences

• When we reason analogically, we proceed from the observation that two or more things are
similar in some respects to the conclusion that they are probably similar in some other respect
as well.
X is like Y because they share properties A and B.
So, X probably has property C, since Y also has it.
Reasoning by Analogy
• X is similar to Y in some specific ways, namely A, B, and C.
• X has an additional feature D, therefore, most likely Y also has the feature D.

Example:
• Premise 1: Linda is like Maya.
• Premise 2: Linda and Maya are both in their thirties.
• Premise 3: Linda is married.
• Conclusion: Maya is married.
We can conclude by analogy that Maya is also married.
Reasoning by Analogy
• X is similar to Y in some specific ways, namely A, B, and C.
• X has an additional feature D, therefore, most likely Y also has the feature D.

Example:
• Premise 1: Adi’s car a 2010 Mercedes sedan is expensive to run.
• Premise 2: Bobi’s car is a 2010 Mercedes sedan and it is expensive to run.
• Premise 3: Caca’s car is a 2010 Mercedes sedan.
• Conclusion: Caca’s car will be expensive to run as well.
Caca’s automobile shares the relevant features, that is it is a 2010 Mercedes sedan. We can
conclude by analogy that it is also expensive to run.
Reasoning by Analogy
Constructing good analogical arguments:
• Identify as many analogous features, likenesses, or similarities as possible
• Identify similarities, and if these predominate, then the analogy will fail
• Make sure that the likenesses are relevant to your conclusion
• Be modest. Do not try to push an analogy too far. Stick to obvious likenesses and similar cases.

If you try to argue that a car can fly because it shares certain features with a jet fighter like an
engine, seats, and a windshield, your argument will not get very far, because the likenesses are
not relevant to your hypothesis.
Exercise #5
• Pick any type of arguments aforementioned before.
• Write a sentence or two using such type of argument.
Common Logical Fallacies
Fallacies: Definition: Example:
Your opponent over-simplifies or misrepresents your X: I think we should hire someone to redesign our
argument (i.e., setting up a “straw man”) to make it website.
easier to attack or refute. Instead of fully addressing
The Straw Man Fallacy your actual argument, your opponent presents a Y: You’re saying we should throw our money away
superficially similar -- but ultimately not equal -- on external resources instead of building up our in-
version of your real stance, helping them create the house design team? That’s going to hurt our
illusion of easily defeating you. company in the long run.
Just because a significant population of people believe
a proposition is true, doesn’t automatically make it true The majority of people believe advertisers should
The Bandwagon Fallacy and validate an argument. These arguments are spend more money on billboards, so billboards are
commonly seen in advertising (e.g., “three out of four objectively the best form of advertisement.
people think X brand toothpaste cleans teeth best”).
While appeals to authority are by no means always
fallacious, they can quickly become dangerous when
you rely too heavily on the opinion of a single person - Despite the fact that our Q4 numbers are much
The Appeal to Authority - especially if that person is attempting to validate lower than usual, we should push forward using the
Fallacy something outside of their expertise. Just because same strategy because our CEO says this is the best
someone in a position of power believes something to approach.
be true, doesn’t make it true. These arguments are also
commonly found in advertising (esp. public figures).
Common Logical Fallacies
Fallacies: Definition: Example:
This common fallacy misleads by presenting complex
issues in terms of two inherently opposed sides. Instead
of acknowledging that most (if not all) issues can be
thought of on a spectrum of possibilities and stances, the We can either agree with Bobi’s plan, or just let the
The False Dilemma Fallacy
false dilemma fallacy asserts that there are only two project fail. There is no other option.
mutually exclusive outcomes, ignoring opportunities for
compromise or chances to re-frame the issue in a new
way.
This fallacy occurs when someone draws expansive
Two members of my team have become more
conclusions based on inadequate or insufficient
engaged employees after taking public speaking
The Hasty Generalization evidence. In other words, they jump to conclusions
classes. That proves we should have mandatory
Fallacy about the validity of a proposition with some -- but not
public speaking classes for the whole company to
enough -- evidence to back it up, and overlook potential
improve employee engagement.
counterarguments.
Slothful induction is the exact inverse of the hasty
generalization fallacy above. This fallacy occurs when Even though every project Candra has managed in
The Slothful Induction sufficient logical evidence strongly indicates a particular the last two years has run way behind schedule, I
Fallacy conclusion is true, but someone fails to acknowledge it, still think we can chalk it up to unfortunate
instead attributing the outcome to coincidence or circumstances, not his project management skills.
something unrelated entirely.
Common Logical Fallacies
Fallacies: Definition: Example:
If two things appear to be correlated, this doesn’t
necessarily indicate that one of those things irrefutably
Our blog views were down in April. We also
caused the other thing. This might seem like an
The Correlation/ Causation changed the color of our blog header in April. This
obvious fallacy to spot, but it can be challenging to
Fallacy means that changing the color of the blog header
catch in practice -- particularly when you really want to
led to less views in April.
find a correlation between two points of data to prove
your point.
In place of logical evidence, this fallacy substitutes
examples from someone’s personal experience. One of our clients doubled their conversions after
The Anecdotal Evidence Arguments that rely heavily on anecdotal evidence changing all their landing page text to bright red.
Fallacy tend to overlook the fact that one (possibly isolated) Therefore, changing all text to red is a proven way
example can’t stand alone as definitive proof of a to double conversions.
greater premise.
A Texan fires his gun at a barn wall and then proceeds
to paint a target around the closest cluster of bullet
Lisa sold her first startup to an influential tech
holes. He then points at the bullet-riddled target as
The Texas Sharpshooter company, so she must be a successful entrepreneur.
evidence of his expert marksmanship. We tend to
Fallacy (She ignores the fact that four of her startups have
cherry-pick data clusters based on a predetermined
failed since then.)
conclusion, instead of letting a full spectrum of
evidence lead them to a logical conclusion.
See https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies for more examples.
Exercise #6
• Pick any type of logical fallacies aforementioned before.
• Write a sentence or two using such type of argument.
Part 4: Writing
Writing is Thinking
• To believe that in your head something that feels clear is thinking is
a very dangerous thing. When you try and put it down on a page,
when you try and lay out your ideas in a structured order that
someone else can digest, and you realize you can’t, it’s the thinking
was weak, not the writing. Thought written then speak.

“Nothing so sharpens the thought process as writing down one’s

arguments. Weaknesses overlooked in oral discussion become
painfully obvious on the written page.”
-- Hyman G. Rickover, U.S. Navy Admiral
The Case of Amazon
Amazon banned PowerPoint in the company. If personnel wish to ask people to agree to budgets and to
give them resources, they don't use PowerPoint. Instead, they write a six-page word document that states
why they are asking for the money, the resources etc.
Jeff Bezos says “PowerPoint is easy for the presenter and hard for the listener. Writing is hard for the
presenter, but easy for the reader.”
In the management meeting, the first 20 minutes is reading time without interruption. If you have gone to
the effort to write six pages explaining your proposal you deserve to see your work read. You deserve to sit
there and see people reading through your work.
Jeff Bezos will hold them there for 20 minutes reading through the six pages, noting down their questions,
no debate, no discussion, until everyone in the room has read all six pages and taken in the context, the
criteria, and has time to think about what it is that they would like to debate to question.
After 20 minutes silent reading they can then have a
discussion but an informed discussion about the proposal.
Effective Writers Write Critically
When you write, you want to have a good understanding of the topic you are writing about.
Make sure that you have accurate, relevant information, and present it in a way that makes sense
to the reader.
• What makes bad writing:
• the words are wrong,
• the phrases are wrong,
• the sentences are wrong,
• they are not ordered right in the paragraphs,
• the paragraphs aren’t coherent,
• the whole thing makes no sense.
• In summary:
• Read and write every day.
• See if you can discover what you believe is true.
• Such practices will build your foundation.
Assignments
• Find a problem then devote your time to that problem. • Write the coherent argument and proper paragraph.
Don’t write on “marketing,” for example. Pick something The sentence, paragraph, and essay must stand as a whole.
more specific, such as “marketing luxury products for The sentence says what is supposed to say. It should be
millennial.” comprehensive and concise.
• Focus and aim to unite your thinking around that • Put the essay aside. Leave it there. After a delay, write
problem. Your essay must constitute the elaboration of a another outline, without referring to your first draft. a day
single idea. or more is optimal. This forces you to re-conceptualize your
ideas, at the paragraph level of analysis. Then return to the
• Come up with elegant, complex, interesting question.
first draft. Reorganize it according to your new outline. Do
Hint: The topic formulation is the difficult part of the
not be afraid to throw out ideas that now seem
assignment.
superfluous.
• Organize your knowledge and resources. Use one of the
• Consider to use elegant word choice and integrate
four aforementioned arguments or reasoning strategy.
your personality. Choose each word properly. Use elegant
• Get your sense right, sharpen your thinking, and write and careful phrase. Establish an identifiable and intelligent
carefully. Write first, edit later. statement.

• Write a three to five sentence summary. Each sentence • Repeat this process as many as necessary. Constitutes
should carry enough conceptual weight to withstand an intelligent approach to editing. One additional repetition
elaboration into a paragraph. is usually sufficient to produce a decent essay.
Part 5: What’s Next?
Thinking Hard About Thinking
• Realize the power of thinking: how to think, not what to think.
• What critical thinking teaches us is how to question things rigorously, how to
form sound, well-reasoned, coherent thoughts and arguments, and critically
how to identify lies, hoaxes, bullsh*t.
• Critical thinking also teaches us that it’s okay to be wrong, that the ideas we
hold aren’t us, and that we don’t need to defend them to the death, and, in
fact, that we can change those ideas. And that it is absolutely liberating to do
so.
• Critical thinking really fundamentally change how we approach the world, to
have the vulnerability and the humility, to be receptive to the idea that we
might be wrong, and it’s profoundly transformative.
Putting It into Practice
“Thinking is difficult, that’s why most people judge.” — Carl Jung

• Thinking is hard. Thinking about some problem is so hard, that it makes your headache just
thinking about them.
• Knowledge is of no value unless you put it into practice. It seems daunting. It takes practices.
The more you do it, the easier it gets.
• You have to be willing to be a fool to advance, because when you first move in your new
direction, you do not know anything. But, you will not be there for long if you are willing to
learn and practice.
• If you stay in your little safe place, temporarily you are safe. But, something will get you sooner
or later (the fool is the precursor to the savior).
• Stop watching cute cat videos and collecting internet memes.
Thank You