RECAP & To do list

GE2134 – Critical and Creative Thinking

• Review last week’s material
Argument Analysis – Do simulation (recommended)
Analyzing Argument (Part 1) • Report your score, optional, in “Discussions”
Evaluating Argument (Part 2)
– Work on problem set
• Necessary and Sufficient conditions

Week 4 (Tue/CA1 & Thurs/C01) • Before next class

Week 5 (Wed/C02) – Do simulation
No class for CA1 & C01
– Work on problem set
Semester A 2024

Learning Outcomes
• Identify the reason or reasons, explicit or implicit, a person is using to argue that a given claim is
true or very probably true
• Display the analyses of arguments using argument maps, showing where appropriate the final
Part 1 conclusion, various lines of reasoning used, implicit but unspoken reasons
• Given more complex conversations containing multiple arguments, pro and con, made in a given
context, analyze and map those arguments including the divergent conclusions being advocated
and the counter-arguments presented to the reasons advanced by one side or another
Analyze Arguments and • Apply argument mapping techniques to display analyses of decision making by individuals or
groups, include statements that indicate that a decision is needed, lines of reasoning that
Diagram Decisions abandoned, options which were considered but not accepted

4
 For C02

Week 4 (5) (Part 1) Opening Video Introduction

•Make an argument: Process of giving one or more

reasons in support of a claim
• Claim: Statement that the maker of the argument is seeking to
show to be true or probably true
• An argument’s claim can be referred to as the argument’s conclusion

5 6

Introduction Analyzing Reasons and Claims

• Reason(s): Statements used to show that the conclusion is true • Accuracy depends on context and purpose
or that it is probably true
• Over-simplification masks reality
• Considerations or rationale are other terms used to refer to reasons
• Argument: Combination of a person’s claim and the reason(s) a • Reason and premise
person presents in support of that claim

7 8
 independent ?
O
Accuracy Depends on Context and Purpose S
-

%
• Accurate analyses: I need to get better job
a
: too

moron brutal
– Deepens one’s understanding of what other people are saying
,

– Helps in evaluating or making cogent counterarguments

• Accuracy of an analysis depends on knowing the
difference between reason and claim
• Rule of thumb

Over-Simplification Masks Reality Reason and Premise

• Humans are not fully reflective and thoughtful while • Grammatical structure, context, and purpose must be
making decisions considered to make a correct analysis to
• Analysis is an active skill • In normal everyday conversations, people seldom Reason
g
• Confusions to avoid articulate every premise
-

– Argument does not mean quarrel or disagreement

– The word conclusion does not suggest that the person’s
conclusion must come at the end

10 11
 Common Words and Phrases Used to Signal Conclusions
and Reasons

Words That Signal Conclusions Words That Signal Reasons

So… Since…
Thus… Given that…
Therefore… Whereas…
T IF ←
premise
We can now infer… For the reason that…
→

in -
These facts indicate… Let us begin agreeing that…

And so probably… Is supported by…

We can deduce… Is implied by…
O This justifies our decision… Is understandable when you consider…

2 premises
12

Mapping Claims and the Reasons for them Map 1

• Interpreting unspoken reasons and claims in context

• Interpreting the use of irony, humor, sarcasm, and more
Oval represents the reason
An argument 's
conclusion

Arrow conceals

13 14
Map 2 Map 3
claim
#2

* ① 443

15 16

Interpreting Unspoken Reasons and Claims in

Map 4
Context
• Unspoken assumptions can be made due to certain
factors
– Context
– Shared experiences
= – Common knowledge
implicit ideas – Similarities of cultural backgrounds
A cloud shape represents

17 18
 Interpreting the Use of Irony, Humor, Sarcasm,
Map 5
and More
• Words can be represented inO
brackets to:
– Clarify a statement
-

– Describe nonverbal cues

19 20

children -7 father
Analyzing Arguments in Context Map 6
An apartment

• The El Train argument µhreaTJ

• The “Guns for Kids” conversation
D) open
Another apartment
? D ?

21 22
Map 7 Map 8

23 24

Map 9 Map 10

25 26
Expressions that Often Signal Objections or Expressions that Often Signal Objections or
Counterarguments Counterarguments

27 28

Discussion Questions Analyzing and Mapping Decisions

• What clarifications or distinctions would you add to the • “We should cancel the spring trip” #1
Guns for Kids example? • “We should cancel the spring trip” #2
– Deliberate on the emotions the example evoked
– Are there any other important considerations they should have
thought about?
– How did you avoid demonizing, underestimating, or
disrespecting one or the other side of this issue?

29 30
 Map 11 Map 12

be
The rejected option can

shaded rectangle
represented by a

31 32

Map 13 Mapping Conventions

Continuation map
kwhe[
to
James pushes the
group
reconsider
-

33 34
 For C02

Week 4 (5) (Part 1) Endnote

Part 2

-
Evaluate Arguments:
Four Basic Tests

Ttt

35

For C02

Learning Outcomes Week 4 (5) (Part 2) Opening Video

• Explain the four presumptions about argument making we

-

make when we offer one another reasons to support our

claims
• Evaluate the worthiness of arguments by applying the four
tests: Truthfulness of the Premises, Logical Strength,
Relevance, and Non-Circularity
• Recognize common reasoning mistakes known as
-
fallacies of relevance

37 38
Giving Reasons and Making Arguments Truthfulness

• Truthfulness • People expect that the statements offered when making

• Logical strength arguments are true
• Relevance – If a disagreement about the truth of any statement should arise,
people involved can:
• Non-circularity • Make an effort to find out if that statement is true
-

• Qualify the force with which they assert and maintain any claims in the
line of reasoning that relies on the statement
• Premise - Statement that is a component of a reason
t
tf
39 40

FEI! a taking
Logical Strength Relevance
T
• The speaker’s reason is supposed to be the logical basis • Conclusion can be true independent of whether the
=
-
for his or her claim premises are true or logically support the conclusion -

• The assumed truth of the premises of an argument – So What? presumption

justifies or implies that the conclusion also be taken as • The listener takes the speaker’s reason to be relevant in
true believing the speaker’s claim

41 42
Non-circularity Four Tests for Evaluating Arguments

• Claim must not be part of the basis for believing in the

-
• Test #1: Truthfulness of the premises
-
truth of the reason • Test #2: Logical strength
• Argument making is directional • Test #3: Relevance
• Test #4: Non-circularity
• Argument making contexts

43 44

Test #1: Truthfulness of the Premises Test #2: Logical Strength

• Truth or falsity of premises is a-

-
priority in critical thinking • An argument passes the test if there is no possible
Mr

• Person must get the information straight if he or she does scenario in which all the premises can be true while its
- -

not have the best information T conclusion is false

"
– Sound argument: Contains true premises and passes the Test
-

*
of Logical Strength re
-

• Multiple independent reasons can be provided for a given

claim
Deo D
45 46
Map 1 Test #3: Relevance
R2 R2 .

Pass Ti
• Test requires making a reasoned judgment that the truth
→
→

failed -0ms
→ →a

of the conclusion depends upon the truth of the reason

Ty • People with knowledge and experience appropriate to
context and issues under discussion can easily apply the
test

47 48

Test #4: Non-circularity Map 2

• Requires that a claim is not relied upon a chain of

reasoning used to support its own reason
-

• Argument flows in one direction, from reasons and

evidence toward the conclusion

49 50
Map 3 Simulation – Evaluating Argument Worthiness

51 52

Evaluative Adjectives for Arguments and Their

Argument Making Contexts
Elements
• Desire for best knowledge is trumped by the competitive
need to vanquish the opposition
– Argument making includes the search for facts that support
one’s preconceptions
• Winning an argument does not guarantee that a best
decision is made
• Vocabulary used to evaluate arguments must be flexible

53 54
Common Reasoning Errors Fallacies of Relevance

• Fallacies of relevance • Appeals to ignorance

– It is false to assume that the absence of a reason for an idea
should count as a reason against the idea
• Appeals to the mob
– One should not assume that because a large group of people
believe in something or do something, their opinion is correct

55 56

Fallacies of Relevance Fallacies of Relevance

• Appeals to emotion • Straw man fallacy

– False to assume that one’s initial emotional response to an • Assuming that, by refuting a weaker argument among several
idea, event, story, person, image, or proposal is the best guide independent reasons, one has successfully refuted all the
for forming reflective fair-minded judgments reasons for a claim
• Ad hominem attacks – Includes the practice of attributing to the opposition an
– Claims that a person’s ideas must be tainted because the argument that is not theirs, and then demolishing that argument
person has some vice or flaw

57 58
Fallacies of Relevance Discussion Question

• Playing with words fallacy • Give an example of a recent argument that fails one or
– Exploits problematic vagueness, ambiguity, donkey cart more of the four tests for evaluating arguments
expressions, stereotyping, and slanted language in order to – State the argument and explain which test or tests it failed and
support a claim why
• Misuse of authority fallacy
– False assumption that if a powerful person makes a claim, then
the claim must be true

59 60

For C02

Week 4 (5) (Part 2) Endnote – Four Basic Tests Week 5 – To honour “Reading Week” in CLASS

• No class for Tue/CA1 and Thurs/C01 only

• Wed/C02 still has class in Week 5

– Wed/C02 had “Reading Week” on 18 Sept
2024 (Week 3) already

This will bring all three sections to the same

teaching sequence after Week 5.

All three sections have the same number of

lectures/workshops required, i.e., 8.

61 62
 new

Company/orgae#
bummers
geg.gg
CafeDeC midday
feasible of ene box

creative
MRL out