Critical Thinking Notes

International bussiness and Logistics

What is critical thinking

- Analyze/Evaluate arguments

- Good logic

- Discover and overcome personal biases (Prejudice)

- Make reasonable choices and plans to solve problems

Why is it different/hard

- It is a higher-order skill

- Humans are pattern-seeking and story-telling => Embellishing the truth and hard to recognize
truth

- Feelings and emotions are reactive in nature - fast / thinking requires time - slower (Political
application)

* Lies are easier to hear => Emotional language assist in conveying the narrative, instead of the
truh (Cold, hard)

How to get good at Critical Thinking

- Practical theory: Terms and concepts for identifying good/bad argument - Clear and accurate
information

- Open-minded, self-reflection fairness (Counter bias, inner stubborn => Not impossible, but
hard)

- Practice
*Critical thinking/ Conflict - How to distinguish between them ... (trong vở)
Reasons we struggle with Critical Thinking
- Bad mental habits

1. Egocentrism
2. Sociocentrism: Evaluating issues on the assumption that your community/group is

better than others

3. Conformism: Doing things because everyone is doing it
=> Motivated reasoning is an error in thinking where we evaluate situations based on what
you’re already believe and what you want it to be

Motivated reasoning/Confirmation bias: Nearly the same

Confirmation bias: Actively seek out information that correlate to what we already have in our
mind, and ignore contrasting information

Terms and research by Social Psychologists 1. Human credulity:

- We believe things easily : + If we don’t know everything about a topic, our brains convert new
information into a belief automatically

+ This happens to everyone

+ We can decide to use “Cognitive effort” to evaluate new information

+ The deeper the belief, the more effort we have to put in to change it

=> Our brain is full of weird belief - They just flow into our head

2. Belief Perseverance: Once we have a belief, we latch on to it

- In some situation, this is necessary (Trying to not cheat in class with everyone around)

- BUT sometime it makes us keep beliefs even when presented with counter evidence

- People can ignore or distort opposing information to hold on to beliefs, even if the opposing
information is true/right/logical

3. Confirmation bias:
- We seek, remember and accept new information that supports what we already believe
4. Cognitive dissonance
- The mental and emotional discomfort with contradiction or inconsistent ideas or beliefs ( - We
do not like contradiction
- Our brains distort new information to avoid this discomfort and to fit our belief
- We only spend time with people who support their beliefs (To avoid discomfort)
- Also possible to change
* New concepts in 1950: ‘Cult’
An argument: One or more premises that support a conclusion
A statement: Any sentences that can be viewed as either true or false
- Red is a color (True)
- It is cold today (False)
- Capital punishment is wrong (debatable)
Questions are not statement (Can not be viewed as true/false)
Greetings are not statement
Requests/Proposals are not statement
Instructions/Exclamations/Commands are not statement

* Rhetorical Questions: A sentence that seems like a question but with an implied message. ‘I
hope Peter likes his new job’ is a statement
Premises and conclusions are statements
Premises are statements that support conclusions (sometimes called reasons)

To find premises, we have indicator words:

Since/because/given that/considering that/In view of the fact that/on account of/in as much as

Conclusions are statements supported by premise. This is what the writer/speaker want you to
accept/believe

Therefore/Hence/So/It follows that/That is why/As a result/Thus/For this

reason/Consequently/Accordingly/This implies that...

Other ways to find conclusions

1. Find the main issue of the argument and where the writer states their opinion on it 2. Look at
the beginning and ending (sometimes)
3. “Because test”

- The writer believes ____________ (conclusion) because ___________ (premise)

Do not play your sound system loudly as you may not be able to hear warning sirens from
emergency vehicles. In addition, hearing damage from loud noise is almost undetectable until
it’s too late

Premises: + You may not be able to hear warning sirens from emergency vehicles + Hearing
damage from loud noise is almost undetectable until it’s too late Conclusions: Do not play your
sound system loudly
You know how I know animals have souls? Because on average, the lowest animal is a lot nicer
and kinder than most of the human beings that inhabit

this Earth
Premises: On average, the lowest
animal is a lot nicer and kinder than most of the human beings that inhabit this Earth
Conclusions: Animals have souls
Rights are either God-given or evolve out of the democratic process. +, the ability to make and
keep agreements. Animals cannot possibly reach such

an agreement with other creatures. They cannot respect anyone else’s rights. Therefore they
cannot be said to have rights.

Premises: + Rights are either God-given or evolve out of the democratic process
+ Most rights are based on the ability of people to agree on a social contract, ability to make
and keep agreements

+ Animals cannot possibly reach such an agreement with other creatures. + They cannot respect
anyone else’s rights.
Conclusions: Animals cannot be said to have rights/don’t have rights NOT-ARGUMENTS:

1. Reports: Provides information

2. Unsupported assertions: That politician is a thief
3. Conditional statements: (If it rains, we will cancel the event) 4. Explanations: I fell down
because I tripped
5. Statements of common knowledge

Deductive arguments: The conclusion of the argument must be true, if the premises are true
Example: All cats have fur
Whiskers is a cat => Whiskers has fur
How to determine whether an argument is deductive

1. Indicator words: Therefore, definitely, absolutely, necessarily, certainly 2. Strict necessity

test:
3. Common pattern test:

Inductive arguments: The conclusion probably is true if the premises are true
In most cases, students who take note score well on exams. Since you took notes, you should

do well on the exam.

1. Inductive generalization: (generalization means to assign qualities to members of a group)

- Inductive reasoning/argument: An argument about the future based on past patterns 2.

Causal argument: An argument that claims/denies ‘one thing causes another’

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4

- What is CT - Barriers to CT - What is an argument

- Why is it important - How to + Egocentrism + Statements

improve + Premises
+ Sociocentrism + Conclusions
- Non-
+ Conformity arguments

=> Motivated reasoning

+ Dissonance
 Cognitive

+ Human credulity

+ Belief perseverance

+ Confirmation bias

Instructions for exam:

1. Test will be in classroom from 8am-9am

2. It will be MCQ with one bonus question (20 MCQ + 1 bonus question) 3. It will be on paper
but you can keep phones for translation

Deductive reasoning:

1. Can be evaluated either as True - Valid/ False - Invalid 2. The premises are true => 1 single
conclusion (Certain) 3. Tests

3.1. Indicator word test: Certainly/Definitely/Absolutely/In follows that/Definitely/Conclusively

3.2. Strict necessity test: Is the conclusion the only possible outcome? 3.3. Common pattern
test: (Note)
4. Types of deductive reasoning

A. Arguments of elimination - get rid of possibilities until left with only one option

B. Arguments based on Mathematics - precise calculations

(8 is greater than 4; 4 is greater than 2; Therefore 8 is greater than 2)

C. Arguments based on definition (Jeff has a pilot’s license. Therefore, he has been trained to
fly)

5. Syllogisms (Vietnamese : Tam đoạn luận): - 3 lines

- 2 general statement (2 premises) leads to another more particular statement (One conclusion)

The premises are assumed to be true

We evaluate conclusion as Valid/Invalid
Hypothetical Syllogisms
- 2 premises, one conclusion
- At least one ‘If/then’ premise (possibility evaluation)
*If the shark is hungry, it will eat me
The shark is hungry
Therefore, the shark will eat me
If I “want” to buy lunch, I “should” bring money
I want to buy lunch
Therefore, I should bring money
VALID (?)
=> If A, then B
A
Therefore B
Another common pattern (Chain pattern)
“If we don’t stop for gas, we will run out of gas
If we run out of gas, we will be late for school
Therefore, if we don’t stop for gas, we will be late for school” => Chain
If A, then B
If B, then C
Therefore, if A, then C
Denying the consequent: If A, then B
Not B
Therefore not A
INVALID (?)
Denying antecedent (antecedent: Tiền lệ)

If A, then B
Not A
Therefore not B
“If we are in Haiphong, we are in Vietnam. We are not in Haiphong

Therefore we are not in Vietnam Affirming consequent

If A, then B
B

Therefore A

If we are on Earth, then we are in the Solar System

We are in the Solar System

Therefore we are on Earth (Technically wrong, factually true - no known astronauts on Mars/the
Moon; only in space stations)

Modus ponens: Affirming the antecedent

Modus tollens: Denying the consequent
CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS
Deductive arguments with 2 premises, 1 conclusion that include “all, some or none”

1. Major premise (All men are mortal)

2. Minor premise (Socrates is a man)
3. Conclusion (Therefore, Socrates is mortal)
Categorisms:

1-4: Valid;5: Valid; 6-9: Invalid; 10-11: Valid; 12: Invalid; 13: Valid

Inductive arguments:

1. If the premises are true, the conclusion is probably or most likely true

2. Evaluated as strong or weak, NOT valid/invalid

3. These are actually evaluated based on what is true in the world

I. Inductive Generalizations: An argument that something is true about a group based on general
characteristics

“All of the students I have met in ISE have been friendly, so I think all students in ISE are
friendly”

Predictive arguments: A prediction supported by reasons

Arguments from Authority: An argument that presents conclusion supported by reference to an

authority (a person with training/experience) or witness (a person who was present for an event
or experience)

4. Causal Arguments: An argument that asserts or denies that one thing caused something else
(Inductive arguments that make claim)

*Some students get jobs, and then their grades went down. Getting a job isn’t good for students*

5. Statistical arguments: a conclusion supported statistics about some portion of a group 85%
of Seafarers get trained at Maritime Universities
Sam is a seafarers, so probably went to a M.U.
6. (...)

FORMAL LOGIC
- Deduction, syllogisms, formulas
Informal logic
- Making arguments in everyday life
- Persuasion
Relevance
How strongly do the premises support the conclusion?
Positive (The premises make sense + support the conclusion)
Negative (The premises make it obvious that the conclusion is wrong)
Irrelevant (The premises and conclusion have no logical conclusion)
Logical Fallacies: Arguments that are flawed or incorrect in their logical structure TODAY:
Fallacies of relevance arguments that seem to offer good reason, but do not.
(1) Personal attack (Ad Hominem) (Attacking someone’s character of appearance instead of
argument)

Example: The President’s policies are terrible; he’s so old!

(2) Attacking the motive (Attacking the reason or motive for an argument instead of argument
itself)

Of course our teacher says education is important. That’s how she gets paid

(3) Look who’s talking (Tu quoque): Turning an accusation back on the arguer instead of
addressing the argument (Whataboutism in politics)

(Smoking is harmful, you should quit - Well, you used to smoke!)

Downloaded by Nguy?n G?u ([email protected])

lOMoARcPSD|35321919

(4) Two wrongs make a right

Justifying a wrongful act by saying someone else did something just as bad or worse
Mom: Stop hitting your (sister/brother)
Kid: She/he hit me first
(5) Scare Tactics
Threatening harm or danger if your conclusion is not accepted
Example: Vote for me or the economy will collapse/Buy this product, or no one will like you
EXAMPLES: I

1. Personal attack: Hillary Clinton is not fit for office, her husband had an affair with his
secretary.

2. Attacking the Motive: You only sided with her because she is your girlfriend.

3. Tu Quoque: You should not cheat in class, it is against the rules - Everyone does that all
the time, you still do so as well

4. Two wrongs make a right: - Stop attacking Ukraine, you are invading another country!

- You invaded Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Syria and bombed all of them to the ground in the
name of democracy and peace as well!

5. Scare Tactics: (Police) Admit to your felony or (torture)

(6) Appeal to Pity: Evoking pity or compassion in ways that are not relevant to a conclusion.
(7) Bandwagon appeal: An argument that offers the popularity of a conclusion as its only
evidence

Example: I know he’s guilty. Everyone said so

(8) Straw Man Fallacy: An argument where we distort someone’s conclusion, and then attack the
distortion (méo mó, biến thể)

Mom: I would like you to help me clean the house more often

You: It is so unfair that you want me to do everything, I have to study sometimes.

(9) Red Herring: Bring up an irrelevant topic to sidetrack a debate or avoid an issue

Example: People say my political party isn’t doing enough to protect the ecology of our coast.
But I grew up fishing here

(10) Begging the question: - When the arguer uses the thing being proved as a premise a)
Restating conclusion: Smoking is dangerous because it is unhealthy.

b) Going in circle: A: GOD WROTE THE BIBLE B: HOW DO YOU KNOW?

A: BECAUSE IT SAYS SO IN THE MOTHER****** BIBLE

B: HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS IS TRUE?
A: BECAUSE GOD WROTE IT YOU HEATHENISTIC INFIDEL!
5 student/group, all member has to present
VAGUENESS
- It is one kind of imprecision in language
- When? (A word/group of words) is vague when its meaning is fuzzy amd inexact

+ Sweatshop laborers earn minimal pay working in suffocating conditions in factories owned by
American corporations. They claim that economic realities force them to participate in this
practice.

OVERGENERALITY

- Words are overgeneral if the info they provide is too broad and unspecific in a given context +
Teacher: Johnny, what is seven plus five
+ Johnny: More than two
+ Mother: Where are you going?

+ Teenager: Out.

+ Mother: When will you be back?

+ Teenager: Later
AMBIGUITY

- A word/expression is ambigious if it has two or more distinct meanings and the context does
not make clear which meaning is intended

- John called (John Smith or John Snow?)

DISPUTE
- Verbal dispute occurs when people appear to disagree on an issue but in actuality have

simply not resolved the ambiguity of a key term (... trưa chép)

- Factual dispute happens when opponents disagree not over the meanings of words but over the
relevant facts

- Person A might say, “That man didn’t commit the crime, he has an alibi (Bằng chứng ngoại
phạm)”

- Person B might say, “He did commit the crime, I saw him do it”

TYPES OF DEFINITIONS

- If you’ve ever created a new word or used an old word in an entirely new way, you have
provided a stipulative definition; that is; you tell your readers or listeners what it is you mean
by the term

(...)
*Bố cục bài tt

1. Mở đầu => Giới thiệu topic và nội dung liên quan (khảo sát/số liệu) 2. Ý kiến của nhóm (3) =>
Giải thích
3. ý kiến trái chiều (2)
4. Kết luận

Retarded = Intellectual disabilities/Old = senior citizen/used car = secondhand car/stewardess =

cabin attendant/fat = chubby/deaf = hearing-impaired/ghetto = enclave/ divorced =
separation/primitive = technologically behind/ doorman = gatekeeper/pimples =
blemishes/blockaded = siege/bombed = | | /torture = enhanced interrogation/freshman = first-
year student) / gambling = gaming

...

REFUTING ARGUMENTS

- To refute an argument, in this context, means to defeat it, that the premises do not provide
convincing reasons to accept the conclusion 2 ways:
1. Show that a premise/a critical group of premises is false/dubious 2. Show that the conclusion
does not follow from the premise We should ban homework because it encourage plagiarism,
copying and cheating. In a survey by Forbes, 90% of students are aware of ChatGPT, and 89% of
survey respondents report that they have used the platform to help with a homework assignment
48% of students admitted to using ChatGPT for an at-home test or quiz, 53% had it write an
essay, and 22% had it write an outline for a paper. In many cases, students aren’t able to finish
homework on time, and more often than not, teachers would reprimand them for that fact.
However, the reasons may be more complex than simple procrastination and/or forgetfulness.
They may have been doing housework, (in college) working outside in shifts, or simply not
being able to comprehend the teaching in the class yet. With pressure from teachers however,
students may resort to copying and cheating as a countermeasure. They see homework as
something to be done only to please their teacher, instead of a way to retain and expand their
knowledge through practical application. And with tools readily available such as Grammarly,
ChatGPT... They do not have many incentives to do the problems themselves, and “waste” time
on “unnecessary chores”. However, some may argue that homework is the most effective way to
help children retain knowledge. They argue that without homework, simple keywords learning
mostly would be ineffective in ensuring students understand the overall subject they have learned
in class. By doing homework, students would be required to research their subject in depth,
therefore gaining a better understanding of the problem and won’t feel the need to cheat in class
anymore. As traditional homework is no longer effective in modern classroom, quiz and short
tests can be used to replace them. They would be easier to do, and much more effective since it
can focus on keywords, therefore helping students learn asier because less unnecessary
information is put into their head. Homework should be banned because it cause stress, anxiety
and self- depreciation to students.