Thinking and Problem Solving

Critical Thinking
Maasai Mara University

1
Thinking and Problem Solving

Course Purpose: • The course aims at equipping

students with the skills and strategies required in critical
thinking in order to find the best solutions to our problems
Expected Learning Outcomes
By the end of the strand, the learner should be
able to:
i. Appreciate the skills and strategies employed in
critical thinking to enhance making informed
choices, decisions and judgments
ii. Apply logical principles and skills in critical
thinking to the study of other disciplines to
resolve disputes
iii. Use correct reasoning in arguments to avoid
disputes arising from bad arguments
iv. Appreciate the role of critical thinking in our daily
endeavors in enhancing the quality of life
v. To identify some of the critical-thinking skills and
strategies to aid in resolving conflicts

Course Content
Definition of terms and Scope: what is critical thinking?
Components of critical thinking; Why critical thinking?
The problem; Critical thinking and philosophy; critical
thinking and logic; Basic concepts in logic: arguments and
propositions; Critical thinking and problem solving; claims
2
Thinking and Problem Solving

and critical thinking; Issues and arguments; Identifying the

issue; settling an issue through argument; Facts and
opinions; Objective and subjective claims; Beliefs,
opinions, views, convictions, prejudices; Critical thinking
and clear writing; Defining terms; Ambiguities in critical
thinking; Evaluating informative claims

MODE OF DELIVERY
• PowerPoint presentations
• Individual Readings on digital sources
• Class discussions, physical or electronic
• Seminars and webinars
• Group discussions
• Take away assignments

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS/ RESOURCES

AND EQUIPMENT
• Computers
• Projectors
• White boards
• Modules
• Internet

COURSE ASSESSMENT

Two sitting Cats each accounting for 15 marks

3
Thinking and Problem Solving

End semester exam accounting for 60 marks

CORE READING MATERIAL FOR THE

COURSE
• Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001).
Critical Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New
York.
• Copi M. Irving and Cohen Carl, (1994).
Introduction to Logic, 9th Edn. Macmillan
College Publishing Company.
• Oriare, Nyarwath, (2010). Traditional Logic: An
Introduction, Nairobi: Consolata Institute of
Philosophy Press.
• Groarke, Leo A. and Tindale, Christopher W
(2004). Good Reasoning Matters! A Constructive
Approach to Critical Thinking, 3rd Edn. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
•
FURTHER READING MATERIALS
• Internet readings
• Course modules
Core Competencies to be developed:
• Self-efficacy
• Communication and collaboration
• Learning to learn
• Critical thinking and problem solving
Link to PCIs
4
Thinking and Problem Solving

• Global Citizenship
• Education for Sustainable Development (ESD

Topic 1. Critical Thinking

In this topic, we will address the following questions:

a. What is critical thinking?
b. Why is critical thinking such an important skill?
c. What are the components of critical thinking?
d. Is it our nature to think critically?
e. What is the relationship of critical thinking to
philosophy?

What is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is the identification and evaluation of
evidence to guide decision making. In other words, it is
evaluating whether we should be convinced that some
claim is true or some argument is good as well as
formulating good arguments. A critical thinker uses broad
in-depth analysis of evidence to make decisions and
communicate his/her beliefs clearly and accurately.

5
Thinking and Problem Solving

Critical thinking consists of a mental process of analyzing

or evaluating information particularly statements or
propositions that people have offered as true. It forms a
process of reflecting upon the meaning of statements,
examining the offered evidence and reasoning and forming
judgement about the facts. Critical thinkers can gather such
information from observation, experience, reasoning and
/or communication. Critical thinking is something we need
to do every day.
It has its basis in intellectual value that go beyond subject-
matter divisions and which include: clarity, accuracy,
precision, evidence, thoroughness and fairness. A critical
thinker is reflective and critical. The accumulation of
knowledge does not by itself lead to understanding,
because it does not necessarily teach the mind to make a
critical evaluation of facts that entail consistent and
coherent judgement.
Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of
actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying,
analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information
gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience,
reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to
belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on
universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter
divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency,
6
Thinking and Problem Solving

relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth,

and fairness.
It entails the examination of those structures or elements of
thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or
question-at-issue; assumptions; concepts; empirical
grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions; implications
and consequences; objections from alternative viewpoints;
and frame of reference. Critical thinking - in being
responsive to variable subject matter, issues, and purposes
- is incorporated in a family of interwoven modes of
thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical
thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking,
economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical
thinking.

Components of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1)
a set of information and belief generating and processing
skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment,
of using those skills to guide behaviour. It is thus to be
contrasted with the mere acquisition and retention of
information alone, because it involves a particular way in
which information is sought and treated. Secondly, it has

7
Thinking and Problem Solving

to be contrasted with the mere possession of a set of skills,

because it involves the continual use of them; and thirdly,
the mere use of those skills ("as an exercise") without
acceptance of their results.
Critical thinking varies according to the motivation
underlying it. When grounded in selfish motives, it is often
manifested in the skillful manipulation of ideas in service
of one's own, or one's groups', vested interest. As such it is
typically intellectually flawed, however pragmatically
successful it might be. When grounded in fair-mindedness
and intellectual integrity, it is typically of a higher order
intellectually, though subject to the charge of "idealism" by
those habituated to its selfish use.
Critical thinking of any kind is never universal in any
individual; everyone is subject to episodes of undisciplined
or irrational thought. Its quality is therefore typically a
matter of degree and dependent on, among other things, the
quality and depth of experience in a given domain of
thinking or with respect to a particular class of questions.
No one is a critical thinker through-and-through, but only
to such-and-such a degree, with such-and-such insights and
blind spots, subject to such-and-such tendencies towards
self-delusion. For this reason, the development of critical
thinking skills and dispositions is a life-long endeavor.

8
Thinking and Problem Solving

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. Critical
Thinking involves an analytical reading and reasoning that
enables students in identifying and articulating the central
patterns found in reasoning and in expository writing.
Understanding these patterns of reasoning helps
students to better analyze, evaluate, and construct
arguments and to more easily comprehend the full
range of everyday arguments found in ordinary
journalism. Critical thinking will help students
recognize what makes reasoning explicitly different
from other expository activities.

The Problem: Is it our Nature to Think Critically?

Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our
thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial,
uninformed or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of
our life and that of what we produce, make, or build
depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy
thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life.
Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically

9
Thinking and Problem Solving

cultivated. This course should therefore help the student to

develop some of the skills required to form intelligent
opinions, make good decisions and determine the best
courses of action- as well as recognize when someone else’
reasoning is faulty or manipulative. In a nutshell, it is worth
asking why critical thinking is such an important skill.
Critical Thinking and Philosophy
It is of paramount importance to examine the correlation
between critical thinking and philosophy and explain why
the study of philosophy nurtures or enhances an
individual’s capacity to think critically. In other words,
there is need to explore the role that philosophy plays in
critical thinking based on the nature of the discipline
philosophy itself. As the ancient philosophers long ago
discerned, philosophy is a quest for wisdom. We all are
aware that a person can have a great deal of knowledge and
still be a learned fool. In our age of confusion and
uncertainty, we need a sense of direction. Wisdom is
what provides us with that sense: it is an affair of values.
Philosophical inquiry is essentially the application of
reasoning to a wide variety of topics. Philosophy is a set of
views or beliefs about life and the universe, which are often
held uncritically. This is the informal sense of philosophy.
However, we can talk about philosophy in a formal sense
of the term. In a formal sense or use of the term philosophy,
10
Thinking and Problem Solving

it is a process of reflecting on and criticizing our most

deeply held conceptions and beliefs. The word philosophy
is derived from the Greek words philia (love) and Sophia
(wisdom) and means ‘the love of wisdom’. Philosophy is a
rational attempt to look at the world as a whole. It presses
its inquiry into the deepest problems of human existence.
Some of the perennial problems of philosophy or
philosophical questions are concerned with the relation
between freedom and determinism (is my life controlled
by outside forces, or do I have a determining or even a
partial degree of control)? What is truth? What is the
distinction between right and wrong? What is life and why
am I here? Why is there anything at all? What is the place
of life in this great universe? Do things operate by chance
or through sheer mechanism, or is there some plan or
purpose or intelligence at the heart of things? Why do
people struggle and strive for their rights, for justice, for
better things in the future? What do concepts like right and
justice mean, and what are the marks about a good society?
In other words philosophy is an attempt to clarify and if
possible to answer a range of puzzling and fundamental
questions which arise when, in a general and inclusive way,
we try to understand ourselves and the universe we inhabit.
This is to say that philosophy means getting clear about
what we know and how to live.

11
Thinking and Problem Solving

Why does the study of philosophy enhance an individual’s

capacity to think critically? Or put differently what role
does philosophy as a discipline play in critical thinking?
In one of his works, Encyclopedia of the Philosophical
Sciences, trans. W. Wallace (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1975, section 7, G.W.F. Hegel writes: ‘Reflection-
thinking things over- [is] the beginning of philosophy’.
Each one of us has a philosophy, even though we may not
be aware of it. We all have some ideas concerning physical
objects, our fellow persons, the meaning of life, death,
God, right and wrong, beauty and ugliness, and the like. Of
course, these ideas are acquired in a variety of ways, and
may be vague and confused.
We are continuously engaged, especially during the early
years of our lives, in acquiring views and attitudes, from
our families, friends, teachers and from various other
individuals and groups. This is to say that our way of
looking at the world and even classifying objects in a
certain way is not something inborn. Rather it is a fruit of
a series of shared meanings which we have acquired, from
our parents, teachers and the environment in which we
have grown, in German Lebenswelt which simply means
the lived world.
These attitudes also may be greatly influenced by movies,
television, music lyrics and books. They may result from
12
Thinking and Problem Solving

some reflection on our part, or they more likely may result

from a conventional or emotional bias. This broad popular
man- in- the-street (common sense) view of philosophy is
not adequate for our purposes. It does not describe the work
and task of the philosopher. We need to define philosophy
more specifically; the broad view is vague, confused and
superficial.
The word philosophy is derived from the Greek words
philo (love) and Sophos (wisdom) and means ‘the love of
wisdom’. A definition of philosophy can be offered from a
number of perspectives. Here I will present two. Each
approach must be kept in mind for a clear understanding of
the many meanings of philosophy and what particular
philosophers may say about the nature and function of
philosophy.
Philosophy is a set of views or beliefs about life and the
universe which are often held uncritically. This is the
informal sense of philosophy or ‘having’ a philosophy.
Usually when a person says’ my philosophy is’ this or that,
he/she is referring to an informal personal attitude to
whatever topic is being discussed. The former president of
Kenya spoke of the philosophy of peace, love and unity and
yet every elective period people were being displaced from
their homes. Yet he spoke of having a philosophy, namely

13
Thinking and Problem Solving

“Nyayo Philosophy” of peace, love and unity. This is

philosophy in the informal general sense of the term.
We can also talk of philosophy in the
formal/technical/academic sense of the term or “doing
philosophy”. In this sense, philosophy is defined as a
process of reflecting on and criticizing our most deeply
held conceptions and beliefs. These two senses of
philosophy- ‘having’ and ‘doing’ cannot be treated
independently of each other, for if we did not have a
philosophy in the informal personal sense, then we could
not do a philosophy in the critical, reflective and academic
sense.
As regards philosophy in the strict, technical, academic
(formal) sense, one can also define philosophy as the
attempt to clarify and if possible to answer, a range of
puzzling and fundamental questions which arise when, in a
general and inclusive way, we try to understand ourselves
and the universe we inhabit. Among many other things,
these questions concern existence and reality, knowledge
and belief, reason and reasoning, truth, meaning, and
value both ethical and aesthetic.
The questions themselves are of the form: What is reality?
What kind of things ultimately exist? What is knowledge
and how do we come by it? How can we be sure that our
claims to knowledge are not in some systematic way
14
Thinking and Problem Solving

mistaken? In other words is there any genuine knowledge

we can rely on or must we simply depend on opinions and
guesses? What are the canons of correct reasoning? What
is morally the right way to live and act and why? etc.
Philosophical problems are not problems which can be
solved by empirical means- by looking through a telescope
or microscope, or by conducting experiments in the
laboratory. They are conceptual and logical problems,
requiring conceptual and logical investigations. It therefore
means that philosophical inquiry is essentially the
application of reasoning to a wide variety of topics.
Philosophers therefore are those people who seek to argue
on the basis of reason.
Over the millennia, a great investment of genius has been
brought to the task of clarifying and answering the
questions of philosophy. Some philosophers have
attempted to construct explanatory theories, occasionally
very elaborate and ambitious in scope; others have tried to
clarify and resolve particular questions by painstaking
analysis and criticism.
Almost all those who have contributed to philosophy
throughout its history have agreed that the matters
mentioned above- existence, knowledge, truth, value- are
deeply important; and it is upon this consensus that the

15
Thinking and Problem Solving

philosophical debate, which has gone on at least since

classical antiquity, has been based.
In a nutshell, the following are some of the reasons why the
study of philosophy nurtures an individual’s capacity to
think critically:
As I have already pointed out, the fact of ‘having’
philosophy is not enough for ‘doing’ philosophy. A
genuine philosophical attitude is searching and critical; it
is open-minded and tolerant- willing to look at all sides of
an issue without prejudice. To philosophize is not merely
to read and know philosophy; there are skills of
argumentation to be mastered, techniques of analysis to be
employed, and a body of material to be appropriated such
that we become able to think philosophically. Philosophy
employs a variety of methods, namely dialectical
(Socratic) method which entails critical questioning,
critical reflection, rational method, which is logical,
systematic, and analytical, existential/phenomenological
method. As regards this method, the proponents of this
method opine that philosophical reflection must begin from
ordinary experiences. Existentialism as an approach to
philosophy is concerned with how an individual is
supposed to live his life beginning with concrete individual
experience as opposed to abstract theoretical principles
(the lived world).
16
Thinking and Problem Solving

As has already been pointed out, Philosophers are

reflective and critical. They take a second look at the
material presented by common sense. In other words,
philosophers do not stop at the phase values of things. They
attempt to think through a variety of life’s problems and to
face all the facts involved impartially. It is therefore worth
noting that the mere accumulation of knowledge does not
by itself lead to understanding, because it does not
necessarily teach the mind to make a critical evaluation of
facts that entails consistent and coherent judgment.
This explains why the study of philosophy is of paramount
importance. Shallowness, incompleteness, poor
reasoning and assertions with flimsy foundations
prevent a truly enlightened citizenry. In this regard,
because the study of philosophy enhances an individual’s
capacity to think critically. This clear thinking by extension
enables one to develop the best solutions to our problems
because ideally, the study of philosophy nurtures our
capacity for making informed choices. In other words,
critical thinking can enable one to avoid unnecessary
disputes which might be as a result of lack of clear
thinking. Excellence in thought though, must be
systematically cultivated. In this regard, there is need to
make a clear cut distinction between knowledge and
wisdom. It is a fact that one can have a great deal of

17
Thinking and Problem Solving

knowledge and can still be a learned fool. Being

knowledgeable does not necessarily imply being wise
because wisdom is not a purely cerebral attainment;
wisdom is as much a matter of what we do and feel as it is
of how we think. “But thought is central to it. Wisdom is
a matter of seeing things - but as they are, not subjectively”
(Kaplan A., 1977). This therefore leads us to the correlation
between critical thinking and problem solving.
In The Republic, Plato employs his now famous Allegory
of the Cave to illustrate how philosophy aims at freedom.
Precisely stated, the Allegory of the Cave indicates that one
value of philosophy is that through it one achieves
freedom-freedom from assumptions we have
unquestionably accepted from others, and freedom to
decide for ourselves what we believe about ourselves
and our place in the universe. The allegory indicates that
the aim of philosophy is freedom from prejudices and
biases. Philosophy breaks the chains that imprison and hold
us down- the chains we are often not even aware that we
are wearing. Like the prisoners in the cave, we uncritically
accept the beliefs and opinions of those around us, and this
leads us to see the world in narrow and rigid ways. In other
words, philosophy frees us from dogmatism and
indoctrination and hence, makes us truly responsible or
accountable for our own decisions and actions.

18
Thinking and Problem Solving

The notion of responsibility makes sense only if we are

free and we are really free only when we rely upon inner
controls or self-chosen ends. If for instance one acts as one
does merely because of custom or tradition, or the law, then
that person is not genuinely free. Herein is to be found the
significance of philosophy to human freedom. When asked
what good his philosophy did him, Aristotle remarked that
it enabled him to do willingly what other people did merely
because of fear of the law. A human being should through
reason be able to discover the principles and the laws by
which he or she should live by within society. This,
according to Aristotle is because natural laws are based on
human nature and on the nature of societies. The behavior
they prohibit is wrong not because a particular group or
state has passed laws against them but because they run
counter to the social nature of human beings. Since such
laws are discoverable through reason, one who ( through
reason) has discovered such laws, in obeying the laws
would be willingly obeying them whereas the individual
who has not as yet discovered such laws, in obeying them
would be doing so because of fear of retribution.
Most of us are not really free because, most of the times,
we lead unexamined lives; lives that we have not really
thought about. We therefore engage in actions and
behaviours merely on the basis of custom, tradition or the

19
Thinking and Problem Solving

law. Individuals who fall within this category are, in a

sense, machine-like; they are not significantly different
from robots for indeed they are not really free.
Philosophy is therefore a useful tool in emancipating one
from all sorts of bondage, be they cultural, historical,
traditional or otherwise.
In a nutshell, we can reiterate the usefulness of philosophy
by saying that philosophy should play a central part in any
balanced college or university curricula. The study of
philosophy contributes distinctly and substantially to
the development of students’ critical thinking. It
enhances their ability to deal rationally with normative
issues. It extends their understanding of
interdisciplinary questions. It strengthens their grasp
of our intellectual history and of our culture in relation
to others. It increases their capacity to articulate and
assess world-views and it improves their skills in
writing and speaking.
Philosophical reflection can be brought to bear on any
subject matter whatsoever; every discipline raises
questions which philosophical investigation can help
clarify; and every domain of human existence confronts us
with problems on which philosophical reflection can shed
light for instance educational problems, problems related
to law, economics, history etc.
20
Thinking and Problem Solving

“The study of philosophy can help students in all the

ways this suggests and the philosophical techniques
they assimilate can help them both in their other
academic work and in their general problem solving
over the years.
To sum up, every discipline should take the study of
philosophy very seriously having said that philosophical
reflection can be brought to bear on any subject matter
whatsoever for every discipline raises questions which
philosophical investigation can help to clarify and that a
person who has studied philosophy is more likely to pursue
an issue in depth, examine it comprehensively with sound
reasoning than a person who has not studied philosophy
given that the study of philosophy contributes to the
development of students’ critical thinking and nurtures our
capacity for making informed choices, judgement and
decisions and by extension developing problem-solving
skills by developing “a philosophy of life” that sustains a
harmony between thought and action that is indispensable
to one’s well-being.

Reading Materials Required for Topic One

Anne, Thomson (2002). Critical Reasoning: A Practical
Introduction, 2nd Edn. London: Routledge

21
Thinking and Problem Solving

Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001). Critical

Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Hegel G.W.F. (1975). Encyclopedia of Philosophical
Sciences, Trans. by W. Wallace, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Matthew, Allen (2004). Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical
Understanding and Writing, 2nd Edn. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2004
Ochieng`-Odhiambo F. (2009). A Companion to
Philosophy, Nairobi: Consolata Institute of Philosophy
Press.
Richard L. Epstein and Carolyn Kernberger (2006). The
Pocket Guide to Critical Thinking, Thomson Wadsworth,
2006

Topic 2. The Relationship of Philosophy to Logic

In this topic, we will address the following questions:

1. What is logic?
2. What are the practical usefulness of logic?
3. Why is philosophical enterprise essentially the
application of reasoning to a wide variety of topic?

22
Thinking and Problem Solving

4. What are the basic concepts in logic?

5. What is the correlation between philosophy and
logic?

To philosophize is not merely to read and know

philosophy; there are skills of argumentation to be
mastered, techniques of analysis to be employed, and a
body of material to be appropriated such that we become
able to think philosophically or critically. Philosophy
involves clear thinking or clear reasoning and that is why
we have already pointed out that philosophy is getting clear
about what we know and how to live and this clarity in
thinking presupposes logic as one of the traditional
branches of philosophy in addition to epistemology,
metaphysics and ethics (moral philosophy). Logic being
one of the traditional branches of philosophy requires
that it be understood within the context of the
meaning and role of philosophy.

What is logic?
Philosophy endeavors to understand the nature of
correct thinking and to discover what valid reasoning
is. One thread running throughout the history of

23
Thinking and Problem Solving

philosophy is its appeal to reason, to argumentation,

to logic. That is why we have expressed in the
previous section that philosophical inquiry is
essentially the application of reason to a wide variety
of topics. We all use arguments in our everyday life
to support our claims and to refute the claims of others
with whom we disagree. But how do we distinguish
between valid and invalid arguments? Logic is thus a
branch of philosophy that studies reasoning. It deals
with the operations of right reasoning. It studies
principles and rules of reasoning with the aim of
distinguishing correct, good, and bad reasoning.
Logic can then be seen as both the art and science of
correct thinking or correct reasoning. Logic is critical;
and this it achieves through the use of critical
criticism. Therefore, every logical judgement, or
generally any opinion, should be justified by some
acceptable facts or evidence. Any claim to reality, or
about reality, and hence knowledge should be backed
by logical facts, hence the task of devising tests to
determine which arguments are valid and which are
not belongs to logic. In other words, logic studies
reasoning with the main concern of differentiating the

24
Thinking and Problem Solving

correct from incorrect reasoning. It is therefore the

study of principles of good reasoning that helps in
distinguishing good from bad, or correct from
incorrect reasoning. To reason correctly is to think
well or correctly which is more likely to lead to truth.
And truth satisfies our curiosity hence the study of
logic is intellectually rewarding.
As a branch of philosophy, logic deals with general
questions that relates to the nature of correct and
incorrect reasoning. In other words, while
epistemology deals with truth, with the processes of
knowing themselves, logic deals with specific and
formal problems of reasoning. In this quest, logic is a
reflective study that does not require empirical
approach to the verification of its claims. Therefore
logic does not study how people actually reason or
think, but the nature of correct and incorrect
reasoning or thinking irrespective of whether people
do in fact reason correctly or incorrectly. Logic being
a branch of philosophy requires that it be
understood within the context of the meaning and
roles of philosophy.

25
Thinking and Problem Solving

Logic can be seen as both an art and a science of

correct thinking. As a science it is concerned with
principles and laws of correct thinking. It develops a
system of philosophical analysis and thinking- In this
respect it is concerned with what constitutes correct
thinking, i.e. what is correct thinking and why it is
correct?
But as an art, logic is concerned with application of
the principles of correct thinking or reasoning. It
seeks to create a stable habit by which to carry out the
act of reasoning in an orderly, easy and errorless way.
So as an art, logic equips and prepares human beings
for certain actions- actions that are certain.
Correct or right thinking hence reasoning can be
considered from two aspects, namely aspect of form
(formal logic) and aspect of matter (material logic).
From the aspect of form, logic is concerned with the
sequence of claims or judgements. Therefore, it is
concerned with the form or structure of good/correct
reasoning without necessarily scrutinizing the content
or matter of reasoning. For instance,

26
Thinking and Problem Solving

If human beings have two heads and Oriare is a

human being, then Oriare must have two heads. This
aspect of logic constitutes the subject of formal logic.
This aspect alone is not sufficient to guarantee good
reasoning. From the aspect of matter, logic is
concerned with the matter of reasoning, that is to say
the content of reasoning. It deals with whether the
claims or judgements of reasoning (propositions used
in reasoning) are in agreement with reality or facts.
Logic, according to this aspect must also concern
itself with the truth-values (truth or falsity) of the
judgements (propositions) which are employed in
reasoning. This aspect then constitutes the subject of
material logic.
The two aspects, taken together help in the
formulation of good reasoning.
The two aspects of reasoning therefore bring us to the
various mental acts (acts of the mind)- or what at
times we also refer to as three levels of intellective act
or three operations of the mind or intellect:

27
Thinking and Problem Solving

1. Simple apprehension or conception: The

intellect or the mind abstracts a universal general
idea from the data supplied by the senses)
2. Judgement: The intellect affirms or denies that
something is the case. In judgment we affirm or
deny that something is the case. For instance,”
this car is blue” (affirming) or “this car is not
blue” (denying)
3. Reasoning (inference): The intellect or the mind
extracts a new idea from the previous idea. For
instance, on seeing that there are dark clouds in
the sky, one concludes or infers that it is soon
going to rain. The conclusion that it is soon going
to rain is inferred from the previous idea of
observing that there are dark clouds in the sky.
To determine the truth-value of a proposition, we
need to understand the meaning of the terms used, for
instance, “man is a rational animal”. We need to know
the meaning of “man” as well as “rational being”.
Thus we form concepts of the realities to which these
terms refer. Therefore we have the first act of the
mind which is conception or simple apprehension.
Once we have grasped the meaning of the terms, then
28
Thinking and Problem Solving

we can make a judgement i.e. make some claim about

what is already apprehended. The judgement is
expressed in or is a verbal expression called
proposition. In a judgement, we affirm or deny that
something is the case- we affirm or deny some
attribute of the subject. This act of judgement is the
second act of the mind.
The other level is that of mental operations called
inference or reasoning. This is a form of reasoning by
which the mind moves from some given claim(s) or
judgement or proposition to another related claim
(judgement or proposition). In an inference, there
must be a judgement (claim) derived from at least
another. This act of the mind comprehends a
relationship between various realities as expressed in
various propositions. For instance, on seeing that
there are dark clouds in the sky, I conclude that it is
soon going to rain. The judgement that the sky has
dark clouds results from direct observation. But the
judgement that it would soon rain is derived from the
fact that the sky has dark clouds. The mind has the
capacity to recognize a relationship or lack of it

29
Thinking and Problem Solving

between given realities or claims. It is this capacity

that enables the mind to make inferences.
Therefore, logic as an act of analysis presupposes
simple apprehension- grasping the concepts or the
meaning of the terms used, judgements as expressed
in propositions, and finally reasoning. It is concerned
therefore with inferences. Inference, in this context,
is cautious, careful or deliberate reflective reasoning.
It must therefore be distinguished from uncritical or
unreflective reasoning.
The Practical Utility or Usefulness of Logic
Interest in logic has a long history. This is due to two
main reasons. Firstly, as a study of critical reasoning,
logic raises a theoretical interest. The study of logic
as knowledge in itself is intellectually rewarding. The
knowledge that logical principles have close relations
with basic philosophical problems as well as
mathematics is worthy in itself. Therefore logic
assists in dealing with basic philosophical problems.
Apart from the already mentioned theoretical value,
the study of logic has practical utility or usefulness.
The mastery of logical principles enables one to

30
Thinking and Problem Solving

understand and consequently avoid most mistakes in

reasoning. Logic therefore enables one to think and
reason correctly. Correct thinking and reasoning is
more likely to lead to truth and truth is preferable to
error. Therefore the study of logic is of great
importance-
One may anticipate an objection by pointing out that
reason is not the only way to arrive at truth. That is
possibly true. But through reasoning, one arrives at a
justifiable truth, truth that one can defend and explain.
Truth has not only a theoretical value, but also a
practical value. Truth is knowledge and as such is
indispensable in human life. It enables one to plan and
execute the plan wisely; hence one attains one´s goals
or objectives in life.
Logic also enables one to avoid jumping to
unjustified conclusions or assertions that may be due
to some strong emotions, confusion due to careless
use of language and unintelligibility due to ambiguity
and vagueness. Consequently it may help in reducing
conflicts that may result from ambiguous or vague use
of language.

31
Thinking and Problem Solving

The mastery and application of logical principles is

likely to enable one to communicate effectively. This
entails effective acquisition and dissemination of
knowledge. Logic therefore becomes vital to the
study of other disciplines. As a branch of philosophy,
logic deals with general questions that relate to the
nature of correct and incorrect reasoning or thinking
irrespective of whether people do in fact reason
correctly or incorrectly.
To reason correctly is to think well or correctly which
is more likely to lead to truth and truth satisfies our
curiosity. Truth not only justifies our curiosity, but it
is also practically vital in human life. If one wants to
plan wisely, to carry out an action, to succeed in a
certain undertaking, then one needs certain truth
(knowledge). Conscious living implies carrying out
actions with more understanding of their actual or
possible results (objectives).
To avoid holding inconsistent point of views,
jumping to unjustified conclusions due to some strong
emotions, we need certain principles to guide our
thinking or reasoning. When our thinking is guided
by certain principles, that is, principles of good
32
Thinking and Problem Solving

thinking, then we are more likely to have clarity in

thought and expression hence effective acquisition
and dissemination of knowledge.
Life is nothing but constant process of acquisition,
transformation and application of knowledge.
(Teaching minds, touching hearts and transforming
lives). This process would not be possible without
even the slightest degree of good thinking or good
reasoning. Therefore as a conclusion, the more
refined the good thinking, the better the life ( shoddy
thought, shallow thinking is expensive both in money
and quality of life, the quality of our life and what we
build and produce depends intimately on the quality
of our thinking or thought. In other words,
shallowness, incompleteness, poor reasoning and
assertions with flimsy foundations prevents an
enlightened citizenry. Excellence in thought,
excellence in thinking must therefore be
systematically, logically, analytically cultivated.

Basic Concepts in Logic

33
Thinking and Problem Solving

The basic concepts in logic are Propositions and

Arguments. We shall start our discussion with
propositions.
1. Propositions
What is a proposition? A proposition is a sentence
that is either true or false. The condition of a sentence
being either true or false is referred to as truth-value.
A proposition therefore is a sentence that has truth-
value. For instance, the proposition “The University
of Nairobi is in Kenya”. So a proposition is a
declarative sentence as opposed to interrogative
sentence (question), exclamation, imperative
sentence (commands), suggestion and performative
sentence.
A proposition is an expression of thought. A
proposition expresses a certain situation in the world.
In a nutshell, a proposition is a declarative sentences
which possess truth-value and truth-value in logic
simply means the possibility of a sentence to be either
true or false. This means that not all sentences or
statements qualify as propositions. The statement or
sentence “It is raining” is a proposition because such

34
Thinking and Problem Solving

a sentence has truth-value in the sense that it can

either be true or false depending on the given states of
affairs or situation in the world. As it has been pointed
out, not all sentences or statements are propositions
e.g. commands. For instance Shut that door!,
Questions, for instance, “What time is it”?,
Exclamations, for instance “What a nice ice-
cream!”, Greetings, for instance “Hullo Linda”. This
is to say that a proposition is a declarative sentence or
statement as opposed to an interrogative, imperative
or exclamative sentence.
For instance,
Interrogative sentence e.g. how many people are in
the room? What time is it?
Imperative sentence e.g. please close the window,
shut that door
Exclamation e.g. what a nice day!, what a nice ice-
cream!
Suggestion e.g. Let us go dancing tonight
Performative sentence e.g. with this water, I bless
you.

35
Thinking and Problem Solving

We have pointed out that an argument consists of

propositions and in the context of an arguments, we
refer to those propositions as premise(s) and a
conclusion. In other words, an argument consists of
two parts, namely premise(s) and a conclusion. This
is to say that an argument must consist of at least a
premise or more than one premise i.e. premises and a
conclusion. An example of an argument with one
premise and a conclusion.
We are in the month of April, next month will be
May. We are in the month of April is the premise,
Next month will be May is the conclusion. An
example of an argument with two premises and a
conclusion:
All human beings are mortal
Opiyo is a human being
Therefore, Opiyo is mortal
The two premises are: All human beings are mortal
and Opiyo is a human being
The conclusion of the argument is Opiyo is mortal.

36
Thinking and Problem Solving

So what roles do premises play in an argument?

Premises are the claims that support the conclusion
and the conclusion is the claim that one attempts to
support. In other words, we support the conclusion by
means of premise(s).
Even if we have not defined an argument, it is worth
pointing out the relation of arguments and
propositions. An argument is composed of
propositions. Some of these propositions are called
premises and one is called a conclusion. In other
words, an argument consists of two parts, namely
premise(s) and a conclusion. In this regard, a
proposition is either a premise or a conclusion but
only within the context of an argument, that is, a
proposition becomes a premise or a conclusion only
when used in an argument. In other words, whether a
proposition is a premise or a conclusion depends on
the role it performs in an argument. What roles do
premise(s) and conclusion play in arguments?
Premise(s) is or are claims or propositions which act
as reasons for supporting the conclusion and the
conclusion is the claim or proposition that one
attempts to support. This is to say that we support the
37
Thinking and Problem Solving

conclusion by means of the premises. Therefore an

argument must have either a premise or premises and
a conclusion e.g. “since we are in the month of
December, next month must be January” or “all those
people who live in secret location in Ongata Rongai
are miserable; Dr. Opiyo Ogutu lives in secret
location in Ongata Rongai, therefore the conclusion
will be Dr. Opiyo Ogutu is miserable.
Types of Propositions
A proposition can be either a simple or a compound
one. A simple proposition is normally a categorical
one. Compound propositions are hypothetical
(conditional), disjunctive, conjunctive or
biconditional. A hypothetical (conditional)
proposition is of the form “if p then q”, e.g. “if one is
a Kenyan then one is an African”. A disjunctive
proposition is in the form “either p or q” e.g. “either
one is noble or ignoble”. A conjunctive proposition is
in the form “both p and q”, e.g. “both Mary and
Bridgit are Kenyans”. A biconditional is in the form
“p if and only if q” e.g. “one is a wife if and only of
one has a husband”

38
Thinking and Problem Solving

Let us now examine the form of categorical

propositions whose understanding is of paramount
importance in understanding elementary logic. This is
simply because they are the basic propositions
through which one often expresses one´s ideas and
that any clear simple proposition one may use can be
translated into categorical propositions.
A categorical proposition is one that asserts that the
subject class is either wholly or partially included in
or excluded from the predicate class. A standard
categorical proposition has four components:
Four Components of a Standard Categorical
Proposition:
1.A quantifier ( e.g. All or Some)
2. A subject term (a subject term represents a
subject class)
3. A copula (a form of verb “to be” e.g., is or are)
and
4. A predicate term (a predicate term represents a
predicate class)
Therefore, a standard categorical proposition takes
any of the following forms:
39
Thinking and Problem Solving

All S are P, e.g. All human beings are mortal

No S are P, e.g. No human beings are mortal
Some S are P, e.g. Some human beings are mortal
Some S are not P e.g. some human beings are not
mortal.
When a proposition makes reference to all the
members of its subject class (whole class), then it is
said to be universal as in a) and b) above. But when a
proposition makes reference to only some members
of its subject class (part of the members), then it is
said to be particular as in c) and d) above. However,
when a proposition affirms the inclusion of its subject
class wholly or partially into its predicate class, then
it is said to be affirmative as in a) and c) above. But
when a proposition denies the inclusion (asserts the
exclusion) of its subject class wholly or partially from
its predicate class, then it is said to be negative as in
b) and d) above. Therefore any categorical
proposition in the form “All S are P” is said to be
universal affirmative proposition, “No S are P” is said
to be universal negative proposition, “Some S are P”
is said to be particular affirmative proposition while
40
Thinking and Problem Solving

“Some S are not P” is said to be particular negative

proposition.
Conventionally, the four basic forms of categorical
propositions are referred to by the letters A, E, I, O:
A: All S are P
E: No S are P
I: Some S are P
O: Some S are not P
The four letters are derived from the two Latin words
Affirmo (I affirm) and Nego (I deny). The first two
vowels (A and I) from the word affirmo represent the
two affirmative forms of the categorical propositions,
that is, the universal and particular affirmative
propositions. And the two vowels (E and O) from the
word Nego represent the two negative forms of
categorical propositions.
Conclusion
We have four types of categorical propositions,
namely we have an A proposition- e.g. All S are P, we
have an E proposition e.g. No S are P. we have an I
proposition Some S are P and lastly an O proposition
41
Thinking and Problem Solving

e.g. some S are not P. We also talk about quantity and

quality of a categorical proposition for instance in the
case of quantity, we have propositions such as A and
I propositions e.g. All S are P and some S are P
referring to quantity while when we talk about the
quality of a categorical propositions we are referring
to propositions such as A and I (affirmative) and E
and O (negative) so eventually we have universal
affirmative and particular affirmative or universal
negative or particular negative all referring to quality.
As far as compound propositions are concerned, we
have conditional (if P then Q), conjunctive (Both P
and Q), disjunctive (Either P or Q), biconditional (p if
and only if Q).
2.Arguments
An argument is defined as an attempt to support a
claim by giving reasons for believing it. An argument
is a set of propositions in which the truth of one of the
propositions is claimed to be established on the basis
of the other propositions either necessarily or by
some probability. The one whose truth is asserted on
the basis of the truth of the others is called conclusion

42
Thinking and Problem Solving

while the one/ones whose truth provide the basis for

the truth of the conclusion is/are called premise(s).
Therefore an argument can as well be defined as a set
of premise(s) and a conclusion. Since a conclusion is
drawn or inferred from the premise(s), an argument
then must have at least two propositions, one being a
premise and the other being a conclusion, but at most
infinite number of premises and a conclusion e.g.
“since we are in the month of December, next month
must be January” or “all those people who live in
secret location in Ongata Rongai are miserable; Dr.
Opiyo Ogutu lives in secret location in Ongata
Rongai, therefore the conclusion will be Dr. Opiyo
Ogutu is miserable.
Deductive and Inductive Inferences
We have two forms of argumentations or reasoning.
In this sense, we can therefore argue or reason
deductively or inductively hence we talk about
deductive and inductive forms of argumentation or
reasoning or just deductive and inductive inferences.
Deduction and induction are forms of argumentation
or reasoning.

43
Thinking and Problem Solving

What is deduction?
Deduction: deduction is the form of reasoning that is
often emulated in the formulaic drawing-room
denouncements (le denuncie) of classic detective
fiction. It is the most rigorous form of argumentation
there is, since in deduction, the move from premises
to conclusions is such that if the premises are true, the
conclusion must also be true. In other words, in the
case of deductive arguments, we make a general
conclusion from general statements as opposed to
inductive arguments where we arrive at the general
conclusion from particular statements or cases. This
is to say that in deduction, we make a general
conclusion from general statements such that the
conclusion follows necessarily or absolutely from the
premises such that if the premises are true, the
conclusion must also be true and vice-versa namely if
the premises are false, the conclusion must also be
false. This is to say that we cannot come up with a
true conclusion from false premises in a deductive
form of argumentation or reasoning and vice versa in
that we cannot come up with a false conclusion from

44
Thinking and Problem Solving

true premises in a deductive form of argumentation or

reasoning. For example take the following argument:

Elvis lives in a secret location in Nairobi.

All people who live in secret locations in Nairobi are
miserable.
Therefore Elvis is miserable.
Another example of a deductive form of
argumentation is:
All students of critical thinking are generous,
Edwin Kipkemei is a student of critical thinking
Therefore, the conclusion is Edwin Kipkemei is
generous.
In other words, in a deductive form of argumentation
or reasoning, the conclusion follows necessarily or
absolutely from the premises.

If we look at our definition of a deduction, we can see

how this argument fits the bill. If the two premises are
true, then the conclusion must also be true. How could
45
Thinking and Problem Solving

it not be true that that Elvis is miserable, if it is indeed

true that all people who live in secret locations in
Nairobi are miserable, and Elvis is one of these
people? The conclusion must be true if the premises
are true. In other words, a (successful deductive
argument is one where, if the premises are true, then
the conclusion must also be true.
Another example of a deductive argument is: The
murder was clearly premeditated. The only person
who knew where Dr. Waweru would be that night was
his colleague, Dr. Opiyo. Therefore, the killer must
be…..
Concerning the investigations of our detective,
reading his deliberations, one could easily insert the
vital, missing word. The killer must surely be Dr.
Opiyo.

What is Induction?
Induction: In the case of an inductive argument, we
make a general conclusion from particular cases or
instances. Unlike deductive inferences, induction
involves an inference where the conclusion follows
46
Thinking and Problem Solving

from the premises not with necessity but only with

probability. Often induction involves reasoning from
a limited number of observations to wider,
probable generalizations. Reasoning this way is
commonly called ‘inductive generalization’. It is a
kind of inference that usually involves reasoning from
past regularities to future regularities. One classic
example is the sunrise. The sun has risen regularly so
far as human experience can recall, so people reason
that it will probably rise tomorrow. (The work of the
Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) has
been influential on this score.
Swan 1 is white
Swan 2 is white
Swan 3 is white
Therefore, the conclusion is all swans are white.
In other words, in induction, the conclusion follows
from the premises not necessarily or absolutely as in
the case of deduction but with probability in the sense
that having observed a number of limited Swans and
found out that they were white in colour, we cannot
say necessarily or absolutely that all swans are white
47
Thinking and Problem Solving

but we can only say that probably all swans are

white. In other words, induction is a form of
argumentation or reasoning in which we make a
general conclusion from particular limited cases or
instances and the conclusion follows from the
premises with probability and not necessarily or
absolutely as in the case with deduction.
Another example of an inductive argument is: P1 is
white; P2 is white; P3 is white; therefore all Ps are
white.
In a nutshell, arguments that are valid are known as
deductive arguments. Deductive arguments are very
important to the acquisition of knowledge since they
enable one to expand one’s knowledge. By having
knowledge of the premises in the argument, one can
thereby infer the conclusion and in doing so gain
knowledge of new proposition.
Moreover, valid arguments which lack true premises
and so are not sound can still be epistemically useful.
However, not all acceptable types of argument are
deductive. For instance, consider the following
inference:
48
Thinking and Problem Solving

Every observed Emus has been flightless.

Therefore
C All emus are flightless.
This argument is clearly not deductive, since it is
entirely possible, even granted the truth of 1, that
there is an unobserved Emus around somewhere that
is not flightless. That is, since the premise can be true
and yet the conclusion simultaneously be false, this
argument is not a valid argument. Nevertheless, given
that we have observed lots of emus across a suitable
length of time and in lots of different habitats, then it
does seem that this is an entirely legitimate inference
to make. That is, the argument seems perfectly
acceptable provided that we interpret 1 along the
following lines:
1. Lots of Emus have been observed over many years
and in a wide range of environments and they have
always been flightless.
Therefore:
Supporting argumentation.

49
Thinking and Problem Solving

The Anatomy of Arguments

An argument consists of a conclusion (the claim that
the speaker or writer is arguing for or the claim that
one attempts to support) and premise(s) (the claim (s)
that he or she offers in support of the conclusion or
the claim(s) that serve as reasons for believing the
conclusion).
Analysis: Two examples of arguments:
[premise] Every officer on the force has been
certified, and [premise] nobody can be certified
without scoring above 70% on the firing range.
Therefore, [conclusion] every officer on the force
must have scored above 70 percent on the firing
range.
[premise] Mr. Conners, the gentleman who lives on
the corner, comes down this street on his morning
walk every day, rain or shine. So [conclusion]
something must have happened to him, because
premise [he has not shown up today)
NB. Notice that sometimes the conclusion of one
argument can serve as the premise of another:

50
Thinking and Problem Solving

[premise] Every student who made 90 percent or

better on the midterms has already been assigned a
grade of A. [premise] Since Katia made 94 percent on
her midterms, [conclusion] she already has her A.
Conclusion indicators
When the words in the following list are used in
arguments, they usually indicate that a premise has
just been offered and that a conclusion is about to be
presented. (The three dots represent the claim that is
the conclusion.
Thus… Consequently… Therefore… Hence…
Accordingly… This shows that…
This implies that… This suggests that… This
proves that…
Example: Bruno drives a BMW X5. This suggests
that either he is rich or his parents are.
The conclusion is either he is rich or his parents are.
The premise is Bruno drives a BMW X5.
[Premise] All those students who have been assigned
A’s are excused from the final exam. [Premise]

51
Thinking and Problem Solving

Margaret got an A, so [conclusion] she is excused

from the final.
[premise] you cannot check books out of the library
without an ID card. So [conclusion] Bill will not be
able to check any books out. The unstated premise
must be ‘Bill has no ID card.’
Arguments can have unstated conclusions as well:
[Premise] The political party that best reflects
mainstream opinion will win the most seats in the
next general election of 2007, and [premise], ODM-
Kenya certainly best reflects mainstream opinion.
The unstated conclusion is ODM-Kenya will win the
most seats in the next general election of 2007.
There is a difference between independent premises
and dependent premises for a conclusion.
Premise indicators
When the words in the following list are used in
arguments, they generally introduce premises. They
often occur just after a conclusion has been given. A
premise will replace the three dots in an actual
argument.

52
Thinking and Problem Solving

Since… Because… For… In view of… This is

implied by…
Example: Either Bruno is rich or his parents are, since
he drives a BMW X5.
The premise is the claim that Bruno drives a BMW
X5; the conclusion is the claim that either Bruno is
rich or his parents are.
[Premise] Raising the speed limit will wear out the
highway faster. In addition, [premise] doing so will
result in more highway deaths. Therefore,
[conclusion] we should not raise the speed limit.
[premise] Raising the speed limit will waste gas.
[Premise] We do not have any gas to waste.
Therefore, [conclusion] we should not raise the speed
limit.
Analysis: the first example of an argument gives two
independent premises for the conclusion that we
should not raise the speed limit (doing so would wear
the highways; doing so would waste lives. The
premises are independent of one another because the
falsity of one would not cancel the support the other
provides for the conclusion. However, the premises in
53
Thinking and Problem Solving

the second example (raising the speed limit will raise

gas; we do not have any gas to waste) are dependent
on one another. The falsity of either premise would
automatically cancel the support the other provides
for the conclusion that the speed limit should not be
raised.
Types of Arguments
Good and Bad, Valid and Invalid, Strong and
Weak Arguments (Good, Valid and Sound
arguments)
When we say that an argument is a good argument,
we are saying that it gives us grounds for accepting
its conclusion. ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ are relative terms:
Arguments can be better or worse depending on the
degree to which they furnish or provide support for
their conclusions. There is more than one way in
which an argument might qualify as good; before we
explain them, however, we need to describe some
important technical distinctions.
An argument whose premises provide absolutely
conclusive support for the conclusion is ‘valid’. In
other words,
54
Thinking and Problem Solving

A valid argument has this characteristic: It is

necessary, on the assumption that the premises are
true, that the conclusion be true. This is merely a
precise way of saying that the premises of a valid
argument, if true, absolutely guarantee a true
conclusion:
Analysis: [premise] Every philosopher is a good
mechanic, and [premise] Emily is a philosopher. So,
[conclusion] Emily is a good mechanic. Valid? Yes.
These premises, if true, guarantee that the conclusion
is true. What is validity of an argument? Validity is
simply a property of an argument’s structure or form
and in validity we are not interested in the truth or in
the content of the propositions making an argument
rather we are simply interested in the structure or the
form of an argument. For instance, all human beings
have five heads, Opiyo is a human being, therefore
the conclusion is the Opiyo has five heads. Valid?
Yes.
The above example is an example of a valid
arguments because if we look at the structure or form
of the arguments, the conclusion follows necessarily
or absolutely from the premises, hence a valid
55
Thinking and Problem Solving

argument is a deductive argument in which the

conclusion follows necessarily or absolutely from the
premises. In validity we are only interested in an
argument’s structure and that is why we have already
pointed out that validity in a property of an
argument’s structure.
NB: Although the argument about Emily is valid, it
so happens the premises are not true. Not every
philosopher is a good mechanic, and Emily is no
philosopher; she is Linda’s cat. So the argument is not
a good one, from the standpoint of offering us
justification for accepting the claim that Emily is a
good mechanic. However, the argument is valid
nonetheless, because the conclusion must follow from
the premises. Thus an argument’s being valid does
not depend on its premises being true. What
determines whether an argument is valid is whether
the conclusion absolutely follows from the premises.
(When we say that a conclusion absolutely follows
from the premises, we mean that if the premises were
true, the conclusion would then have, the conclusion
would then have to be true as well.) If the conclusion
does absolutely follow from the premises, the
56
Thinking and Problem Solving

argument is valid, whether or not the premises are

true. Now a valid argument whose premises are true
is called a ‘sound’ argument:
A sound argument has these two characteristics: It is
valid, and its premises are all true.
An example of a sound argument:
[Premise] Some pesticides are toxic for humans, and
[premise] anything that is toxic for humans is unsafe
for most humans to consume. Therefore, [conclusion]
some pesticides are unsafe for most humans to
consume.
The above is an example of a sound argument: It is
valid, because the conclusion absolutely follows from
the premises and its premises (and hence its
conclusion) are true.
NB: An argument can be valid without necessarily
being a good argument. For instance the argument
about Emily is not good because, even though it is
valid, it does not justify accepting the conclusion: Its
premises are false.
A sound argument, by contrast, normally does justify
accepting the conclusion. We say ‘normally’ because
57
Thinking and Problem Solving

cases can arise in which even sound arguments are not

particularly good. Arguments that beg the question
fall in this category. Let us consider the following
argument:
If a person travels in the same direction far enough,
he or she will arrive back at the place he or she started
from. Therefore, if Kotar travels in the same direction
far enough, he will arrive back at the place he started
from.
The above argument is sound; but of Kotar happened
to leave in the middle of Europe in the tenth century,
it seems odd to suppose he would have been justified
in believing that if he travelled far enough in the same
direction, he would arrive back where he started.
Arguments can be useful- they can qualify as good
arguments- even though we do not intend them to be
valid or sound. Look at this example in which
Onyango says to Njuguna:
[Premise] Every year as far back as I can remember
my roses have developed mildews in the spring.
[Conclusion] Therefore, my roses will develop
mildew this spring too.
58
Thinking and Problem Solving

The above argument does not qualify as valid (or

sound) because it is possible that the conclusion is
false even assuming the premise is true (it might be
an incredibly dry winter). Nevertheless, this is not a
bad argument. In fact, it is really quite good: it may
not be absolutely impossible that Onyango’s roses
won’t get mildew this spring, but, given the premise,
it is very, very likely that they will. Onyango is
certainly justified in believing his conclusion.
Arguments like the above one, which only show that
the conclusion is probably true, are said to be
relatively strong. More precisely:
A strong argument has this distinguishing
characteristic: It is unlikely, on the assumption that
the premises are true, that the conclusion is false.
Notice that the premises do not actually have to be
true for the argument to be strong. For instance like in
the case of Onyango’s argument which he intends
only to be a strong argument, it is somehow
inappropriate to discuss whether it is valid. Yes,
technically Onyango’s argument is invalid, but
because Onyango is only trying to demonstrate that

59
Thinking and Problem Solving

the conclusion is likely, the criticism does not amount

to much- he ever intended that the argument be valid.
Conclusion
A good argument justifies acceptance of the
conclusion.
A valid argument has this defining characteristic: It is
necessary, on the assumption that the premises are
true, that the conclusion be true.
A valid argument whose premises are all true is called
a sound argument.
A strong argument has this characteristic: It is
unlikely, on the assumption that the premises are true,
that the conclusion is false.
Normally, sound arguments and strong arguments are
good arguments.
The best policy is not to speak of valid arguments as
strong or weak; speak of them as sound or unsound.
Likewise, the best policy is not to speak of strong or
weak arguments as valid or invalid; just refer to them
as strong or weak.

60
Thinking and Problem Solving

NB: The terms ‘valid’ and ‘invalid’ are absolute

terms. Either an argument is valid, or it is not, and that
is that. By contrast, ‘strong’ and its opposite ‘weak’
(like ‘good’ and ‘bad’), are relative terms. Arguments
can be evaluated as strong or weaker depending on
how likely the premises show the conclusion to be.
Validity and Soundness
In everyday speech, people talk about someone
‘making a valid point’ or ‘having a valid opinion’. In
philosophical speech, however, the word ‘valid’ is
reserved exclusively for arguments. More
surprisingly, a valid argument can look like this:
All blocks of cheese are more intelligent than any
philosophy student
Meg the cat is a block of cheese
Therefore Meg the cat is more intelligent than any
philosophy student.
All utter nonsense, you may think, but from a strictly
logical point of view or logical standpoint, it is a
perfect example of a valid argument. What is going
on?

61
Thinking and Problem Solving

Defining validity
Validity is a property of well-formed deductive
arguments, which, to recap, are defined as arguments
where the conclusion is in some sense (actually,
hypothetically, etc.) presented as following from the
premises necessarily. A valid deductive argument is
one for which the conclusion follows from the
premises in that way.
The tricky thing, however, is that an argument may
possess the property of validity even if its premises or
its conclusion are not in fact true. A fact is a word or
a phrased which is used to emphasize that a claim is
true. Validity, as it turns out, is essentially a property
of an argument’s structure. And so, with regard to
validity, the content or truth of the statements
composing the argument is irrelevant. For instance,
considering structure first, the argument featuring
cats and cheese given above is an instance of a more
general argumentative structure, of the form:
All Xs are Ys
Z is an X
Therefore Z is a Y
62
Thinking and Problem Solving

In our example, ‘block of cheese’ is substituted for X,

‘things that are more intelligent than all philosophy
students’ for Y and ‘Meg’ for Z for Z. That makes our
example just one particular instance of the more
general argumentative form expressed with the
variables X, Y and Z.
What you should notice is that one does not need to
attach any meaning to the variables to see that this
particular structure is a valid one. No matter what we
replace the variables with, it will always be the case
that if the premises are true (although in fact they
might not be), the conclusion must also be true. If
there is any conceivable way possible for the premises
of an argument to be true but its conclusion
simultaneously be false, then it is an invalid
argument.
What this boils down to is that the notion of validity
is content-blind (or topic-neutral). It really doesn’t
matter what the content of the propositions in the
argument is- validity is determined by the argument
having a solid, deductive structure. Our example is
then a valid argument because if its ridiculous
premises were true, the ridiculous conclusion would
63
Thinking and Problem Solving

also have to be true. The fact that the premises are

ridiculous is neither here nor there when it comes to
assessing the argument’s validity.
Soundness
To say an argument is valid, then, is not to say that its
conclusion must be accepted as true. The conclusion
must be accepted only if (1) the argument is valid and
(2) the premises are true. This combination of valid
argument plus true premises (and therefore true
conclusion) is called a ‘sound’ argument. Calling it
sound is the highest endorsement one can place on an
argument. If you accept an argument as sound you are
really saying that you must accept its conclusion. This
can be shown by the use of another valid, deductive
argument. If you say that an argument is sound you
are saying two things that may be understood as
premises:
If the premises of the argument are true, then the
conclusion must also be true. (That is to say, you are
maintaining that the argument is valid).

64
Thinking and Problem Solving

The Premises of the argument are true (in fact) true.

If you regard these two as premises, you can produce
a deductive argument that concludes with certainty:
Therefore, the conclusion of the argument is true.
For a deductive argument to pass, muster, it must be
valid. But being valid is not sufficient to make it a
sound argument. A sound argument must not only be
valid; it must have true premises as well. It is, strictly
speaking, only sound arguments whose conclusions
we must accept.
Reading Materials Required for Topic Two
Bagini Julian and Fosi Peter S. (2003).The
Philosopher’s Toolkit: A Compendium of
Philosophical Concepts and Methods, Blackwell
Publishing.
Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001).
Critical Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Copi M. Irving and Cohen Carl, (1994). Introduction
to Logic, 9th Edn. Macmillan College Publishing
Company.

65
Thinking and Problem Solving

Oriare, Nyarwath, (2010). Traditional Logic: An

Introduction, Nairobi: Consolata Institute of
Philosophy Press

Topic 3. Claims and Critical Thinking

In this topic, we will address the following questions:
a. Why is critical thinking such an important skill?
b. What are factual matters (objective claims) and
matters of opinion (subjective claims)?
c. How do we settle an issue?
d. How do we respond when confronted with a claim?
e. Why are some opinions better than others?
What is a claim?
Human beings are very versatile in the use of words. In
other words, there is a multiplicity of uses of words,
symbols and sentences. For instance, we use words to ask
questions, give commands, make promises, lie to others or
warn them etc. One of the things we can do with words is
to make claims. A claim is a statement that is either true or
false. It is a declarative sentence used in such a way that it
is either true or false (but not both). However, many of the
things we say are neither true nor false as when we ask a
question, what time is it? Or great a friend, (Hello Linda!)

66
Thinking and Problem Solving

Or give an order (shut the door!). Such questions, greetings

and orders as well as many other things we say and write
may be appropriate or inappropriate, clever or stupid but
we do not ordinarily think of them as true or false. A claim
must always have a truth -value- that is, it must be true or
false (although we do not have to know whether it is true
or false). For instance the claim “Marion is hungry” is a
claim even if we do not know if it is true, 2+2=5 is a claim,
but a false claim, dogs are mammals is a true claim. Other
examples of claims are “there is ice on the moon”, “there
is no ice on the moon”
What is the official job of making claims? (The primary
job of making claims is to communicate information)
The official job of claims is to communicate information.
But in fact we use claims to fulfil or accomplish a variety
of goals. Many times we communicate a fact to others
when our main interest is not simply to make them aware
of the fact but rather to persuade them, warn them,
amuse them, comfort them or annoy them. There will
be often be times when a person’s motivation for
making a claim is more important than the information
contained in the claim itself.
How can we respond when we are confronted with a
claim?

67
Thinking and Problem Solving

We can respond in so many ways when we are confronted

with a claim namely, ignore or consider it, question or
challenge it, criticize, defend or make fun of it. We have to
determine whether to accept it (believe it), reject it (believe
that it is false) or suspend judgement about it (possibly
because we do not have enough information at the time to
accept or reject it).
We accept or reject claims with varying degrees of
confidence:
We may have full confidence in the truth (or falsity) of one
claim but only modest confidence in the truth or falsity of
another. The degree of confidence in our acceptance or
rejection of a claim should depend on the amount of
evidence we have for or against the claim.
It therefore requires critical thinking which consists in
a careful, deliberate determination of whether we
should accept, reject or suspend judgement about a
claim- and of the degree of confidence with which we
accept or reject it. The ability to think critically is vitally
important; in fact our lives depend on it. The way we
conduct our lives depends on what we believe to be true-
on what claims we accept. The more carefully we evaluate
a claim and the more fully we separate issues that are
relevant to it from those that are not, the more critical is our
thinking.
68
Thinking and Problem Solving

Critical thinking involves a lot of things, including the

abilities to listen, and read carefully, to evaluate
arguments, to look for and find hidden assumptions,
and to trace the consequences of a claim. If you are
beginning to sense that there is no simple way of deciding
when to accept a claim, you are on the right track. We
should say that we should accept a claim only when we
have a good reason for doing so. Critical thinking
therefore requires constant practice if you are going to
become skilled in it because there are no shortcuts to
determine good reasoning from bad. Hence it is of
paramount importance to put into practice what one learns
for critical thinking is not just a classroom activity.
Concerning the purpose of claim, we have said that the job
of a claim is to communicate information but it does not
happen necessarily that whenever we communicate
information our interest or aim is to enable the others to be
aware of the facts. People make claims to communicate
information but often have other objectives as well.
Issues and Arguments
Whenever we have to think critically, the first item of
business is to make sure we are focusing on the correct
claim. It does us no good to come to a correct decision
about whether to accept a claim if that claim is not the one
we should have been concerned about in the first place.
69
Thinking and Problem Solving

“Issue” is the word most frequently used to identify the

focus of a debate, discussion or dispute.
In the broadest sense, an issue is any matter of
controversy or uncertainty; it may be in dispute, in doubt
or simply “up for review”. If Fuellenbach believes that
there will be a recession and Nelly believes there won’t,
then we say that they are divided (that is, take opposite
sides) on the issue. We can state the issue neutrally by
using the word “whether” in front of the claim that one
party accepts and the other rejects. In this case, what is at
issue is whether there will be a recession.
How do you identify an issue?
Identifying the Issue
It is worth noting that an issue is different from a topic of
conversation. Pet care can be a topic of conversation, but
it is not an issue. Whether wild animals such as ferrets and
skunks should be pets is an issue because it is a matter of
controversy. Again notice that the word “whether” helps to
show that an issue is involved. In everyday conversation, it
is often difficult to figure out exactly what the issue is.
Most of us have been part of the heated discussions with
friends or family members. Onyango yells that taxes are
too high under the new administration, Carthy laments that
ODM is out to destroy education in Kenya and their Father

70
Thinking and Problem Solving

shouts that the government funds too many social programs

and allows too many foreigners into the country. Such
discussions are hopelessly unsatisfying because they are
not focused on one clear and precise question at issue. A
worthwhile discussion focuses on a single topic and then
on a particular question at issue.
For example the topic of abortion raises many different
questions: Should abortion be legal? Should the
government pay for abortions? Should teenagers be
allowed to have abortions without parental consent? etc.
Unless the participants or parties to this discussion
focus on one question at issue, the ensuing argument
will be disorganized and incoherent, hence uncritical
thinking can lead to unnecessary disputes,
unwarranted conclusions and wasted time. Disputes
always occur when two parties will not address the
same issue.
Example: Theresa: That nuclear power plant is too
dangerous to have been built so close to the city
Daniel: If it were not for the nuclear power plant, Theresa,
you would not have enough light to read your newspaper.
Analysis: Teresa and Daniel are addressing related issues,
but they are not discussing the same issue

71
Thinking and Problem Solving

NB. At times people intentionally confuse issues in order

to draw others’ attention away from a claim that they do
not want to deal with or to make it look as though they have
proved a point when in fact they have not.
Settling an Issue through Argument
When we attempt to settle an issue- that is, when we
attempt to determine which side is correct- one of our most
important tools is argument. (The others are observation
and consulting reliable sources). Generally speaking an
argument can be thought of as an attempt to support a claim
by giving reasons for believing it. The claim one attempts
to support is known as the conclusion of the argument; the
claims that serve as reasons for believing the conclusion
are known as premises. Hence an argument is basically an
attempt to support a claim (the conclusion) by providing a
reason or reasons for believing it (the premises). Senator
Barack Obama will support gun control legislation. After
all, he is a liberal, and nearly all liberals are in favour of
gun control. Allan states his reasons for the conclusion in
the rest of the passage- that Obama is a liberal and that
nearly all liberals are in favour of gun control. The most
common words used to identify the conclusion are words
such as ‘therefore’, ‘consequently’ and ‘hence’ while
‘since’ and because are often used to introduce premises).

72
Thinking and Problem Solving

The construction, evaluation, and where necessary

criticism of arguments is really at the heart of critical
thinking
Facts and Opinions
The word ‘fact’ is often used to indicate or emphasize that
a claim is true. We have already defined critical thinking a
careful and deliberate determination of whether we should
accept, reject or suspend judgement about a claim- and of
the degree of confidence with which we accept it or reject
it. For instance, ‘it is a fact that Mars is smaller than Earth’
means the same as ‘it is true that Mars is smaller than
Earth’ or more simply, ‘Mars is smaller than earth.
The word, ‘opinion’ on the other hand is used to indicate
that a claim is believed, or judged to be true, by someone
often after certain amount of thought. For example, ‘it is
Moore’s opinion that Mars is smaller than Earth’ says that
Moore believes Mars is smaller than Earth. ‘It is Perker’s
opinion that Mars is made of Mozzarrella cheese’ says that
Perker believes this peculiar claim about Mars.
Analysis: Now, the first of these opinions is true; the claim
is not just Moore’s opinion, it is also a fact. The second
opinion is false, it is not a fact that Mars is made of cheese.
So some opinions are factual (true), and some are not
(false). In this case, one of the goals of critical thinking is

73
Thinking and Problem Solving

to help us form opinions of the former sort and avoid those

of the latter.
We can also make a distinction between issues that are
factual matters and those that are not. We can say that an
issue is about a factual matter (or a matter of fact) when
there are established methods for settling it- that is, when
there are generally accepted criteria or standards on which
the issue can be judged- or when we can at least describe
what kinds of methods and criteria would apply even
though it may be impractical or impossible to actually
apply them.
Analysis: Let us say that Perker thinks that Mars is made
of cheese while Moore does not. This is a disagreement
about a factual matter for there are accepted means for
settling the issue. In deed we know that Moore’s opinion
about Mars is true and Perker’s is not. But we can
determine that an issue is about a factual matter even if we
are not able to tell which side- if any of them- is correct. In
other words, we can say that an issue is about a factual
matter even if we cannot determine what the actual facts
are. Saying something is a factual matter is different from
saying that it is a fact. NB: Claims about factual matters do
not have to be true. ‘Mars is made of cheese’ is about a
factual matter, although of course it is false.

74
Thinking and Problem Solving

Analysis: Whether Julius Caesar took a bath on the day he

was murdered on the steps of the Roman Senate. There is
of course no way we can determine for sure whether Caesar
took a bath that day, although we might poke around a bit
in history books to see if anybody mentions such a thing.
But the issue is still a factual matter, because it is very easy
to describe methods and criteria that, if we could apply
them, would settle it. For instance, following Caesar
around would enable the observer to determine if Caesar
took a bath on the day he was murdered.
We also talk of matters of pure opinion. You can test
whether you have before you a factual matter or a matter
of pure opinion: For example, when two people disagree
about a factual matter, it is certain that at least one of them
is wrong; that is, two conflicting opinions about a matter of
fact cannot both be correct. But we allow two people to
hold conflicting opinions about matters of pure opinion,
and we do not say that either of them is wrong.
Objective and Subjective Claims
Objective claims are claims about factual matters or
matters of fact while subjective claims are claims about
matters of pure opinions or rather they are expressions of
people’s preferences, tastes or biases. While subjective
claims are expressions as far as people’s preferences,
tastes, biases or prejudices are concerned, objective claims
75
Thinking and Problem Solving

are statements which are either true or false irrespective or

regardless of our personal preferences, tastes, biases or
prejudices.
An example of a subjective claim: ‘Vanilla tastes better
than chocolate’ can be another way of saying ‘I like the
taste of vanilla better than I like the taste of chocolate’, If
Linda says: ‘Dogs make better pets than Cats’ and
Mwaniki says ‘Cats make better pets than dogs’, they can
both be correct because each is really expressing his own
tastes.
NB. Many students think that a claim is subjective, that is,
a matter of pure opinion simply because it is controversial.
However, there are many claims which are controversial in
nature and yet they are not subjective. Instead they are
objective. For example, claims such as:
Whether raising taxes last year would have caused a
recession
Whether the death penalty lowers crime rates
Whether human beings evolved from more primitive
primates etc. are all controversial issues, but all of them are
factual matters in the sense that there are accepted
standards and criteria of judging them. In other words, we
can imagine procedures by which they can be tested to
determine whether they are true
76
Thinking and Problem Solving

There are disputes concerning the objective or subjective

nature of some claims particularly those in the moral
sphere or claims about moral issues:
‘Stealing is morally wrong’ is said by some to be an
objective claim, i.e. a statement of fact; others take it to be
a subjective claim, an expression of pure opinion. There are
some sophisticated arguments about how such claims
should be classified.
The same is true about claims like ‘Carmel lion’s music is
better than Eminem’s.’
‘God exists’: Some say this is a straightforward objective
claim; others say that it is not a claim at all.
NB: The above claims have one thing in common with
objective claims- about matters of fact or factual matters,
namely that whether or not we can finally determine the
truth about them, it is still the case that some opinions are
better reasoned- indeed more intelligent- than others.
As a conclusion, given that some of the above issues are
very important to how we lead our lives, it is of paramount
importance to bring one’s critical thinking skills and
strategies to bear on them.
Conclusion
From here every student should begin to be able to:

77
Thinking and Problem Solving

a. Define critical thinking and explain why it is an

important skill
b. Define the terms ‘claim’, ‘issue’, ‘argument’,
‘premise’ and ‘conclusion’ and explain their
significance in critical thinking
c. Distinguish between factual matters (or objective
claims) and matters of opinion (or subjective claims)
d. Explain why some opinions are better than others.

Reading Materials Required for Topic Three

Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001). Critical
Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Harold T., Marilyn S. and Richard N. (1995). Living Issues
in Philosophy
Hegel G.W.F. (1975). Encyclopedia of Philosophical
Sciences, Trans. by W. Wallace, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2002.
Leo A. Groarke and Christopher W. Tindale (2004). Good
Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to Critical
Thinking, 3rd Edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Ochieng`-Odhiambo F. (2009). A Companion to
Philosophy, Nairobi: Consolata Institute of Philosophy
Press.

78
Thinking and Problem Solving

Ogutu, Anthony (2017). “Ethics in Educational Curriculum

in Africa” in Tangaza Journal of Theology and Mission
2016/I Science and Religion, pp. 39-67.

Topic 4. Critical Thinking and Problem solving

In this topic, we will address the following questions:

1. Why is critical thinking very key in addressing
puzzling and fundamental problems?
2. Why is sustaining a harmony between thought and
action indispensable for our well-being?
3. Why is maintaining coherent and consistent
worldview very key for human existence?
4. Although we value every person equally, should we
do the same with every opinion a person might hold?
5. What is the primary job of critical thinking?

Critical Thinking and Dispute Resolution

It is worth noting that the primary job of critical thinking is
getting at the truth, discovering which claims are true and
which are false. In this case, truth is the “bottom line”
concept. We have already examined the distinction
between an issue and a topic of conversation in the
79
Thinking and Problem Solving

previous topic by pointing out that pet care can be a topic

of conversation, but it is not an issue. Whether wild animals
such as ferrets and skunks should be pets is an issue
because it is a matter of controversy. In our context, an
issue is something a person raises or addresses or tries to
resolve.
In everyday conversation, it is often difficult to figure out
exactly what the issue is. Most of us have been part of
heated discussions with friends or family members. Unless
the parties to the discussion, focus on one question, the
ensuing argument will be disorganized and incoherent.
This is one way uncritical thinking can lead to
unnecessary disputes, unwarranted conclusions and wasted
time. Ideally, the acquired critical thinking skills and
strategies is more likely to assist one to maintain
coherent, consistent worldview. Besides, critical thinking
skills can enable one to sustain a harmony between
thought and action which are indispensable to our well-
being. Indeed there is need to avoid leading a divided life
i.e. a contradiction between what we say and what we do.
In other words, preaching water and drinking wine. Shoddy
though is expensive both in money and quality of life. The
quality of our life and what we build and produce depends
ultimately on the quality of our thought.

80
Thinking and Problem Solving

For instance, persuasive orators can sway minds and

hearts and thereby wage wars, gain political control,
establish cults, and otherwise seduce an unsuspecting
public. Unaware of the complexities of an issue, unfamiliar
with a comprehensive view of a topic, unable to distinguish
between valid and invalid reasoning, ready to yield to
authoritative approaches, individuals and communities
have been asked to sacrifice their lives for certain values
and ideals. However, a person who has studied philosophy
and has acquired the necessary critical thinking skills is
more likely to pursue an issue in depth and examine it
comprehensively with sound reasoning.
Having said that the primary job of critical thinking is
getting at the truth, namely discovering which claims are
true and which are false, we want to impress upon you that
the truth of a claim is an objective fact about the world,
something that does not depend on our feelings or beliefs
(unless, of course, the claim is about our feelings or
beliefs). “There is a book on the table” is true if and only if
there is in fact a book on the table, regardless of whether
we know there is such a book or how we feel or believe
about its being there.
There are legitimate disputes about the objective or
subjective nature of some claims. Many place claims about
moral issues in this category. “Stealing is morally wrong”
81
Thinking and Problem Solving

is said by some to be an objective claim, a statement of fact;

others take it to be a subjective claim, an expression of pure
opinion. There are some sophisticated arguments about
how such claims should be classified. The same is true for
claims like “Mozart’s music is better than Madonna’s”.
Something similar applies to claims like “God exists”.
Some say this is a straight forward objective claim; others
say it is not a claim at all. However one sorts out these
kinds of claims, they do have one thing in common with
objective claims about factual matters: whether or not we
can finally determine the truth about them, it is still the case
that some opinions are better reasoned-indeed, more
intelligent-than others.
Because some of these issues are very important to how we
lead our lives, it is important to bring one’s critical –
thinking skills to bear on them. Problems occur when we
fail to understand the differences between matters of fact
and matters of pure opinion and between the objective and
subjective claims with which we state them. We can waste
time by trying to convince someone to change his or her
mind on a matter of pure opinion, since in the long run,
there is no way to finally settle the matter. On the other
hand, we make a more serious mistake if we treat a
matter of fact as if it were one of pure opinion. Calling
it pure opinion can be an excuse for failing to pursue

82
Thinking and Problem Solving

the issue; it can be a way of avoiding a difficult problem

or abandoning it before we have tried our best to settle it
one way or another.
Let us take stock: That a claim “states a fact” just means
that it is true; that it “states an opinion” means only that
somebody believes it to be true. Some opinions are helpful,
important, and true; others are false, silly or
dangerous. Some claims are objective-they are about
matters of fact; others are subjective-they are about
matters of pure opinion: personal preferences, tastes and so
on. These distinctions should help you organize your
thoughts about facts and opinions and keep you from
making some elementary mistakes.
“Everyone’s Entitled…”
Speaking of mistakes, there is another mistake that is so
egregious. It deserves special consideration. You can
usually spot this mistake because it almost always takes the
same form, even the same words: “Everyone is entitled to
his or her own opinion.”
Now, it is true that, in some sense, everyone is entitled to
his or her own opinion on anything. The reason for this is
that, in anything except a completely authoritarian
dictatorship, people are not forced to hold a given set of
opinions. (And they probably could not be made to agree

83
Thinking and Problem Solving

completely even in a totally authoritarian society). But-and

this is the mistake –the fact that we do not force people to
have this or that opinion on a subject does not mean that
one opinion may not be much more intelligent, much
more practical, much more humane than some other
opinion. Indeed, some opinions are so bad, so stupid or so
dangerous that it may be hazardous or even immoral to
hold them. Other opinions are even worse: How could one
be “entitled” to the opinion that people should be allowed
to abuse their children whenever they want to or that
human slavery is a justifiable form of labor?
Although it is vital to argue against such defective
opinions, the real danger of the “entitlement” error is that
it keeps people from talking and reasoning with one
another. We should not confuse the equal value of
people with the equal value of people’s opinions. All too
often someone says, “Well, you are entitled to your
opinion” as a way of giving up, a way of saying that he or
she does not want to argue about the issue any more.
Certainly, there are times when further discussion is
useless, but that does not mean that every opinion is as
good-as “entitled”-as every other. Remember, just because
our value system gives equal worth to people, it does not
give equal worth to people’s opinions. In other words,
although we value every person equally, we should not do

84
Thinking and Problem Solving

the same for every opinion a person might hold. Some

opinions are carefully reasoned and are worth our
consideration; others are dubious, misleading or downright
dangerous. A critical thinker therefore, is one who has the
motivation and skills to tell the difference.
This explains why in spite of our amazing advances, many
thoughtful people are disturbed and anxious. They are
concerned that our physical power and scientific
knowledge stand in sharp contrast with the failure of
governments and individuals to come to grips with the
pressing intellectual and moral problems of life.
Knowledge seems divorced from values. Indeed, we are all
aware that a person can have a great deal of knowledge and
still be a learned fool, hence there is an urgent need to
make a clear cut distinction between knowledge and
wisdom or between being learned or schooled and being
educated.

In our age of science and technology, characterized by

confusion and uncertainty, we need a sense of direction. It
is wisdom that provides us with that sense; it is an affair of
values. As Abraham Kaplan in his work, In Pursuit of
Wisdom has written:

85
Thinking and Problem Solving

“Whatever else wisdom may be, it is in some sense an

understanding of life. It is not a purely cerebral attainment;
wisdom is as much a matter of what we do and feel as it
is of how we think. But thought is central to it. Wisdom
is a matter of seeing things- but as they are, not
subjectively” (Kaplan Abraham, 1977).
Besides, in our complex and changing world, we are faced
with so many moral challenges. Many keen observers have
called attention to the loss of a sense of values that has
accompanied the growth of modern technology (H. J.
Muller, 1970).They tell us that we have been living under
the illusion that more automobiles, labor-saving devices
and the like will bring happiness and usher in a better life.
Without a strong sense of values derived from value-giving
institutions such as the family and religion, however, the
human spirit tends to weaken or deteriorate.
A number of scholars have told us that modern civilization
is successful in transmitting to the young technical
knowledge but fails to transmit the moral, cultural and
historical heritage of that civilization. This implies that
ethical reflection illuminates an individual sense of right.
This is to say that the “bottom line” concept is thought.
Wisdom is much more of how we think and as has been
rightly put previously, the quality of our life and what we
build and produce depends ultimately on the quality of our
thought. In this case, by thinking clearly, we are more
likely to avoid unnecessary and unwarranted disputes,
86
Thinking and Problem Solving

squabbles that may arise due to poor reasoning. In this

sense, shallowness, incompleteness, poor reasoning and
assertions with flimsy foundation prevents an enlightened
citizenry
Having the courage to question the conventional and
traditional is useful for individuals in achieving
intellectual autonomy and in helping communities to make
informed choices.
Failure to obtain a specific answer to a philosophical
question or an acceptable solution to a problematic issue
frequently leads to frustration. Nonetheless, exploration of
the possible, reasonable solutions clarifies the options
open to thoughtful persons. The usefulness of choosing
from reasoned, researched alternatives rather than from
bigoted, impulsive, and unclear claims is apparent in all
dimensions of our lives. Ideally, the study of philosophy
and critical thinking nurtures our capacity for making
informed choices. That is why Socrates in his famous belief
said that the unexamined life is not worth living.
Similarly, philosophy proceeds with the conviction that the
unexamined idea is not worth having.
“Developing a philosophy of life” for instance, was an
objective considered essential or at least important by
about 45% of American college freshmen in 1993. More
important were, in ascending order, helping others who are

87
Thinking and Problem Solving

in difficulty, becoming an authority in one’s field, raising

a family and being very well-off financially.
We wonder whether the responses were based on a clear
understanding of the nature of values and the possible
meanings of “developing a philosophy of life”. Were the
surveyed students aware of the meanings, branches and
tools of philosophy? Had they any notion of the benefits of
choosing adequate views of reality and maintaining a
coherent, consistent world view? We propose that a
mature person’s philosophic beliefs are well established;
such a man or woman is well integrated, and sustains a
harmony between thought and action that is
indispensable to his or her well-being.
Wisdom is intelligent conduct of human affairs. We
experience intellectual discomfort when confronted
with fragmentary and confused views of the world.
Without some unity of outlook, the self is divided.
Among other benefits, the study of critical thinking gives
our lives an inner integration, helps us to decide what to
approve and what to disapprove and provides a sense of
the meaning of human existence.
We have already pointed out that the primary job of critical
thinking is getting at the truth, discovering which claims
are true and which are false. In this case, truth is the
“bottom line” concept in our case. We also distinguished
88
Thinking and Problem Solving

between an issue and a topic of conversation by pointing

out that pet care can be a topic of conversation, but it is not
an issue. Whether wild animals such as ferrets and skunks
should be pets is an issue because it is a matter of
controversy. In our context, an issue is something a person
raises or addresses or tries to resolve.
In everyday conversation, it is often difficult to figure out
exactly what the issue is. Most of us have been part of
heated discussions with friends or family members. Unless
the parties to the discussion, focus on one question, the
ensuing argument will be disorganized and incoherent.
This is one way uncritical thinking can lead to
unnecessary disputes, unwarranted conclusions and wasted
time. Ideally, the acquired skills and strategies of critical
thinking is more likely to assist one to maintain coherent,
consistent worldview. Besides, critical thinking skills can
enable one to sustain a harmony between thought and
action which are indispensable to our well-being. Indeed
there is need to avoid leading a divided life. Shoddy though
is expensive both in money and quality of life. The quality
of our life and what we build and produce depends
ultimately on the quality of our thought.
Reading Materials Required for Topic Four
Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001). Critical
Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
89
Thinking and Problem Solving

Harold T., Marilyn S. and Richard N. (1995). Living Issues

in Philosophy
Hegel G.W.F. (1975). Encyclopedia of Philosophical
Sciences, Trans. by W. Wallace, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2002.
Leo A. Groarke and Christopher W. Tindale (2004). Good
Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to Critical
Thinking, 3rd Edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Ochieng`-Odhiambo F. (2009). A Companion to
Philosophy, Nairobi: Consolata Institute of Philosophy
Press.
Ogutu, Anthony (2017). “Ethics in Educational Curriculum
in Africa” in Tangaza Journal of Theology and Mission
2016/I Science and Religion, pp. 39-67.
Topic 5. Critical Thinking and Clear Writing
In this topic, we will address the following questions:
a. What is an ambiguous claim?
b. What are the guidelines to help one get organized?
c. What are the types and forms of definitions?
d. What are good writing practices?
You have the keyboard, a pen or pencil in front of you. The
enemy is the blank screen or a piece of paper that you must
convert somehow into an essay and one of the essays that
90
Thinking and Problem Solving

gives people most trouble is the argumentative essay in

which someone has to support his or her position on an
issue and the successful essays achieve their goals by
offering good arguments since critical thinking aims at
formulating good arguments.
We stated in the first part of our course that critical thinking
comprises two components:
A set of information and belief generating and processing
skills
The habit, based on the intellectual commitment, of using
those skills to guide behavior, hence it is to be contrasted
with mere acquisition and retention of information alone
because it involves a particular way in which information
is sought and treated.
Our aim in the second part of our course is to show how to
apply principles and strategies of critical thinking to write
good essays, how to organize one’s thoughts, state one’s
claims clearly and avoid counterproductive language. This
section is not a substitute for a course in composition or
writing. Rather, it provides information that will help the
students write strong essays based on clearly stated
arguments and reasonable claims by providing the various
principles by which to evaluate arguments and claims as

91
Thinking and Problem Solving

well as argumentative essays. The principles of critical

thinking can also be applied to one’s own writing.
Organization and focus
A good argumentative essay must first of all be well
organized. Many times, we encounter pieces of writing in
which words, claims or arguments are strangely assembled
that the result is unintelligible.
Principles of Organization
The most natural and common organizational pattern in an
argumentative essay is:
To state what you are trying to establish
Proceed to establish it by setting forth the considerations
that support your position by
Adding explanations, illustrations or other elaboration as
needed
Guidelines to help one get organized in order to write
clearly
1. Focus: From the outset, make clear what issue you
intend to address and what your position on the issue
will be. In other words, state clearly the issue you
intend to address and your position on the issue. This
is what is sometimes referred to as the statement of the
problem. One should for instance state that in this
92
Thinking and Problem Solving

essay, this is what I intend to shed light on. The essay

that begins with the statement ‘in this essay, I shall
argue that…’ is boring.
2. Stick to the issue: All points you make in an issue
should be connected to the issue under discussion and
should always either (a) support, illustrate, explain,
clarify, elaborate on or emphasize your position on the
issue. In other words, every point that you are making
in terms of explanation, elaboration or clarification
must be connected to the issue under the discussion.
3. Arrange the components of the essay in a logical
sequence: It is common sense to make a point before
clarifying it and not the other way round. For instance
place support for item B next to item B, not next to
item F or G. It is worth bringing in examples when
supporting one’s points, clarifications such that the
reader knows what you are doing
4. Be complete: You do not have to be exhaustive in
your treatment of the issue because many issues are
much too large to be treated exhaustively in a single
essay. The basic principle is that the more limited your
topic, the easier it is to be complete in your coverage.
However, do accomplish what you set out to
accomplish by supporting fully and adequately
whatever position you take on the issue, and anticipate
and respond to possible objections. Sentences should
93
Thinking and Problem Solving

be complete, paragraphs should be unified wholes and

usually each should stick to a single point and the
essay should reach a conclusion.
Defining Terms
Any serious attempt to support or sustain a position
requires a clear statement of what is at issue or as it is
sometimes called the statement of the problem and this
stating of what is at issue at times involves a careful
definition of key terms.
Purpose and Types of definitions
Definitions can serve different purposes.
1. Stipulative definitions: they are meant to introduce
unusual or unfamiliar words, to coin new words or to
introduce a new meaning to a familiar word. For
instance “All bachelors are eccentric”.
2. Explanatory definitions: are meant to explain,
illustrate or disclose important aspects of difficult
concepts.
3. Precising definitions: Meant to reduce vagueness and
eliminate ambiguity
4. Persuasive definitions: Meant to influence the
attitude of the reader. Many times, persuasive
definitions are used in the field of advertisements.

94
Thinking and Problem Solving

At times definitions are intended just to amuse. Whatever

the case, most definitions take various common forms. The
most common forms of definition are:
Forms of definitions

1. Definition by example by pointing to, naming or

describing one or more examples of something to
which the defined term applies. For instance, ‘By
scripture, I mean books like the Bible or the Koran’.
‘By temperate climate’ I mean weather in an area like
the Mid-Atlantic States’. By cutlery I mean spoons,
knives, forks, by stationery I mean pens, pencils,
books etc., by furniture, I mean tables, chairs etc.
2. Definition by synonym: Giving another word or
phrase that means the same thing. ‘Fastidious’ means
the same as ‘fussy’. ‘Prating’ is the same as
‘chattering’, to be ‘lubricous’ is to be ‘slippery’ the
word ‘denotation’ is synonymous to ‘reference’ while
the word ‘connotation’ is synonymous to ‘sense’.
Some synonymous terms are words such as cost-
price; cosmos-world, universe etc.
3. Analytic definition: specifying (a) the type of thing
the term applies to and (b) the differences between the
things the term applies to and other things of the same

95
Thinking and Problem Solving

type e.g. ‘A mongoose is a ferret-sized mammal native

to India that eats snakes and is related to civets’.
Ambiguities in Critical Thinking
Ambiguous claims
When do we say that a claim is ambiguous? A claim is an
ambiguous claim if it can be assigned more than one
meaning and if the particular meaning it should be assigned
is not made clear by context. For instance if an accountant
rises from her desk on Friday afternoon and says, ‘My work
here is finished’, she might mean that she has finished the
account she was working on, that her whole week’s work
is done and she is leaving for the weekend or that she is fed
up with her job and is leaving the company. An ambiguous
word or phrase can sometimes bring a difference in a
discussion or a dispute.
Some Types of Ambiguities
A claim can be ambiguous for different reasons.
a. Semantic ambiguity: Example ‘My brother does not
use glasses’. The meaning of this claim is unclear because
it contains an ambiguous word or phrase. It could mean
either eye glasses or drinking glasses. A claim whose
ambiguity is due to the ambiguity of a particular word or
phrase is called a semantically ambiguous claim.
Semantics is the study of the relation between linguistic
96
Thinking and Problem Solving

signs and what they connote or denote. It is the study of the

meaning of words and sentences. How can we therefore
eliminate semantic ambiguity? By substituting an
unambiguous word or phrased such as ‘eyeglasses’ for
‘glasses’.
b. Syntactic ambiguity: Syntactically ambiguous claims
have to do with structures. Syntax is the study of the way
that words and other elements of language can be strung
together to form grammatical units without taking the
meaning of the sentence into account at all. The sentences
‘Smith are happy’ and Smith is’ are both syntactically
incorrect while the sentence’ Smith is happy’ is
syntactically correct. An example of a syntactically
ambiguous claim is: ‘He chased the girl in his car’. The
only way to eliminate syntactic ambiguity is to rewrite the
claim. Sometimes syntactically ambiguous claims result
when we do not clearly show what a pronoun refers to. For
example the claim ‘The boys chased the girls, and they
giggled a lot’ is an example of this sort of ambiguity; you
cannot be certain whether ‘they’ refers to the boys or to the
girls. He was bitten while walking by a dog’ should be
revised either as ‘While he was walking, he was bitten by
a dog’, or as ‘While he was walking by a dog, he was
bitten’.

97
Thinking and Problem Solving

c. Grouping ambiguity: This is a peculiar kind of

semantic ambiguity. For instance: ‘Secretaries make
more money than physicians’
Analysis: Is this claim true or false? We cannot say. We do
not know what the claim is because we do not know exactly
what ‘secretaries’ and ‘physicians’ refer to. If the claim is
that secretaries as a group make more money than
physicians make as a group, then the claim is true because
there are many more secretaries than physicians. But if the
claim is that secretaries individually make more money
than physicians individually, then the claim is of course
false.
NB. Whenever we refer to a collection of individuals, we
must clearly show whether the reference is to the collection
as a group or as individuals.
Fallacies of composition and division: related to
grouping ambiguities are mistakes or fallacies. Suppose
something holds true of a group of things individually. To
think it must therefore necessarily hold true of the same
things as a group is to commit the fallacy of composition.
An example of a fallacy of composition is: ‘We do not
spend that much on military salaries. After all, whoever
heard of any one getting rich in the army? (in other words,
we do not spend that much on service personnel
individually; therefore we do not spend much on them as a
98
Thinking and Problem Solving

group’). Another example of fallacy of composition is

Senator Malala is corrupt, therefore all senators are corrupt.
Fallacy of division: To think that what holds true of a
group automatically holds true of all the individuals in that
group is to commit the error known as the fallacy of
division. Examples of fallacy of division are: Congress is
incompetent. Therefore ‘congressman Obama is
incompetent’, ‘Parliament is incompetent, and therefore
Parliamentarian Koigi is incompetent’.
Reading Materials Required for Topic Five
Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001). Critical
Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Epstein, Richard L. and Kernberger Carolyn, (2006). The
Pocket Guide to Critical Thinking, Thomson Wadsworth.
Thomson, Anne (2002). Critical Reasoning: A Practical
Introduction, 2nd Edn. London: Routledge

Topic 6. Evaluating Informative Claims

In this topic, we will address the following questions:
a. What are the conditions for accepting unsupported
claims?
b. What is internet?

99
Thinking and Problem Solving

c. Why should the information provided by internet be

evaluated with even more caution than information
from the print media, radio or television?
d. What do we mean by the source and credibility of a
claim?
It is one thing to understand a claim; it is another to accept
it. The central task of critical thinking is to determine when
it is reasonable to accept claims because critical thinking is
a careful and deliberate determination of whether we
should accept, reject or suspend judgement about a claim
and the degree of confidence with which to accept or reject
it.
Our concern in this chapter is with those claims which are
presented without explicit supporting argumentation. It is
of paramount importance to support one’s position
concerning the question at issue. We are not concerned for
the time being with claims offered along with their support-
that is, arguments. The fact whether it is a good idea to
accept those claims that come to us without explicit support
depends on two things namely:
1. The content of the claim (what the claim is about)
2. The source of the claim (where it comes from)
As a matter of principle, it is reasonable to accept an
unsupported claim on condition that:

100
Thinking and Problem Solving

1. It does not conflict with our own observations

2. It does not conflict with our background information
3. It does not conflict with other credible claims
4. It comes from other sources that offers us no reason to
suspect bias
Assessing the Content of the Claim (What the claim is
about)
Does the claim conflict with our personal observations?
Our own observations provide the most reliable source of
information about the world. It is therefore only reasonable
to be suspicious of any claim that comes into conflict with
what we have observed. For instance supposing Frida tells
Njuguna there will be no mail delivery today. But Njuguna
has just a short while ago seen the mail carrier arrive and
deliver the mail. Under such circumstances, obviously
neither Njuguna nor you nor anybody else needs
instruction in critical thinking to decide not to accept
Frida’s claim. Anyone would reject it outright.
NB. Critical thinkers need to keep in mind the fact that
observations are not infallible. For instance our
observations may not be reliable if we make them under
certain conditions and circumstances namely:
If we make them when the lighting is poor or the room is
noisy
101
Thinking and Problem Solving

If we make them when we are distracted, emotionally upset

or mentally fatigued
When our senses are impaired
When our measuring instruments are inexact,
temperamental or inaccurate
On the other hand, critical thinkers should be able to
recognize that people vary in their powers of observation.
For instance, some people see and hear better than others,
hence they may be better at making observations than those
whose vision or hearing is less acute. Some people have
special training or experience that makes them better
observers. For instance, customs agents and professionals
counsellors, even those who wear glasses or hearing aids,
are better able than most of us to detect signs of
nervousness or discomfort in people they observe.
Our beliefs, hopes, fears and expectations also affect our
observations. Tell someone that a house is infested with
rats and he is likely to believe he or she sees evidence of
rats. Inform someone who believes in ghosts that a house
is haunted and she may well believe she sees evidence of
ghosts.
May be most important of all, our personal interests and
biases affect our perceptions and judgements we base on
them. We overlook many of the mean and selfish actions
102
Thinking and Problem Solving

of the people we like or love- and when we are infatuated

with someone, everything that person does seems
wonderful. By contrast, people we detest can hardly do
anything that we do not perceive as mean and selfish.
Finally the reliability of our observations is no better than
the reliability of our memories, except in those cases where
we have the means at our disposal to record our
observations. And memory as most of us know can be
deceptive. Critical thinkers are always alert to the
possibility that what they remember having observed may
not be what they did observe.
NB. Even though first-hand observations are not infallible,
they are still the best source of information we have. Any
factual report that conflicts with our own direct
observations is subject to serious doubt.
Does the claim conflict with our background
information?
Factual claims must always be evaluated against our
background information- that is an immense body of
justified beliefs that consists of facts we learn from our own
direct observations and facts we learn from others. Such
information is ‘background’ because we may not be able to
specify where we learnt it, unlike something we know
because we witnessed it this morning.

103
Thinking and Problem Solving

Much of our background information is well confirmed by

a variety of sources. Factual claims that conflict with this
store of information are usually quite properly dismissed,
even if we cannot disprove them through direct
observation. We immediately reject the claim ‘palm trees
grow in abundance near the North Pole’ even though we
are not in a position to confirm or disprove the statement
by direct observation.
Assessing the credibility of the source
Our guiding principle in evaluating unsupported
informational claims requires that they come from credible
sources. How then do you determine that a source is
credible?
In general, the more knowledgeable a person is about a
given subject, the more reason there is to accept what the
person says about it. If Denis knows more about
automobile mechanics than Sanders, you have that much
more reason to accept Denis’ diagnosis of your car’s
problem rather than Sanders.
As concerns observation reports, supposing two people are
making eyewitness reports; the one who knows more about
the subject is the more credible because that person is in
general more apt to make accurate and reliable
observations about occurrences within his or her sphere of

104
Thinking and Problem Solving

expertise. A musician will generally make more accurate

observations than the rest of us about the intonation of the
wind instruments in last Friday’s concert, a carpenter will
be more reliable in reporting on the House being built down
the street, and a chef will be better at telling us what herbs
and spices were used in a sauce at a new restaurant.
When considering the credibility of the person who asserts
a claim, then an important factor is that person’s relevant
background information.
Experts: Linda may know more about engines than
Claudia but that does not mean that she is an expert. Who
is then an expert? One who through education, training or
experience, has special knowledge or ability in a subject.
The informational claims made by experts are the most
reliable of such claims, provided they fall into the area of
expertise. This is true even if two conflicting claims are
both reports of first-hand observations: if one of the claims
is made an expert and the other by a layperson, there is
more reason to accept the claim of the former and not the
latter. NB: We have to consider the claims of experts
carefully because there is always a tendency of thinking
that whatever qualifies someone as an expert in one field
automatically qualifies that person in other areas.
Possessing the ability to become an expert is entirely
different from actually being an expert. Thus,
105
Thinking and Problem Solving

informational claims put forth by experts about subjects

outside their fields are not automatically more acceptable
than claims put forth by non-experts. The main factors that
establish a person’s expertise are as follows: Education,
experience, accomplishment, reputation and position. It is
not always easy to evaluate the credentials of an expert and
credentials vary considerably from one field to another
The News Media: Our best and most common sources of
information about current events are newspapers,
newsmagazines, and the electronic media, radio and
television. Generally speaking newspapers offer the
broadest coverage of general news, the electronic media
the most severely edited and least detailed (with the
exception of certain extended-coverage programs and of
some public broadcasting system programs);
newsmagazine fall somewhere in the middle, although they
usually offer extended coverage in their feature stories.
News reports, especially those that appear in major
metropolitan newspapers, national newsmagazines, and
television and radio news programs tend to be credible
sources of information. This claim is subject to much
qualification, namely: the breadth of coverage from such
news sources is restricted by space, by their audience’s
interests, and by the concerns of advertisers, pressure
groups and government officials. The accessibility of

106
Thinking and Problem Solving

reliable reports also restricts coverage because

governments, corporations and individuals often simply
withhold information. The location, structure and headline
of news story in both print and electronic media can be
misleading about what is important or essential in the story.
The selective presentation of facts is a widely used
approach to persuasion in our society, not just by groups
with their own agendas but by the supposedly objective
news media. There is no guarantee that the media are
giving us ‘the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth.’ The news they present is subject to shaping by the
conscious and unconscious perspectives and purposes of
publishers, editors and owners as well as the groups
mentioned above.
Reporting the News: The popular notion of the
hardworking investigative reporter who ferrets out facts,
tracks down elusive sources, and badgers people for inside
information is largely a creation of movie makers. No news
service can afford to devote more than a small portion of
its resources to real investigative reporting. The great bulk
of news is given to reporters, not dug up after weeks or days
or even hours of investigation. Press conferences and press
releases are the standard means of getting news from both
government and private industry into the mass media. And
because spokespeople in neither government nor industry

107
Thinking and Problem Solving

are especially stupid or self-destructive, they tend to

produce news items that they and the people they represent
want to see in the media. Further because reporters depend
on sources in governmental and private institutions to pass
items along, reporters who offend those sources are not
likely to have them very long. This situation has both good
and bad sides. On the one hand, the media are independent
of the government, thus making it very difficult for
government officials to dictate exactly what gets printed or
broadcast. On the other hand, the media as businesses have
to do whatever it takes to make a profit, even if this affects
which items make the headlines and which are left out
entirely.
Who Listens to the News? We come now to another
problem with relying on the mass media for a real
understanding of events. Much of what goes on in the
world, including many of the most important events, is not
only complicated but also not very exciting. Sensational,
unusual and easily understood subjects can be counted on
to receive more attention than the unexciting, the usual and
the complicated, even if the latter are much more important
in the long run. The same kind of mass preference holds for
people as well as issues and events. The number of movie
stars and celebrities interviewed on talk shows is widely
disproportionate to the effect these individuals have on

108
Thinking and Problem Solving

most of our lives. But they are entertaining in ways that,

say the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board is not. It is
not bad to be entertained. However, overindulgence of our
desire to be entertained at the expense of our need to be
informed is a mistake. If we count on the media to indulge
us, they will give us what we pay for. Competition for
readers and viewers has become fierce, and the tactics the
media employ to attract an audience has begun to endanger
the very idea of an independent, honest, straightforward
press. Television in particular has developed new means of
coming up with sensational stories, stories that may not
have happened at all but for the presence of television
cameras. The large number of cable channels, some with
twenty four hours of news to fill, often have to scrape pretty
hard to find anything newsworthy; and when nothing turns
up, they may be forced to make something up- or at least
make a story out of something that isn’t really worth
reporting. The numerous commentators these days are paid
to attract attention, not to provide factual information or
insight. As critical thinkers, we should be even more
sceptical of what you see on television news now than ever
before; and there never was reason for too much
confidence.
The Internet: Our newest source of information is the
Internet- the amalgamation of electronic lines and

109
Thinking and Problem Solving

connections that allows nearly anyone with a computer and

a modem to link up with nearly any other similarly
equipped person on the planet. Although the Internet offers
great benefits, the information it provides must be
evaluated with even more caution than information from
the print media newspapers and magazines or electronic
media such as radio or television. There are basically two
kinds of information sources on the Internet:
1. Commercial and institutional sources
2. Individual and group sites on the World Wide Web
(www.)
In the first category, we have just to mention a few the
online services provided by newsmagazines, large
electronic news organizations and government institutions.
The second category includes everything else you will find
on the Web- an amazing assortment of good information,
entertainment of widely varying quality, hot tips
advertisements, fraudulent offers, outright lies, and even
the opportunity to meet the person of your dreams (or your
nightmares)! For instance there are people who have met
their current wives online and they corresponded via e-mail
for a time before meeting in person.
NB: Just as the fact that a claim appears in print or on
television does not make it true, so it is for claims you rush
across online. Keep in mind that the information you get
110
Thinking and Problem Solving

from a source is only as good as that source. Remember

also that any individual or group can put up a Web site.
And they can say anything they want to on it. You have
about as much reason to believe the claims you find on such
sites as you would if they came from any other stranger,
except you cannot look this one in the eye.
Reading Materials required for Topic Six
Allen, Mathew (2004). Smart Thinking: Skills for
Critical Understanding and Writing, 2nd Edn. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001).
Critical Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Bagini Julian and Fosi Peter S. (2003).The
Philosopher’s Toolkit: A Compendium of Philosophical
Concepts and Methods, Blackwell Publishing.

Bibliography
Allen, Mathew (2004). Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical
Understanding and Writing, 2nd Edn. Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Ayer, A. J. (1946). Language, Truth and Logic, Penguin
Books

111
Thinking and Problem Solving

Bagini Julian and Fosi Peter S. (2003).The Philosopher’s

Toolkit: A Compendium of Philosophical Concepts and
Methods, Blackwell Publishing.
Borruso, Silvano (1998). The Art of Thinking: Chats on
Logic, Nairobi: St. Paul Communications/Daughters of
St. Paul.
Brooke Noel Moore and Parker Richard, (2001). Critical
Thinking, 6th Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Copi M. Irving and Cohen Carl, (1994). Introduction to
Logic, 9th Edn. Macmillan College Publishing
Company.
Epstein, Richard L. and Kernberger Carolyn, (2006).
The Pocket Guide to Critical Thinking, Thomson
Wadsworth.
Groarke, Leo A. and Tindale, Christopher W (2004).
Good Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to
Critical Thinking, 3rd Edn. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Ochieng`-Odhiambo F. (2009). A Companion to
Philosophy, Nairobi: Consolata Institute of Philosophy
Press.

112
Thinking and Problem Solving

Oriare, Nyarwath, (2010). Traditional Logic: An

Introduction, Nairobi: Consolata Institute of Philosophy
Press.
Sumbye Kapena, (2003). How to Deal with Stubborn
Habits: Keys to Changing Undesirable Behaviour,
Nairobi, St. Paul Publications/Daughters of St. Paul.
Thomson, Anne (2002). Critical Reasoning: A Practical
Introduction, 2nd Edn. London: Routledge.
Sample Cat Questions
1. What are the practical usefulness of logic? (10 marks)
2. Examine the distinction between deductive and
inductive inferences (10 marks)
3. Distinguish between categorical and hypothetical
propositions (10 marks)
4. Asses the distinction between soundness and validity
(10 marks)
5. Explain the standard form of a categorical proposition
(10 marks)
6. Explain why critical thinking is such an important skill
(10 marks)
7. Explain why some opinions are better than others (10
marks)
Sample Exam Questions

113
Thinking and Problem Solving

1. Ideally, the study of philosophy nurtures our capacity

for making informed choices. Discuss (10 marks)
2. Why should we not confuse the equal value of people
with the equal value of people’s opinions?
3. Why should we treat information from internet with
more caution that the information from print or
electronic media? (10 marks)
4. Assess the four guidelines which can help one get
organized in order to write clearly (10 marks)
5. Examine three types of ambiguities in critical thinking
(10 marks)
6. Distinguish among good, valid and sound arguments
(10 marks)
7. Discuss the four conditions that must stand in order to
accept unsupported claims (10 marks)

114