Lecture Two (2)
Chapter Two (2)
CRITICAL/CLEAR THINKING
That is not what I
ask for….!!!
What is
she/he
saying….???
Do I look like an
animal…???
1/8/2018
Allen Chaland Monyomb
Am I an
animal…???
Is it true that sugar is
made from
apples….???
1
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Objectives
• To recognize the importance of clear and logical thinking in all aspects of
business communication.
• To be able to distinguish between communication messages intended as
arguments, and other terms of messages.
• To distinguish between deductive and inductive argument
• To know what are the characteristics of valid deductive arguments and
strong inductive arguments.
• To recognize the main fallacies which occur in arguments
• To be aware of some of the ethical problems involved in arguments, and
the relationship between rhetoric/idiom and logic.
1/8/2018
2
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Clear thinking
• Define and explain Clear Thinking
Clear thinking is that mode of thinking about any;
 Subject, content, or problem in which
 The thinker (person) improves the quality of his
or her thinking by
 Skillfully analyzing, assessing and reconstructing
it.
Clear thinking is;
It is an assumption of Self-directed, self-disciplined,
self-monitored and self-corrective thinking.
It entails effective communication and problem
solving abilities, as well as a commitment to
overcome our native egocentrism and socio
centrism.
1/8/2018
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
3
Viewpoint-Why Clear Thinking?
The Problem:
Everyone thinks.
It is our nature to do so.
But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial,
uninformed, or downright 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 cultivated.
1/8/2018
4
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Critical thinking is NOT the same as being cross!
Being a good critical thinker doesn’t mean you’re mean, unfriendly,
or a grumpy puppy
1/8/2018
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
5
Importance of Clear Thinking
Clear thinking is about;
 Making good judgment.
 Considers possible viewpoints and results in
interpretations, analysis, and evaluation of
evidence and the conclusions inferred from the
evidence.
 Goes beyond personal opinion and involves
making judgments based on research and
evaluations by;
• Distinguishing between fact and opinion
• Evaluating the validity of information sources
• Analyzing and challenging the observations, facts,
inferences and opinion in an argument
• Evaluating the validity of particular theories and
their application to particular situations.
1/8/2018
A critical thinker is
skilled at articulating
and evaluating
arguments and
understanding how
evidence supports or
opposes a claim.
6
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Argument
The purpose of this chapter is;



to introduce the main types of arguments used in
everyday life,
with a view not only to being able to recognize a
deceptive argument when we see one,
but to be able for convincingly demonstrate to
ourselves and our opponents; the reasons for
such a judgment.
What is an Argument?
An argument is;
 A set of propositions, or statements
 that are designed to convince a reader or
listener
 of a conclusion and that contain at least one
reason (premise) for accepting that conclusion.
1/8/2018
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Argument….
If strek can talk like an
human, then he is a
HUMAN…!!!
7
Argument cont’d…
Position taken is the
STARTING POINT…
1
For presenting a
CONVINCING CASE…
2
Usually presented as a
POSITION STATEMENT .
E.g. Introduction of an
essay….
3
The ARGUMENT is
presented in STAGES….
4
Throughout a
DOCUMENT/ ORAL
PRESENTATION to BUILD
THE CASE.
1/8/2018
5
7
THE OUTCOME 6
TO
CONVINCE/PERSUADE
THE READER/LISTENER
TO ACCEPT THE
ARGUMENT.
A premise is a proposition or claim in
which an argument is based/ from which a
conclusion is drawn.
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
8
1/8/2018
9
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Qualities of An Argument
An argument normally is based on:
1.
QUANTITATIVE
REASONING
2.
QUALITATIVE
REASONING
Asking and
answering them is
an essential skill for
critical/clear
analysis.
Examples of questions asked by critical readers of
academic papers and research articles include;





Are the sources of evidence credible?
Do the inferences drawn are over generalized?
Is opinion presentable as fact?
Are the results verifiable?
Are the points made in the study supported by
evidence?
 Is the sample size enough to fulfill the aim of the
study?
1/8/2018
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
CRITICAL QUESTIONS are
the KEY to critical/clear
thinking because they
assist you to DISTINGUISH
between FACT and
OPINION, UNCOVER
ASSUMPTIONS,
EVALUATE AND DRAW
CONCLUSIONS based on
SOUND LOGIC and SOLID
EVIDENCE.
Critical questions facilitate
analysis and evaluation of
the quality of a
writing/communication,
lecture, textbook etc.
10
Inductive & Deductive Arguments
We can distinguish between inductive and
deductive argument.
These two categories;
 Cover most of the arguments we are likely to analyze
or construct,
 And we can be reassured by the fact that we are
participating in a way of clear/critical thinking which
 Stretches right back to the philosophers of Ancient
Greece.
The difference between a deductive and an inductive
argument comes from the sort of RELATIONSHIP the
WRITER/SPEAKER presents between the
PREMISES and the CONCLUSION.
1/8/2018
A premise is a
proposition or claim
in which an argument
is based/ from which
a conclusion is
drawn.
An argument is
a set of propositions,
or statements
that are designed to
convince a reader or
listener
of a conclusion and
that contain at least
one reason (premise)
for accepting that
conclusion.
11
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Inductive Reasoning/Arguments
Inductive reasoning/argument is;
 an argument where the premises provide (or appear to provide) some degree of
support (but less than complete support) for the conclusion.
 The argument is inductive when the writer/ speaker thinks that the truth of the
premises does not definitely establish the truth of the conclusion, but provides
good reason to believe the conclusion is true.
 Reasoning/argument is from the specific to the general viewpoint.
Example; “An Apple is edible. An apple is a fruit.
Therefore, all fruits are edible. Evidently, it is
from the particular to the general viewpoint.
1/8/2018
12
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Inductive Reasoning/Arguments cont’d…
Inductive reasoning/argument is
further divided into three main
categories:
Generalization
Analogy
It corresponds most closely to the explanation already given
of inductive reasoning. It is the most obvious example of
induction at work. It is a claim about an event in general. It is
formed by taking the “inductive leap”. It gives a general,
rather than a specific, character to a subject. The inductive
generalization is a logical fallacy based on insufficient
evidence. For example; It will rain tomorrow.
Concerns two situations, things or ideas are alike in
observable ways and will tend to be alike in many other ways.
It purposely is for comparison of two things to determine
whether similarity exits between them or exist in other ways.
Example; Alcohol is a drug. So is tobacco. They alter
perceptions, have impact physiological and psychological
systems and are regulated substances.
1/8/2018
13
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Inductive Reasoning/Arguments cont’d…
Inductive reasoning/argument is further divided into
three main categories:
Casual
Relationship
A.
Establishing a cause and effect relationship between two
things is also a form of inductive reasoning. In this type of
reasoning, two events are taken into account to see if one
caused the other. Casual relations can be considered in three
kinds of problems:
B.
Two conditions exit that
suggest that one may on
some way be
responsible for the other.
We test to see if one
really is the cause, or
perhaps somehow
connected to the cause
of the other. Refer to
textbook example(s).
A condition exists, and it
is necessary to find out
what caused it. The
result, or effect, is known
so the logical task is to
work back from the
effect to the cause. Refer
to textbook example(s).
1/8/2018
C.
The third problem which
we try to solve by
establishing a casual
relation is in which we
know what conditions
exits and the cause and
we are trying to find the
result or effect. We are
reasoning from cost to
effect. Refer to textbook
example(s)
14
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Deductive Reasoning/Arguments
Deductive reasoning/argument is;
 Based on logical necessity, where the premises
provide (or appear to provide) complete
support for the conclusion.
 The argument is deductive when the truth of
the premises establishes the truth of the
conclusion.
 A common form of deductive argument is a
syllogism. (Refer side note)
 Reasoning/argument from the general to the
specific viewpoint.
1/8/2018
Syllogism is a logical
argument involving three
propositions/statements: a
formal deductive argument
made up of a major
premise, a minor premise,
and a conclusion.
Example 1: is, "All birds
have feathers, penguins are
birds, therefore penguins
have feathers.“
Example 2: “All animals’
breath oxygen, Camels are
animals. Therefore, camels
breathe oxygen.”
15
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Common Fallacies In Argument
Definition:
Fallacy (ies)
Is an argument in which the premises given for the
conclusion do not provide the needed degree of
support. There is an Error In The Reasoning. It is a type
of LOGICAL ERROR that leads to a false statement or
belief or simply mistakes in reasoning.
There are about eleven (11) common fallacies (logical errors) found in
arguments as used in the process of Critical Thinking for
communication. Theses are:
Refer to next couple of
slides…..
1/8/2018
16
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Common Fallacies In Argument cont’d…
Argument Against The Person
This argument relates to an attempt being
made to discredit a point of view by
discrediting the person associated with it. The
argument is attacked by trying to destroy the
arguer’s reputation. Refer textbook example
Misuse of Authority
The use of authority can be convincing when
that person is an authority on the topic being
discussed. Used otherwise, it is misleading in
and irrelevant. Refer textbook example.
Appeal to Commonsense
1/8/2018
Using this approach, the speaker tries to win
support for his/her case by implying that
everyone already agrees with this position,
and that to disagree is to be an extremist and
out of touch with reality. Refer textbook
example.
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
17
Common Fallacies In Argument cont’d…
Criticism Forestaller
A dishonest trick of argument in the usage of
words and phrased designed to make fair
criticisms of the argument more difficult. Refer
textbook example.
Emotive Language
No matter how rational we may think we are. It
is possible not be affected by emotive
language, by the subjective feelings we
associate with some words. Yes these are
usually irrelevant to the logical strength or
weakness of the argument. Refer textbook
example.
Absolute Terms
1/8/2018
Like emotive language, the use of absolutes
such as always, never, hopeless, countless,
infinite etc. are likely to sway an argument
unreasonably. Absolute terms are hardly ever
accurate in world which mostly relative. Refer
textbook example
18
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Faulty Generalization
Two types of faulty generalizations were
discussed in the section on inductive
reasoning. These were either basing a
generalization on too little evidence (hasty
generalization) or basing one on evidence
which is not typically of the whole
(unrepresentative generalization).
The After This, Therefore
Because Of This” Fallacy”
It is an abuse of the causal relations
component of inductive reasoning. For many
people, it is a very strong temptation to
assume that, because one thing happens
before another. It is the cause of it. Such
claims must always treat very skeptically, and
other more convincing, evidence produced.
For example; Refer textbook example.
False Analogy
Using this approach, the speaker tries to win
support for his/her case by implying that
everyone also an abuse of one aspect of
inductive reasoning. A false analogy is an
argument resting on a comparison of two
situations that are essentially different. Refer
textbook example.
1/8/2018
19
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Common Fallacies In Argument cont’d…
False Classification
An abuse of deductive reasoning, as we have
already seen false classification here means
assuming that only two choices exit when
more than two are available. It is more
colorfully known as the black-or-white fallacy
for obvious reasons. Refer textbook example.
Misuse of Statistics
Statistics can be easily misused and abused
and should be treated with extreme caution.
Refer textbook example.
1/8/2018
20
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Summary
 Clear/critical thinking is a process for taking charge
of and accepting responsibility for your own
thinking.
 Critical reading allows you to enquire into existing
material and analyze the ideas, arguments and
supporting evidence in order to verify or critique
the existing body of knowledge.
 Thoughtfully consider the writer’s purpose and use
critical questioning to evaluate the issues,
assumptions, argument, reasoning and conclusion.
Critical reading and questioning enable you to
analyze the quality of reasoning, check for
distortions or bias in the evidence, evaluate the
conclusion against the argument presented and
think about the wider implications.
1/8/2018
21
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Summary Cont’d…
 The basic structure of an argument is
“This because of that’, “This” refers to the
conclusion, while ‘that’ refers to the
support for the conclusion. A valid
argument is based credible evidence that
supports the premise or claim.
 The logic in an argument maybe deductive
or inductive. A deductive argument
applies general principles to reach specific
information to derive a general principle.
 Fallacies are errors in reasoning. They may
over simplify, exclude information, make
appeals to authority or power, attack the
person, ignore the question, make false
analogies and include a range.
1/8/2018
22
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Questions???
1/8/2018
23
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
Review Questions
1.a, g & j
2.a-c
3.a
4.a-c
5.b
1/8/2018
24
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017
The End….
Thank
you
1/8/2018
25
Prepared by Allen C. Monyomb©ITI_Alotau_2017