Critical Thinking #7

Critical Thinking #7  Arguments

It has been awhile since my last blog. Our world seems to be going to hell in a hand basket, what with white supremist, bigoted, domestic terrorists on the one hand and evil, authoritarian despots attacking global democracy on the other. I remain an optimist, affirming the good in people and the energy in youth. That's why I continue to teach and off this crash course on critical thinking, believing it can help us navigate out way through today's challenges.

So, lesson #7 Arguments. Our world is very polarized, full of arguments. That is why it is necessary and important to stop and define the word. I am not talking about the emotional screaming we do everyday, failing to listen to others and refusing to seek understanding within the chaos. Rather, here and in the classroom and, hopefully, in the circles we can influence, an argument is better understood as a "process." It is an attempt to work our way through our disagreements to arrive at a better solution. It is collaboration, not competition. Seen this way, we humanize those with whom we disagree instead of demonizing them.

An argument is a process, most effective when others can understand how we got to the conclusion we did. It technically has two parts: premises/reasons/evidence that lead to a conclusion or claim. Arguments preferably have more than one premise but definitely only one conclusion.

There are two types of arguments: (1) deductive arguments go from general premises to a specific conclusion. If the premises are true, the conclusion MUST be true. Deductive arguments offer certainty. (2) inductive arguments offer reasonable certainty. They go from specific premises to general conclusions. These premises offer some evidence. Inductive arguments rely on the quality of the evidence. Having said this, you might recognize that the scientific method relies heavily on inductive reasoning/arguments. 

Two more terms are relevant here. A SOUND argument is one that has the correct structure (premises that flow into a conclusion) and all the premises are true. A VALID argument is one in which the conclusion logically follows from the premises. If a premise is not true, the argument is not sound but can be valid. NOTICE THE NECESSITY OF VERIFYING THE TRUTH OF PREMISES!

One other word before leaving this step in critical thinking. An enthymeme is an unstated assumption. It can cause horrendous problems when unchallenged. They can be true, but not always.

In conclusion, how do we engage in civil arguments?

Listen, really listen to understand.

When engaged in the process, look for indicator words such as "therefore" and "in conclusion."

Ask yourself and the other, "what is the main point?"

Examine the claims, the language, and the quality of the evidence.

(1) are the claims reasonable? (2) do the premises support the conclusion? (3) how relevant are the types of evidence used? (4) how strong is the evidence? (5) what is the tone [combative, compelling, pleading] of the author of the evidence? (6) is the language emotive? (7) is the evidence credible and the source of the evidence credible?

Do I have the intellectual humility to admit when I am wrong? The point of an argument is not to win but to come to a better understanding.