Introduction

What you’ll learn to do: define critical thinking and its role in your education

The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.

—Christopher Hitchens, author and journalist

By the end of this section, you will be able to explain critical thinking, describe the role that logic plays in critical thinking, and identify how critical thinking skills can be used to evaluate information. You’ll also define information literacy and describe how critical thinking skills can be used to solve problems by identifying strategies for developing yourself as a critical thinker.

Critical Thinking

Thinking comes naturally. You don’t have to make it happen—it just does. But you can make it happen in different ways. For example, you can think positively or negatively. You can think with your heart and you can think with rational judgment. You can also think strategically and analytically, and mathematically and scientifically. These are a few of the multiple ways in which the mind can process thought.

What are some forms of thinking you use? When do you use them and why?

As a college student, you are tasked with engaging and expanding your thinking skills. One of the most important thinking skills is critical thinking. Critical thinking is important because it relates to nearly all tasks, situations, topics, careers, environments, challenges, and opportunities. It’s a “domain-general” thinking skill—not a thinking skill that’s reserved for one subject alone or restricted to a particular subject area. Critical thinking is used in every domain, from physics to auto mechanics. It is often employed to problem solve when we are puzzled by something or to reveal that there is an error in common ways of thinking about things. Thus, critical thinking is essential for revealing biases.

For example, Galileo used a common form of reasoning called reductio ad absurdum (Latin for “reduce to absurdity) to show that the physics of his day was mistaken. People at that time believed that the heavier something was, the faster it would fall. Galileo knew this common conception was mistaken and he proved it both empirically and conceptually. Here is how he proved it conceptually. Suppose you have two objects, one heavier (call it B) than the other (call it A). Suppose the heavier object falls faster. When you put the lighter object under the heavier object (c), the lighter object should slow down the heavier object. On the other hand, gluing together both objects results in a heavier object (c), which should fall even faster than (b). See diagram here. The contradiction proves by reductio ad absurdum that the assumption must be false. This is just one example, but the form of reasoning (reductio ad absurdum) is the same across every domain—from science to religion to auto mechanics. The form of reasoning is just this: assume for the sake of the argument that A is true. If we can then show that A leads to a contradiction (literally where two statements are asserted that cannot possibly be true), then we prove that A is false.

Great leaders have highly attuned critical thinking skills, and you can too. In fact, you probably have a lot of these skills already. Of all your thinking skills, critical thinking may have the greatest value.

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is clear, reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do. It means asking probing questions like, “How do we know?” or “Is this true in every case or just in this instance?” It involves being skeptical and challenging assumptions, rather than simply memorizing facts or blindly accepting what you hear or read.

Imagine, for example, that you’re reading a history textbook. You wonder who wrote it and why because you detect certain biases in the writing. You find that the author has a limited scope of research focused only on a particular group within a population. In this case, your critical thinking reveals that there are other sides to the story.

Who are critical thinkers, and what characteristics do they have in common? Critical thinkers are usually curious and reflective people. They like to explore and probe new areas and seek knowledge, clarification, and new solutions. They ask pertinent questions, evaluate statements and arguments, and they distinguish between facts and opinions. They are also willing to examine their own beliefs, possessing a manner of humility that allows them to admit a lack of knowledge or understanding when needed. They are open to changing their mind. Perhaps most of all, they actively enjoy learning, and seeking new knowledge is a lifelong pursuit.

This description may well be you!

No matter where you are on the road to being a critical thinker, you can always more fully develop and finely tune your skills. Doing so will help you develop more balanced arguments, express yourself clearly, read critically, and glean important information efficiently. Critical thinking skills will help you in any profession or any circumstance of life, from science to art to business to teaching. With critical thinking, you become a clearer thinker and problem solver.

The following video from Lawrence Bland presents the major concepts and benefits of critical thinking.

You can view the transcript for “Critical Thinking.wmv” here.

Supporting Claims with Evidence

Thinking and constructing analyses based on your thinking will bring you in contact with a great deal of information. Some of that information will be factual, and some will not be. You need to be able to distinguish between facts and opinions so you know how to support your arguments. Begin with the following basic definitions:

• Fact: a statement that can be supported by objective evidence such as observation, argument, or research.
• Opinion: a statement whose truth depends on someone’s desire(s) rather than objective evidence. Opinions that cannot be supported by objective evidence are at most subjectively true.

Of course, the tricky part is that most people do not label statements as fact and opinion, so you need to be aware and recognize the difference as you go about honing your critical thinking skills.

You probably have heard the old saying “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions,” which may be true, but conversely not everyone is entitled to their own facts. Facts are true for everyone, not just those who want to believe in them. For example, “mice are mammals”  is a fact since it has been established by scientific research. In contrast, “mice make the best pets” is an opinion (since best means whatever one likes the best—and that is a matter of one’s subjective desires).

Defending against Bias

Once you have all your information gathered and you have checked your sources for currency and validity, you need to direct your attention to how you’re going to present your now well-informed analysis. Be careful on this step to recognize your own possible biases (metacognition). Facts are verifiable statements; opinions are statements without supporting evidence. Stating an opinion is just that. You could say, “Blue is the best color,” and that would be your opinion. In contrast, suppose you were to conduct research and find the use of blue paint in mental hospitals reduces patients’ heart rates by twenty-five percent and contributes to fewer angry outbursts from patients. In that case, the statement “blue paint in mental hospitals reduces patients’ heart rate by twenty-five percent” would be a fact supported by objective evidence.

Not everyone will accept your analysis, which can be frustrating. Most people resist change and have firm beliefs on both important issues and less significant preferences. With all the competing information surfacing online, on the news, and in general conversation, you can understand how confusing it can be to make any decisions. Look at all the reliable, valid sources that claim different approaches to be the best diet for healthy living: ketogenic, low-carb, vegan, vegetarian, low fat, raw foods, paleo, Mediterranean, etc. All you can do in this sort of situation is conduct your own serious research, check your sources, and write clearly and concisely to provide your analysis of the information for consideration. You cannot force others to accept your stance, but you can show your evidence in support of your thinking, being as persuasive as possible without lapsing into your own personal biases.

A Model for Critical Thinking

Students, scholars, and organizations looking for a framework for critical thinking frequently rely on the RED Model. The RED Model was developed by Pearson and consists of three components, (1) Recognize Assumptions; (2) Evaluate Arguments; (3) Draw Conclusions. The video below provides more information on the RED Model. ^[1]

https://youtu.be/8-V4voD_E5A

Logic

Critical Thinking and Logic

Critical thinking is fundamentally a process of questioning information and data. You may question the information you read in a textbook, or you may question what a politician or a professor or a classmate says. You can also question a commonly held belief or a new idea. With critical thinking, anything and everything is subject to question and examination for the purpose of logically constructing reasoned perspectives.

What Is Logic, and Why Is It Important in Critical Thinking?

The word logic comes from the ancient Greek word logike, referring to the science or art of reasoning. Using logic, a person evaluates arguments and reasoning and strives to distinguish between good and bad reasoning. Using logic, you can evaluate ideas or claims people make, make good decisions, and form sound beliefs about the world.^[2]

Critical thinking involves reflective thinking, considering bias, and remaining open-minded and curious. It also demands the intellectual rigor to deconstruct and evaluate claims made by others while also making sound and strong arguments, ourselves. Logic is the study and evaluation of arguments to distinguish good reasoning from bad. When using logic in critical thinking, you will consider the logical structure in order to evaluate its quality. In the next section, we will explore what logical structure is.

Logical Structure

Suppose I argue as follows: if it is raining, then the ground is wet; but since it is not raining, it follows that the ground is not wet. This is an argument whose conclusion is the statement “the ground is not wet.” The two premises of the argument are the conditional statement “if it is raining, then the ground is not wet” and the statement “it is not raining.”  We can rewrite the argument to clearly show each of the statements—the two premises and the conclusion—like this:

1. If it is raining, then the ground is wet.
2. The ground is not wet.
3. Therefore, it is not raining.

This example is a valid argument. A valid argument is an argument whose premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion. In other words, a valid argument is one such that on the assumption of the truth of the premises, it is impossible for the conclusion to be false. Think about the previous argument. Can you see that if we accept the two premises (lines 1 and 2) as true, then we must logically accept the conclusion (line 3) to be true? Valid arguments are the gold standard of reasoning in logic—it is what all arguments aspire to be. When you have constructed a valid argument, no one can argue with your reasoning (although they can still disagree with you regarding whether your premises are true). What is interesting about the concept of logical validity is that an argument can be valid (i.e., the reasoning can be good) even if the premises are obviously false or absurd. For example, consider this (slightly altered) argument from a scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail:

1. If this woman weighs the same as a duck, then she is is made of wood.
2. Everything made of wood is a witch.
3. This woman does weigh the same as a duck.
4. Therefore, this woman is a witch.

Clearly, the first two premises of this argument (lines 1 and 2) are false. However, if we hold them (and also the premise in line 3) true, then the conclusion follows logically. That is, this argument is a valid argument. Think about the logic of this argument for a second. If we assume that lines 1 and 3 are true, then it follows that the woman is made of wood.  And if that is true then by line 2, it follows that she is a witch, which is the conclusion stated in line 4. This silly argument illustrates that logic is first and foremost about the relationship between premises and conclusion, not the actual truth of the premises. Whether or not the premises of an argument are true is often a matter that is outside logic. For example, if one of the premises of an argument were the statement “some mammals do not give live birth,” then logic alone cannot help you figure out whether that is true. For that you need another disciplines: biology.

Let’s return to the first argument for a second to illustrate what logical structure is. That argument has a certain structure that looks like this:

1. If A then B.
2. Not B.
3. Therefore, not A.

What is interesting about logic is that once we can see the form of an argument, then we can automatically know that the argument is valid without even considering or thinking about the content of the argument. Any argument that has a valid structure is a valid argument. Logic is (in part) the study of these structures. The structure that I have just identified has a name: modus tollens (which in Latin means “way of denying,” since the second premise contains a negation, “not”).  Lines 1 and 3 of the Monty Python argument above also contain a valid structure that looks like this:

1. If A then B.
2. A.
3. Therefore, B.

That argument form is called modus ponens (which in Latin means “way of affirming”).

There are many different valid argument structures; however, this is not a logic course, so we will not consider them all.  The important thing to understand is that logic concerns the strength of the relationship between the premises and the conclusion, and the goal in constructing arguments is to construct valid arguments. Again, valid arguments are such that the premises of the argument leave no possibility that the conclusion could be false. In contrast, invalid arguments are ones where the premises do leave open the possibility that the conclusion is false. In other words, the premises do not imply the truth of the conclusion. If an argument is invalid, then we should be able to give a counterexample that proves the argument is invalid. A counterexample is simply a description of a possible scenario where the premises are true and yet the conclusion is false. Let’s look at an example.

1. If the train is late, Shondra is angry.
2. Shondra is angry.
3. Therefore, the train is late.

If we assume the premises (lines 1 and 2) are true, is it possible for the conclusion to be false? If so, then this would show the argument is invalid. Here’s a hint if you can’t already see the answer: might Shondra be angry for some other reason and yet the train still be on time? Suppose Shondra is angry because she spilled coffee on her favorite pants. If so, then it could still be the case that any time the train is late, Shondra is angry but on this occasion, the train is actually on time. Given this scenario, let’s check line by line the argument. In this scenario are the premises true? Yes, they are—premise 1 is true since Shondra would have been angry if the train were late even though the train wasn’t late and premise 2 is true since Shondra is angry because of the coffee spill. And yet the conclusion is false since the train is not late in this scenario. Thus, we have given a counterexample: we have specified a scenario where the premises are true and yet the conclusion is false. And that means the argument is invalid.

Whereas the gold standard of deductive arguments is validity (as discussed in the last section), the standard of inductive arguments is something less than validity. A strong inductive argument is typically called a cogent argument. It is important to understand the difference between deductive and inductive arguments because you need to understand what kind of argument you are trying to make or evaluate. The main difference between inductive and deductive arguments is that whereas deductive arguments seek to establish their conclusions with absolute certainty, inductive arguments only seek to establish their arguments with a high degree of probability. Here’s an example of a strong inductive argument:

1. All ravens that have ever been observed anywhere in the world have been black.
2. Therefore, all ravens are black.

Notice that this argument doesn’t quite obtain the standard of validity. It is possible that there is a non-black raven somewhere in the world that hasn’t been observed. But even if that is a possibility, it seems that the “all ravens are black” conclusion is still highly likely, given the amount of confirmation that the claim possesses (i.e., the number of ravens that have been observed and that all of them have been black).

Unlike deductive arguments, there is no inductive form that is strong. Any inductive argument could be strong or weak depending on the details of the argument. In contrast, deductive arguments have valid logical structures such that any argument that possesses an inductive form is thereby a valid argument, regardless of the topic of the argument; meaning that to evaluate inductive arguments, we have to draw on our knowledge of how the world is. We can say a couple of things about strong inductive reasoning, but to further understand these concepts would require a course in logic and/or scientific reasoning. We will conclude this page with a few rules of thumb to keep in mind when it comes to inductive arguments:

• When making inductive generalizations (such as the ravens argument), make sure that the instances in your premises are not susceptible to any kind of sampling bias. For example, even if I have observed many black ravens, if I have only observed them in one part of the world, there is a good chance that my sample of ravens is not representative of all the ravens in the world.
• Many times inductive arguments depend on establishing correlations and we try to infer causation based on correlation. However, this inference must be done carefully. As the saying goes, correlation is not causation; a correlation is not sufficient to establish causation—just because A and B are strongly correlated, or tend to occur together, doesn’t mean that A caused B. To establish that causal claim would require both a plausible causal story we can tell and (ideally) further test to determine whether A really does cause B.
• Another common inductive argument is an analogical argument. Analogical arguments attempt to compare two different things (A and B) and argue that since they are similar in relevant respects, if A has a certain property (x), then B must have that property as well. The thing to be on the lookout for here is whether A and B really are similar in relevant respects; because if they aren’t, the logic of the analogical argument breaks down.

Evaluating Information

Evaluating information can be one of the most complex tasks you will be faced with in college. But if you utilize the following four strategies, you will be well on your way to success:

1. Read for understanding by using text coding.
2. Examine arguments.
3. Clarify thinking.
4. Cultivate habits of mind.

Read for Understanding by Using Text Coding

When you read and take notes, use the text coding strategy. Text coding is a way of tracking your thinking while reading. It entails marking the text and recording what you are thinking either in the margins or perhaps on Post-it notes. As you make connections and ask questions in response to what you read, you monitor your comprehension and enhance your long-term understanding of the material. This kind of active reading is a kind of metacognition and is importantly different from more passive reading. You will get a lot more out of your reading if you read actively.

With text coding, mark important arguments and key facts. Indicate where you agree and disagree or have further questions. You don’t necessarily need to read every word, but make sure you understand the concepts or the intentions behind what is written. Feel free to develop your own shorthand style when reading or taking notes. The following are a few options to consider using while coding text.

Examine Arguments

When you examine arguments or claims that an author, speaker, or other source is making, your goal is to identify and examine the hard facts. You can use the spectrum of authority strategy for this purpose. The spectrum of authority strategy assists you in identifying the hot end of an argument—feelings, beliefs, cultural influences, and societal influences. The cold end of an argument is the scientific influences.

The following video explains this strategy by describing a spectrum of examples involving culture, beliefs, and feelings as the hot end of the spectrum. Whereas scientific subjects such as geometry, physics, and biology are more on the cold side of this spectrum. Take notes about the examples of the spectrum of authority.

You can view the transcript for “Critical Thinking 101: Spectrum of Authority” here.

Clarify Thinking

When you use critical thinking to evaluate information, you need to clarify your thinking to yourself and likely to others. Doing this clarification well is mainly a process of asking and answering probing questions, such as the logic questions discussed earlier. Design your questions to fit your needs, but be sure to cover adequate ground. What is the purpose? What question are we trying to answer? What point of view is being expressed? What assumptions are we or others making? What are the facts and data we know, and how do we know them? What are the concepts we’re working with? What are the conclusions, and do they make sense? What are the implications?

Cultivate Habits of Mind

Habits of mind are the personal commitments, values, and standards you have about the principle of good thinking. Consider your intellectual commitments, values, and standards. Do you approach problems with an open mind, a respect for truth, and an inquiring attitude? Some good habits to have when thinking critically are being receptive to having your opinions changed, having respect for others, being independent and not accepting something is true until you’ve had the time to examine the available evidence, being fair-minded, having respect for a reason, having an inquiring mind, not making assumptions, and always questioning your own conclusions—in other words, developing an intellectual work ethic. Try to work these qualities into your daily life.

Students interested in practicing these habits of mind should explore the database Opposing Viewpoints which is available through the FSW library. This database provides viewpoint articles, as well as scholarly sources, on a wide variety of controversial topics. Reading and evaluating the arguments in viewpoint articles will allow students the opportunity to identify assumptions, recognize bias, evaluate source credibility and analyze arguments.

Problem-Solving with Critical Thinking

Most of us face problems that we must solve every day. While some problems are more complex than others, we can apply critical thinking skills to every problem by asking questions like, what information am I missing? Why and how is it important? What are the contributing factors that lead to the problem? What resources are available to solve the problem? These questions are just the start of being able to think of innovative and effective solutions. Read through the following critical thinking, problem-solving process to identify steps you are already familiar with as well as opportunities to build a more critical approach to solving problems.

Problem-Solving Process

Step 1: Define the problem

Albert Einstein once said, “If I had an hour to solve a problem, I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and five minutes thinking about solutions.”

Often, when we first hear of or learn about a problem, we do not have all the information. If we immediately try to find a solution without having a thorough understanding of the problem, then we may only be solving a part of the problem.  This is called a “band-aid fix,” or when a symptom is addressed, but not the actual problem. While these band-aid fixes may provide temporary relief, if the actual problem is not addressed soon, then the problem will continue and likely get worse. Therefore, the first step when using critical thinking to solve problems is to identify the problem. The goal during this step is to gather enough research to determine how widespread the problem is, its nature, and its importance.

Step 2: Analyze the Causes

This step is used to uncover assumptions and underlying problems that are at the root of the problem. This step is important since you will need to ensure that whatever solution is chosen addresses the actual cause, or causes, of the problem.

Asking “why” questions to uncover root causes

A common way to uncover root causes is by asking why questions. When we are given an answer to a why question, we will often need to question that answer itself. Thus the process of asking “why” is an iterative process—meaning that it is a process that we can repeatedly apply. When we stop asking why questions depends on what information we need and that can differ depending on what the goals are. For a better understanding, see the example below:

Problem: The lamp does not turn on.

• Why doesn’t the lamp turn on? The fuse is blown.
• Why is the fuse blown? There was an overloaded circuit.
• Why was the circuit overloaded? The hair dryer was on.

If one is simply a homeowner or tenant, then it might be enough to simply know that if the hair dryer is on, the circuit will overload and turn off.  However, one can always ask further why questions, depending on what the goal is. For example, suppose someone wants to know if all hair dryers overload circuits or just this one. We might continue thus:

• Why did this hair dryer overload the circuit? Because hair dryers in general require a lot of electricity.

But now suppose we are an electrical engineer and are interested in designing a more environmentally friendly hairdryer. In that case, we might ask further:

• Why do hair dryers require so much energy?

As you can see from this example, what counts as a root cause depends on context and interests. The homeowner will not necessarily be interested in asking the further why questions whereas others might be.

Step 3: Generate Solutions

The goal of this step is to generate as many solutions as possible. In order to do so, brainstorm as many ideas as possible, no matter how outrageous or ineffective the idea might seem at the time. During your brainstorming session, it is important to generate solutions freely without editing or evaluating any of the ideas. The more solutions that you can generate, the more innovative and effective your ultimate solution might become upon later review.

You might find that setting a timer for fifteen to thirty minutes will help you to creatively push past the point when you think you are done. Another method might be to set a target for how many ideas you will generate. You might also consider using categories to trigger ideas. If you are brainstorming with a group, consider brainstorming individually for a while and then also brainstorming together as ideas can build from one idea to the next.

Step 4: Select a Solution

Once the brainstorming session is complete, then it is time to evaluate the solutions and select the more effective one.  Here you will consider how each solution will address the causes determined in step 2. It is also helpful to develop the criteria you will use when evaluating each solution, for instance, cost, time, difficulty level, resources needed, etc. Once your criteria for evaluation are established, then consider ranking each criterion by importance since some solutions might meet all criteria, but not to equally effective degrees.

In addition to evaluating by criteria, ensure that you consider the possibilities and consequences of all serious contenders to address any drawbacks to a solution. Lastly, ensure that the solutions are actually feasible.

Step 5: Put Solution into Action

While many problem-solving models stop at simply selecting a solution, in order to actually solve a problem, the solution must be put into action. Here, you take responsibility to create, communicate, and execute the plan with detailed organizational logistics by addressing who will be responsible for what, when, and how.

Step 6: Evaluate progress

The final step when employing critical thinking to problem-solving is to evaluate the progress of the solution. Since critical thinking demands open-mindedness, analysis, and a willingness to change one’s mind, it is important to monitor how well the solution has actually solved the problem in order to determine if any course correction is needed.

While we solve problems every day, following the process to apply more critical thinking approaches in each step by considering what information might be missing; analyzing the problem and causes; remaining open-minded while brainstorming solutions; and providing criteria for, evaluating, and monitoring solutions can help you to become a better problem-solver and strengthen your critical thinking skills.

Information Literacy