Critical Thinking Strategies

Discuss how well reasoned the argument is by following the steps given below: 

• Identify the argument (the main idea) of the passage is. 
• Identify the flaws in the reasoning used, if any. Justify your point of view
• Elaborate on how the argument could be made stronger

Keep in mind the following concepts for effective critical thinking:

• alternative explanation — a competing version of what might have caused the events in question that undercuts or qualifies the original explanation because it too can account for the observed facts
• analysis — the process of breaking something (e.g., an argument) down into its component parts in order to understand how they work together to make up the whole
• argument — a claim or a set of claims with reasons and evidence offered as support; a line of reasoning meant to demonstrate the truth or falsehood of something
• assumption — a belief, often unstated or unexamined, that someone must hold in order to maintain a particular position; something that is taken for granted but that must be true in order for the conclusion to be true
• conclusion — the end point reached by a line of reasoning, valid if the reasoning is sound; the resulting assertion
• counterexample — an example, real or hypothetical, that refutes or disproves a statement in the argument
• evaluation — an assessment of the quality of evidence and reasons in an argument and of the overall merit of an argument

Sample Arguments as discussed in class:

1. Time and again it has been shown that students who attend colleges with low faculty/student ratios get the most well-rounded education. As a result, when my children are ready to attend college, I'll be sure they attend a school with a very small student population.

Which of the following, if true, identifies the greatest flaw in the reasoning above?

1. A low faculty/student ratio is the effect of a well-rounded education, not its source.
2. Intelligence should be considered the result of childhood environment, not advanced education.
3. A very small student population does not by itself, ensure a low faculty/student ratio.
4. Parental desires and preferences rarely determines a child's choice of a college or university.
5. Students must take advantage of the low faculty/student ratio by intentionally choosing small classes.

Answer : C

2. All German philosphers, except for Marx, are idealists.

From which of the following can the statement above be most properly inferred?

1. Except for Marx, if someone is an idealist philosopher, then he or she is German.
2. Marx is the only non-German philosopher who is an idealist.
3. If a German is an idealist, then he or she is a philosopher, as long as he or she is not Marx.
4. Marx is not an idealist German philosopher.
5. Aside from the philosopher Marx, if someone is a German, then he or she is an idealist.

          Answer : E

Sample Argument Analysis as discussed in class:

The roads in Mumbai are very bad. BMC is responsible for the maintenance of the roads. Therefore, BMC is a very bad organisation. 

Answer points: 

Analysing the structure of the argument: 

• The author has stated that the poor maintenance of the roads is sufficient cause to prove that the BMC is a bad organisation. 

Conclusion / Main Argument : BMC is a bad organisation. 

Premise / Reason(s) given :   Maintenance of the roads is BMC's responsibility and BMC has not fulfilled its role as the condition of the roads are not good.    

Identifying the flaws in the argument: 

• The author has stated that the poor maintenance of the roads is sufficient cause to prove that the BMC is a bad organisation. 
• The author assumes that the condition of the roads is only BMC's responsibility and that no external factors caused the bad condition of the roads. 
• Moreover, s/he provides no evidence to justify that the BMC's organisation capability is linked to its maintaining the roads. After all, the BMC could have capably fulfilled its other responsibilities and only been not up to the mark in the case of one of its assignments. 

To strengthen the argument: 

• The author should have stated what makes a good organisation and how the BMC fails to meet the standards. 
• The author could also have proven how the BMC alone is responsible for the poor maintenance of the roads. 
• The author should have illustrated how the maintenance of roads and the BMC's organisational capabilities are related.