CRITICAL THINKING & LOGIC of ARGUMENTS
Critical Thinking Dispositions
These are characteristics of one's attitude or personality that facilitate the process of developing CT skills:
Inquisitive
Systematic
Judicious
Truth Seeking
Analytical
Open-minded
Confidence in reasoning
Factors that Influence one's CT Disposition
Culture
There are many factors that can influence one's disposition towards CT, the first of these is culture [6]. There are many aspects of culture that can impact the ability for people to think critically. For instance, religion can negatively impact the development of CT [7].
Many religions are founded upon faith which often requires wholehearted belief without evidence or support, the nature of organized religion counters the very premise of CT which is to evaluate the validity and credibility of any claim.
Growing up in an environment
Growing up in an environment such as this can be detrimental to the development of CT skills. This kind of environment can dampen dispositions that question religious views or examine the validity of religion. Another cultural factor that can be detrimental to a CT disposition is that of authority [8].
Authoritarian parenting style
When a child is raised under the conditions of an authoritarian parenting style it can be detrimental to many aspects of their lives, but especially to their CT skills as they are taught not to question the credibility of authority and often receive punishment if they do.
Authoritarian Classroom
This is also applicable in the classroom[9] where teachers who don’t foster an atmosphere of openness or allow students to question what they are taught can impact CT development as well. Classrooms where questions are rejected or home environments where there is a high level of parental power and control can all cripple the ability of students to think critically. As well, students will have been conditioned to not think this way their entire lives [10].
Children are Natural Critical Thinkers
Critical thinking is an essential skill that allows individuals to analyze, evaluate, and interpret information in a logical and objective manner. While it is often thought of as a skill that is developed in adulthood, children are natural critical thinkers. However, as children grow and are socialized, they may be educated out of critical thinking, leading to a lack of curiosity and the acceptance of ideas without questioning them.
Children who are yet to be socialized often ask critical questions because they are naturally curious and have a desire to understand the world around them. They are not bound by societal norms or expectations and are free to explore their environment with an open mind. They ask questions that challenge assumptions and are not afraid to question authority.
However, as children grow and begin to interact with society, they may learn that questioning authority is not always accepted. They may also learn that there are certain ideas or beliefs that are not to be challenged. This can lead to a decrease in critical thinking and an acceptance of ideas without questioning them.
Military & Critical Thinking
You must have noticed that there is a strong resemblance to conditions in which military schools, academies, and military colleges and PMEs in general train their “cadets” and officers.
Can we do something about it?
However, despite these cultural limitations, there are ways in which a disposition for CT can be fostered in both the home, in the classroom, and in professions like the military.
Query: Read the following statements and give me the problems with the logic and reason, if any, of the following assertions:
“NATO expansion after end of cold war:
1999- Czech Republic, Hungary n Poland.
2004- Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia n Slovenia.
2009- Albania n Croatia.
2017- Montenegro.
2020- Macedonia.&
2022- Ukraine, on the verge of amalgamation!!
And believing Western Sponsored Media - coerced by the USA,- we are forced to believe that Russia is the aggressor??
Come on lets live in the real world!!
A: The given statements seem to contain a mix of political assertions and logical reasoning.
Let's break down the different components and analyze them individually.
Firstly, the statements provide a list of NATO expansions that occurred over time, starting in 1999 with the inclusion of Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland, and continuing with additional countries in subsequent years. This part of the statement appears to be factual information.
However, the subsequent sentence raises a question about the logic and reasoning behind believing that Russia is the aggressor, while also claiming that Western-sponsored media coerced by the USA forces us to believe this. This statement contains a few logical fallacies:
False dilemma: This statement creates a false dilemma by suggesting that there are only two options - either Russia is the aggressor or we are being coerced into believing so by the Western media. This is a fallacy because it oversimplifies the issue and ignores other plausible explanations.
Ad hominem: This statement attacks the Western media as being "coerced" by the USA, without providing any evidence to support this claim. This is an ad hominem fallacy because it attacks the source of the information rather than addressing the actual content of the information itself.
Hasty generalization: This statement appears to generalize about the nature of Western media without providing specific examples or evidence to support the claim that they are all biased in favor of the USA. This is a hasty generalization fallacy because it draws a broad conclusion without sufficient evidence.
In summary, the statements regarding the expansion of NATO are factual information, while the subsequent assertion about the nature of Western media and the role of Russia in global politics contains logical fallacies. It is important to critically evaluate information and avoid relying on oversimplified or biased perspectives.
Query: Read the following statements and give me the problems, if any, with the logic and reason of the following assertions:
“ It's all over now. How long can we kid ourselves who has moved perpetually for his national interests...and succeeded.. it's only now reversal have started show after the big withdrawal from Afg.
Who made money with weapons sales from each of these..??
So there is no requirement to throw Chaff to distract...it's been on far too long .
The Deep State .zindabad..”
A: After reviewing the provided search results, I couldn't find a clear connection to the given query. The statements mentioned in the query seem to be a mix of political commentary and a question about who profited from weapon sales in a certain situation. However, there is no clear argument or assertion to analyze for its logic and reason.
In general, it is essential to evaluate arguments and assertions for their logical soundness and coherence. One way to do this is to look for logical fallacies [2], which are flaws in reasoning that render an argument unsound. Another way is to examine the premises and the conclusion of an argument and check whether they are supported by evidence and valid reasoning. Logical operators and connectives can help us form new statements from existing ones [1].
However, the statements in the given query do not lend themselves to such analysis. Therefore, I cannot provide a specific response to the query. If you have any further information or clarification regarding your question, please let me know, and I will do my best to assist you.
Query: Read the following statements once again and give me the problems with the logic and reason, if any, of the following assertions:
“It's all over now. How long can we kid ourselves who has moved perpetually for his national interests...and succeeded.. it's only now reversal have started show after the big withdrawal from Afg.
Who made money with weapons sales from each of these..??
So there is no requirement to throw Chaff .to distract...it's been on far too long .
The Deep State .zindabad..”
A: Based on the given query, the provided web search results do not directly relate to the topic at hand. However, given the statements provided in the query, there are several logical fallacies and issues with the reasoning presented.
The first statement, "It's all over now," is an example of a hasty generalization fallacy [1]. This statement is a sweeping conclusion that is not necessarily true based on the available evidence.
The second statement, "How long can we kid ourselves who has moved perpetually for his national interests...and succeeded.. it's only now reversal have started to show after the big withdrawal from Afg," is a non sequitur fallacy [1]. The statement presents a causal relationship between two events that are not necessarily related.
The third statement, "Who made money with weapons sales from each of these..?? So there is no requirement to throw Chaff to distract...it's been on far too long," is an example of a red herring fallacy [1]. The statement presents an irrelevant issue to distract from the original topic.
Finally, the statement "The Deep State zindabad.." is an example of a loaded language fallacy [1]. The term "deep state" carries a negative connotation, and the use of the word "zindabad" implies a biased or emotional perspective.
In conclusion, the statements presented in the query contain logical fallacies and issues with reasoning, including hasty generalization, non sequitur, red herring, and loaded language fallacies.
Query: Can you provide the basic minimum essentials of an argument?
Unless there is a semblance of an argument, one is at a loss to find whether there is a fallacy in the argument.
A: Certainly! Here are the basic essentials of an argument:
Claim: A statement that expresses the main point or position of the argument. It is what the arguer is trying to persuade the audience to accept [2]3.
Evidence: Statements or facts that support the claim. Evidence is to convince the audience that the claim is true [2]3.
Reasoning: The logical connection between the claim and the evidence. It explains how the evidence supports the claim [2]3.
Counterargument: Acknowledging and addressing the opposing viewpoint to the claim. It demonstrates that the arguer has considered other perspectives and is confident in their own argument [1]3.
Organization: The arrangement of the elements of the argument in a clear and logical manner. This helps the audience understand and follow the argument [1]5.
Remember that arguments can take different forms, such as the Toulmin Method, Classical Method, and Rogerian Method, which all provide guidance on how to organize an argument [1]3. Additionally, it's important to note that not every sentence in a paragraph that contains an argument has to be a part of the argument [4].
Read More: https://tinyurl.com/ydxczwh5
No comments:
Post a Comment