The following description was available on the internet as of late 2014; it has since been taken down:
"I also have a 640-page textbook on critical reasoning that is, along with slides, freely available on the net. Information is a source of empowerment, and I have an on-going project to make additional sorts of information, including information for nonspecialists, freely accessible on the net."A great free resource for students. Since Chris has taken down his version of this, the link I give you may not last. You might have to do a fresh Google search for it.
A summary of Chapter I of Critical Reasoning: A User’s Manual
ReplyDeleteI Basic Concepts of Critical Reasoning
The first thing about Good reasoning is that it must be cogent. Convincing reasoning must` always based on reasons; It is based on evidence, and not on wishful thinking or impulsive appeals to emotion. My reasons are the premises of my argument, and my new belief is the conclusion. In a good argument, the premises must validate the conclusion. An argument has one conclusion and one or more premises. We draw a conclusion from premises. If an argument is to be sound, its premises must be relevant to its conclusion. One of the major causes of bad reasoning is the use of arguments whose premises are irrelevant to their conclusions. Drawing inference beyond information we are sure about, will always run the risk of being wrong. I can use reasoning to predict what will happen. My beliefs are much more likely to be true if they are based on evidence. My views in my daily life can be more likely to be true if I test them. Testing my ideas is one way of getting feedback. Last but not the least, to improve my ability to reason and make judgments I must seek feedback. My desires, emotions and moods can weaken my clear thinking.
A summary of Chapter II of Critical Reasoning: A User’s Manual
ReplyDeleteII Reasons and Arguments
An argument is a claim that is backed by reasons. The first steps in deciding whether something that I read or hear is an argument is by identifying the conclusion, and then I can figure out the premises. But I should always begin by looking for the conclusion to identify an argument. Real life arguments often do not contain any indicator words at all as compared to theoretical argument. Therefore, I always learn ask myself: what is this individual trying to get me to believe? And once I know, I will have the conclusion that can help me easily know the premises. In real life the conclusion will normally come at the very end of an argument and rarely at the beginning. It may also come in between several premises. The definition of validity only requires that the premises and conclusion be related in such a way that if the premises are true, the conclusion is true as well. There can be deductively valid arguments with three possibilities: false premises and a false conclusion, false premises and a true conclusion, and all true premises and a true conclusion. The only arrangement that cannot occur in this kind of argument is all true premises and a false conclusion. If premises all true, there is a high probability that the conclusion is true. Valid reasons have this feature because there is no information in the conclusion that was not already contained in the reasons themselves compared to inductively reasons. Finally, conditional arguments just affirms or and deny.
A summary of Chapter IV of Critical Reasoning: A User’s Manual
ReplyDeletePart IV. Relevance, Irrelevance, and Fallacies
In this section of the book I have learnt that in reasoning and argumentation it is important to remain focused on a given subject. This implies that I have to give reasons or evidence that supports the issue at hand for my argument to be relevant. It is important to note that Relevance is not the same thing as truth, just as Irrelevance is not the same thing as falseness, not the same thing as importance, not the same thing as conclusive support, and Relevance can be either positive or negative. Furthermore, the argument can be said to be a flawed, if the premises of an argument are irrelevant to the conclusion. The first safeguard in any argument to be successful, I must always stay focused on the conclusion. I should not allow anything inform of jokes, insults, and the like to deflect my attention from the topic. And be sure that I and the person I am talking are really considering the same claim rather than talking at cross purposes. I commit the fallacy of an argument against a person whenever I launch an attack on a person rather than position or argument. Besides that, I commit the Strawman Fallacy whenever I distort or weaken someone’s position to make it easier for me to attack or argument in an effort to discredit it. Finally, I should be aware of the line-drawing fallacy and inconsistency in an argument a person making.