Critical Reasoning
Consider the terms vague, ambiguity and generality as they relate to our textbook reading for this week.
How are vagueness, ambiguity and generality used in politics or in law in order to achieve a desired outcome?
What are some examples of how this might be applied in your future career?
Include an example or two from current events that demonstrates the use of vagueness, ambiguity and generality.
Feel free to share an article, a screenshot of a social media post, a video, etc
Please use the textbook as reference and also cite the reference at the end
Page i
Twelfth Edition
Critical
Thinking
Brooke Noel Moore
Richard Parker
California State University, Chico
with help in Chapter 12
from Nina Rosenstand and Anita Silvers
Page ii
CRITICAL THINKING, TWELFTH EDITION
Published by McGraw-Hill Education, 2 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10121. Copyright 2017 by
McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Previous
editions 2015, 2012, and 2009. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in
any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written
consent of McGraw-Hill Education, including, but not limited to,
in any network or other electronic storage or transmission, or broadcast for distance learning.
Some ancillaries, including electronic and print components, may not be available to customers
outside the United States.
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 DOW 21 20 19 18 17 16
ISBN 978-1-259-69087-7
MHID 1-259-69087-3
Chief Product Officer, SVP Products & Markets: G. Scott Virkler
Vice President, General Manager, Products & Markets: Michael Ryan
Managing Director: David Patterson
Brand Manager: Penina Braffman and Jamie Laferrera
Director, Product Development: Meghan Campbell
Product Developer: Anthony McHugh
Marketing Manager: Meredith Leo
Director, Content Design & Delivery: Terri Schiesl
Program Manager: Jennifer Shekleton
Content Project Managers: Jane Mohr, Sandra Schnee, and Samantha Donisi-Hamm
Buyer: Laura M. Fuller
Design: Studio Montage, St. Louis, MO
Content Licensing Specialist: Jacob Sullivan
Cover Image: diephosi/Getty Images RF
Compositor: Aptara, Inc.
Printer: R. R. Donnelley
All credits appearing on page or at the end of the book are considered to be an extension of the
copyright page.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Moore, Brooke Noel, author. | Parker, Richard (Richard B.), author.
Title: Critical thinking / Brooke Noel Moore, Richard Parker, California
State University, Chico; with help in chapter 12 from Nina Rosenstand and
Anita Silvers.
Description: Twelfth Edition. | Dubuque, IA : McGraw-Hill Education, 2016.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016021518 | ISBN 9781259690877 (alk. paper) | ISBN
1259690873 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Critical thinking.
Classification: LCC B105.T54 M66 2016 | DDC 160dc23 LC record available at
https://lccn.loc.gov/2016021518
The Internet addresses listed in the text were accurate at the time of publication. The inclusion
of a website does not indicate an endorsement by the authors or McGraw-Hill Education, and
McGraw-Hill Education does not guarantee the accuracy of the information presented at these
sites.
mheducation.com/highered
https://lccn.loc.gov/2016021518
http://mheducation.com/highered
Page iii
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Brief Contents
Dont Believe Everything You Think 1
Two Kinds of Reasoning 32
Clear Thinking, Critical Thinking, and Clear Writing 64
Credibility 93
Rhetoric, the Art of Persuasion 132
Relevance (Red Herring) Fallacies 173
Induction Fallacies 195
Formal Fallacies and Fallacies of Language 220
Deductive Arguments I: Categorical Logic 242
Deductive Arguments II: Truth-Functional Logic 284
Inductive Reasoning 338
Moral, Legal, and Aesthetic Reasoning 390
Page v
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Contents
Preface xiv
Acknowledgments xx
About the Authors xxiv
Dont Believe Everything You Think 1
Beliefs and Claims 4
Objective Claims and Subjective Claims 4
Fact and Opinion 5
Relativism 6
Moral Subjectivism 6
Issues 6
Arguments 7
Cognitive Biases 14
Truth and Knowledge 20
What Critical Thinking Can and Cant Do 20
A Word About the Exercises 21
Recap 21
Additional Exercises 23
Two Kinds of Reasoning 32
Arguments: General Features 32
Conclusions Used as Premises 33
Unstated Premises and Conclusions 33
Two Kinds of Arguments 34
Deductive Arguments 34
Inductive Arguments 36
Chapter 3
Page vi
Beyond a Reasonable Doubt 37
Telling the Difference Between Deductive and Inductive Arguments 37
Deduction, Induction, and Unstated Premises 38
Balance of Considerations 40
Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) 41
What Are Not Premises, Conclusions, or Arguments 41
Pictures 42
If . . . then . . . Sentences 42
Lists of Facts 42
A because B 43
Ethos, Pathos, and Logos 43
Techniques for Understanding Arguments 48
Clarifying an Arguments Structure 49
Distinguishing Arguments from Window Dressing 51
Evaluating Arguments 52
Recap 52
Additional Exercises 53
Clear Thinking, Critical Thinking, and Clear
Writing 64
Vagueness 65
Ambiguity 67
Semantic Ambiguity 68
Grouping Ambiguity 68
Syntactic Ambiguity 68
Generality 70
Defining Terms 75
Purposes of Definitions 75
Kinds of Definitions 76
Tips on Definitions 77
Writing Argumentative Essays 79
Good Writing Practices 80
Essay Types to Avoid 81
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Page vii
Page viii
Persuasive Writing 82
Writing in a Diverse Society 82
Recap 83
Additional Exercises 84
Credibility 93
The Claim and Its Source 95
Assessing the Content of the Claim 96
Does the Claim Conflict with Our Personal Observations? 96
Does the Claim Conflict with Our Background Information? 99
The Credibility of Sources 102
Interested Parties 102
Physical and Other Characteristics 103
Expertise 105
Credibility and the News Media 109
Consolidation of Media Ownership 109
Government Management of the News 109
Bias Within the Media 111
Talk Radio 113
Advocacy Television 113
The Internet, Generally 114
Blogs 117
Advertising 118
Three Kinds of Ads 118
Recap 121
Additional Exercises 122
Rhetoric, the Art of Persuasion 132
Rhetorical Force 133
Rhetorical Devices I 134
Euphemisms and Dysphemisms 134
Weaselers 134
Downplayers 135
Chapter 6
Page ix
Rhetorical Devices II 137
Stereotypes 137
Innuendo 138
Loaded Questions 139
Rhetorical Devices III 141
Ridicule/Sarcasm 141
Hyperbole 141
Rhetorical Devices IV 142
Rhetorical Definitions and Rhetorical Explanations 142
Rhetorical Analogies and Misleading Comparisons 143
Proof Surrogates and Repetition 147
Proof Surrogates 147
Repetition 148
Persuasion Through Visual Imagery 150
The Extreme Rhetoric of Demagoguery 152
Recap 155
Additional Exercises 156
Relevance (Red Herring) Fallacies 173
Argumentum Ad Hominem 174
Poisoning the Well 175
Guilt by Association 175
Genetic Fallacy 175
Straw Man 176
False Dilemma (Ignoring Other Alternatives) 177
The Perfectionist Fallacy 178
The Line-Drawing Fallacy 178
Misplacing the Burden of Proof 179
Begging the Question (Assuming What You are Trying to Prove) 181
Appeal To Emotion 182
Argument from Outrage 182
Scare Tactics 182
Appeal to Pity 184
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Page x
Other Appeals to Emotion 184
Irrelevant Conclusion 186
Recap 188
Exercises 188
Induction Fallacies 195
Generalizations 195
Generalizing from Too Few Cases (Hasty Generalization) 196
Generalizing from Exceptional Cases 198
Accident 199
Weak Analogy 200
Mistaken Appeal to Authority 202
Mistaken Appeal to Popularity (Mistaken Appeal to Common Belief) 202
Mistaken Appeal to Common Practice 203
Bandwagon Fallacy 203
Fallacies Related to Cause and Effect 205
Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc 205
Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc 209
Slippery Slope 211
Untestable Explanation 212
Line-Drawing Again 212
Recap 213
Exercises 213
Formal Fallacies and Fallacies of Language 220
Three Formal Fallacies: Affirming the Consequent, Denying the Antecedent,
and Undistributed Middle 220
Affirming the Consequent 220
Denying the Antecedent 221
The Undistributed Middle 222
The Fallacies of Equivocation and Amphiboly 224
The Fallacies of Composition and Division 225
Confusing Explanations with Excuses 227
Chapter 9
Page xi
Confusing Contraries and Contradictories 229
Consistency and Inconsistency 230
Miscalculating Probabilities 231
Incorrectly Combining the Probability of Independent Events 231
Gamblers Fallacy 232
Overlooking Prior Probabilities 233
Faulty Inductive Conversion 233
Recap 235
Additional Exercises 236
Deductive Arguments I: Categorical Logic 242
Categorical Claims 244
Venn Diagrams 245
Translation into Standard Form (Introduction) 246
Translating Claims in Which the Word Only or the Phrase The
Only Occurs 246
Translating Claims About Times and Places 247
Translating Claims About Specific Individuals 249
Translating Claims that Use Mass Nouns 250
The Square of Opposition 252
Existential Assumption and the Square of Opposition 252
Inferences Across the Square 253
Three Categorical Relations 254
Conversion 254
Obversion 254
Contraposition 255
Categorical Syllogisms 262
The Venn Diagram Method of Testing for Validity 264
Existential Assumption in Categorical Syllogisms 267
Categorical Syllogisms with Unstated Premises 267
Real-Life Syllogisms 268
The Rules Method of Testing for Validity 272
Recap 274
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Page xii
Additional Exercises 274
Deductive Arguments II: Truth-Functional Logic
284
Truth Tables and Logical Symbols 285
Claim Variables 285
Truth Tables 285
Symbolizing Compound Claims 291
If and Only If 292
Necessary and Sufficient Conditions 294
Unless 295
Either . . . Or 295
Truth-Functional Argument Patterns (Brief Version) 298
Three Common Valid Argument Patterns 298
Three Mistakes: Invalid Argument Forms 302
Truth-Functional Arguments (Full Version) 305
The Truth-Table Method 305
The Short Truth-Table Method 308
Deductions 313
Group I Rules: Elementary Valid Argument Patterns 314
Group II Rules: Truth-Functional Equivalences 319
Conditional Proof 327
Recap 330
Additional Exercises 330
Inductive Reasoning 338
Argument from Analogy 338
Evaluation of Arguments from Analogy 339
Three Arguments from Analogy 341
Other Uses of Analogy 342
Generalizing from a Sample 347
Evaluation of Arguments That Generalize from a Sample 348
Three Arguments That Generalize from a Sample 349
Chapter 12
Page xiii
Scientific Generalizing from a Sample 350
The Statistical Syllogism 351
Causal Statements And Their Support 359
Forming Causal Hypotheses 359
Weighing Evidence 361
Confirming Causal Hypotheses 372
Calculating Statistical Probabilities 377
Joint Occurrence of Independent Events 377
Alternative Occurrences 377
Expectation Value 378
Calculating Conditional Probabilities 379
Causation in the Law 380
Recap 381
Additional Exercises 382
Moral, Legal, and Aesthetic Reasoning 390
Value Judgments 391
Moral Versus Nonmoral 392
Two Principles of Moral Reasoning 392
Moral Principles 394
Deriving Specific Moral Value Judgments 394
Major Perspectives in Moral Reasoning 397
Consequentialism 397
Duty Theory/Deontologism 398
Moral Relativism 400
Religious Relativism 402
Religious Absolutism 402
Virtue Ethics 402
Moral Deliberation 405
Legal Reasoning 410
Justifying Laws: Four Perspectives 411
Aesthetic Reasoning 414
Eight Aesthetic Principles 414
Using Aesthetic Principles to Judge Aesthetic Value 417
Evaluating Aesthetic Criticism: Relevance and Truth 419
Why Reason Aesthetically? 420
Recap 422
Additional Exercises 423
Appendix: Exercises from Previous Editions 426
Glossary 450
Answers, Suggestions, and Tips for Triangle Exercises 459
Credits 482
Index 483
Page xiv
Page xv
Page xvi
Critical Thinking . . . Skills for the
course. Skills for life.
More Engaging
Moore & Parker are known for fresh and lively writing. They rely on their own
classroom experience and on feedback from instructors in getting the correct
balance between explication and example.
Examples and exercises are drawn from todays headlines.
Students learn to apply critical thinking skills to situations in a wide variety of
areas: advertising, politics, the media, popular culture.
I love the sense of humor of the authors, the very clear and elegant way they
make critical thinking come alive with visuals, exercises and stories.
Gary John, Richland College
[Before reading this chapter] most students dont realize the extent of product
placement and other similar attempts at subtle manipulation.
Christian Blum, Bryant & Stratton, Buffalo
More Relevant
Moore & Parker spark student interest in skills that will serve them throughout
their lives, making the study of critical thinking a meaningful endeavor.
Boxes show students how critical thinking skills are relevant to their day-to-day
lives.
Striking visuals in every chapter show students how images affect our
judgment and shape our thinking.
The variety [in the exercises] was outstanding. [They] will provide ample
opportunity for the students to put into practice the various
logical principles being discussed.
Ray Darr, Southern Illinois University
Page xvii
More Student Success
Moore & Parker provide a path to student success, making students active
participants
in their own learning while teaching skills they can apply in all their courses.
Learning objectives link to chapter sections and in turn to print and online
activities, so that students can immediately assess their mastery of the
learning objective.
Exercises are dispersed throughout most chapters, so that they link tightly with
the concepts as they are presented.
Students have access to over 2,000 exercises that provide practice in applying
their skills.
Hands-on, practical, and one might say, even patient with the students
learning as it emphatically repeats concepts and slowly progresses them step by
step through the process.
Patricia Baldwin, Pitt Community College
There are a lot of exercises, which provides nice flexibility. The . . . mix of
relatively easy and more challenging pieces . . . is useful in providing some
flexibility for
working in class.
Dennis Weiss, York College of Pennsylvania
Page xviii
H
Changes to the 12th Edition
aving arrived at an even dozen editions, we still have our original goal
constantly in mind: helping teach students to think and reason critically and
make better decisions and making life a bit easier for instructors of critical
thinking courses. We invite both students and instructors to get in touch with us with
any ideas they have that might help us pursue these goals.
As usual, this edition updates names and events in examples and exercises in the
hope that they will be familiar to the current crop of students. As weve mentioned
before, what to many of us instructors are recent events are obscure history to many
new freshmen. Other changes are as follows.
CHAPTER-SPECIFIC CHANGES
Chapter 1 begins with a fuller accounting of what we take critical thinking to be. It
also goes into a bit more depth regarding cognitive biases that affect our thinking.
Chapter 2 contains a revised section on inference to the best explanation (IBE).
Chapter 3 is somewhat leaner, but still makes a wealth of points about the
important concepts of vagueness and generality and it contains a revised account of
several types of definitions.
Chapter 4 gets the usual updating here and there plus a new section on credibility
in social media.
Page xix
Chapter 5 gets updating, new photos, and a subsection on significant mention
under the innuendo heading.
Chapter 6 is left largely unchanged aside from some new examples and photos.
Chapter 7 is also much the same as the previous version, although fallacious
appeals have been changed to mistaken appeals; why use a word students have
trouble spelling when there is one they dont?
Chapter 8 was new in the previous edition. It gets updated this time around,
including a replacement of the section entitled Overlooking False Positives with
an easier to understand Faulty Inductive Conversion section.
Chapter 9 gets a bit of reformatting to make examples stand out more easily. Also,
existential assumption gets its own subsection so it will be more difficult to miss.
Chapter 10 now makes the electrical circuit box a bit less distracting
and adds a couple of new exercises to aid in learning to symbolize
claims. But the biggest change from the previous edition is the reinsertion of a
section that gives a briefer version of truth-functional arguments. This allows an
instructor (like Moore) to deal quickly with this subject or (like Parker) to deal with
it in much more detail by going on to the longer treatment that completes the
chapter.
Chapter 11 has the sections on analogies and generalizations fine-tuned, while the
section on causal hypotheses remains in its previous pristine form.
Chapter 12 has been left alone aside from a bit of updating of examples.
Vladimir Putin asks Hillary Clinton if she can get him a copy
of Moore/Parker.
Page xx
W
Acknowledgments
e, Moore and Parker, feel about this textbook the way people usually feel
about their children. It has been a wonderful thing to watch it grow up
through these (now) dozen editions, although it has caused us the occasional
pain in the backside along the way. Those painsoften in the form of criticism in
reviews and correspondence from adoptershave usually been growing pains,
however, and they have contributed to the improvement of the book. We are pretty
pleased with the book, as proud parents are wont to be, but we realize that there are
always thingssmaller and smaller things, we hopethat can be changed for the
better. We hope this edition incorporates changes of just that sort. Many of them are
listed below.
The online accompaniment to the text continues to expand and, we trust, become
more and more useful to adopters and their students. The preceding pages briefly
describe LearnSmart and Connect, the principal components of the online material.
These programs promise help for the student and an easier and more productive time
for the instructor. We hope you find they live up to this promise.
Having escaped from the mysterious clutches of Mark Georgiev, former KGB
operative and our editor a couple of editions ago, we have been blessed by guidance
this time around from the gentle hands of Penina Braffman, Brand Manager; Anthony
McHugh, Product Developer; Jane Mohr, Content Project Manager; as well as Erin
Guendelsberger, Reshmi Rajeesh, and the ansrsource team, Development Editors,
who encourage us even when we dont quite toe the McGraw-Hill line.
The guidance of the following reviewers of current and previous editions and
others who have written to us has been invaluable:
Keith Abney, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
James Anderson, San Diego State University
Benjamin Arah, Bowie State University
Sheldon Bachus
Patricia Baldwin, Pitt Community College
Monique Bindra
Tim Black, California State University, Northridge
Charles Blatz, University of Toledo
Page xxi
Christian Blum, Bryant & Stratton, Buffalo
K. D. Borcoman, Coastline College/CSUDH
Keith Brown, California State University, East Bay
Rosalie Brown
Lee Carter, Glendale Community College
Jennifer Caseldine-Bracht, Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort Wayne
Lynne Chandler-Garcia, Pikes Peak Community College
David Connelly
Anne DArcy, California State University, Chico
Michelle Darnelle, Fayetteville State University
Ray Darr, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville
William J. Devlin, Bridgewater State University
Paul Dickey, Metropolitan Community College
Sandra Dwyer, Georgia State University
Jeffrey Easlick, Saginaw Valley State University
Aaron Edlin, University of California, Berkeley
Dorothy Edlin
Noel Edlin
Ellery Eells, University of WisconsinMadison
Ben Eggleston, University of Kansas
Geoffrey B. Frasz, Community College of Southern Nevada
Josh Fulcher
Rory Goggins
Geoffrey Gorham, University of WisconsinEau Claire
Joseph Graves, North Carolina A&T University
Dabney Gray, Stillman College
Patricia Hammer, Delta College
Anthony Hanson, De Anza College
Rebecca Hendricks
Judith M. Hill, Saginaw Valley State University
Steven Hoeltzel, James Madison University
Steven R. Huizenga, Central Ohio Technical College
J. F. Humphrey, North Carolina A&T University
Amro Jayousi
Gary John, Richland College
Sunghyun Jung
Allyn Kahn, Champlain College
David Kelsey, Coastline Community College
David Keyt, University of Washington
Page xxii
Paulina Kohan
William Krieger, California State UniversityPomona
Michael LaBossiere, Florida A&M University
Sunita Lanka, Hartnell College
Bill Lawson
Marisha Lecea, Western Michigan University
Marion Ledwig, University of NevadaLas Vegas
Vern Lee, University of Phoenix
Terrance MacMullon, Eastern Washington University
Andrew Magrath, Kent State University
Alistair Moles, Sierra College
Ralph J. Moore, Jr.
Jeffry Norby, Northcentral Technical College
Eric Parkinson, Syracuse University
Steven Patterson, Marygrove College
Carmel Phelan, College of Southern Nevada
Jamie L. Phillips, Clarion University
Domenick Pinto, Sacred Heart University
Ayaz Pirani, Hartnell College
Ed Pluth, California State University, Chico
Scott Rappold, Our Lady of Holy Cross College
N. Mark Rauls, College of Southern Nevada
Victor Reppert, Glendale Community College
Matthew E. Roberts, Patrick Henry College
Greg Sadler, Fayetteville State University
Matt Schulte, Montgomery College
Richard Scott, Glendale Community College
Laurel Severino, Santa Fe Community College
Mehul Shah, Bergen Community College
Robert Shanab, University of Nevada at Las Vegas
Steven Silveria
Robert Skipper, St. Marys University
Aeon J. Skoble, Bridgewater State University
Taggart Smith, Purdue UniversityCalumet
Richard Sneed, University of Central Oklahoma
Alan Soble, Drexel University
Chris Soutter
James Stump, Bethel College
Lou Suarez
Susan Vineberg, Wayne State University
Michael Ventimiglia, Sacred Heart University
Helmut Wautischer, Sonoma State University
Dennis Weiss, York College of Pennsylvania
Linda L. Williams, Kent State University
Amy Goodman Wilson, Webster University
Christine Wolf
Wayne Yuen, Ohlone College
Marie G. Zaccaria, Georgia Perimeter College
Over the years, our Chico State colleague Anne Morrissey has given us more
usable material than anybody else. Shes also given us more unusable material, but
never mind. Weve also had fine suggestions and examples from Curtis Peldo of Chico
State and Butte College; Dan Barnett, also of Butte College, has helped in many ways
over the years.
We thank colleagues at Chico State, who are ever ready with a suggestion, idea, or
constructive criticism; in particular, Marcel Daguerre, Randy Larsen, Becky White,
Wai-hung Wong, Zanja Yudell, and Greg Tropea, whose death in 2010 left us saddened
beyond words. Greg was a dear friend whose deep wisdom and quiet insight
contributed significantly to our thinking over the course of many years. We are also
grateful to Bangs Tapscott, Linda Kaye Bomstad, Ann Bykerk-Kauffman, Sue
Patterson, and Jeffrey Ridenour for contributions both archival and recent.
Last, and especially, we give thanks to two people who put up with us with
patience, encouragement, and grace, Leah Blum and Marianne Moore.
Page xxiii
N
A Note to Our Colleagues
o surprise, reading a book (or taking a course) in critical thinking wont make
anyone a genius. It wont tell you who to vote for or whether to believe in God
or whether to contribute to the Humane Society, But it can, we hope, help
students tell whether a given reason for doing or not doing one of those things is a
good reason. It can help them spot irrelevancies in a discussion, emotional appeals,
empty rhetoric, and bogus argument. Other courses can do these things too, of course.
But speaking generally, other courses are probably not focused so intensely on those
things.
There are differences about how best to go about teaching critical thinking. One of
us, Parker likes to emphasize formal logic. Moore, not quite so much. One thing Moore
and Parker both agree on, and possibly so do many instructors, is that drill and
practice are essential to improving students critical thinking ability. And one thing we
have found is that technology can be helpful in this regard. The personalized digital
reading experience of this text (called SmartBook) questions students as they read,
and the credit they get depends on the proportion of the questions they answer
correctly. (We instructors can also see how long they spent on a reading assignment.)
Additionally, Connect, McGraw-Hills assignment and assessment platform through
which SmartBook is accessed, gives us the means to put a whole lot of exercises online.
And these two things enable us to do even more drilling in class.
If you dont use Connect or LearnSmart, this text contains hundreds and
hundreds and hundreds of exercises of the sort (we think) that can be applied directly
to the world at large. And they are all answered in the Instructors Manual. The
explanatory material found in the text is (we hope) both concise and fairly readable for
even first-year university students.
If you use this text or the online peripherals, we would appreciate hearing from
you. We both can be contacted through McGraw-Hill Education, or via the philosophy
department at Chico State.
Page xxiv
B
About the Authors
rooke Moore and Richard Parker have taught philosophy at California State
University, Chico, for almost as long as they can remember. Moore has been
that universitys Outstanding Professor, and both he and Parker have received
top academic honors on their campus. Moore has seen several terms as department
chair, and Parker has served as chair of the academic senate and dean of
undergraduate education.
Moore has a bachelors degree in music from Antioch College and a PhD in
philosophy from the University of Cincinnati; Parker did his undergraduate degree at
the University of Arkansas and his PhD at the University of Washington, both in
philosophy.
Moore has finally given up being the worlds most serious amateur volleyball
player. He and Marianne share their house and life with Sparky, as cute a pup as youll
ever see. He has never sold an automobile.
Parker gets around in a 1962 MG or on a Harley softail. He plays golf for fun,
shoots pool for money, and plays guitar for a semiprofessional flamenco troupe. He
lives with Djobi, a hundred-pound Doberman.
Moore and Parker have remained steadfast friends through it all. They are never
mistaken for one another.
Page xxv
To: Sherry and Bill; and Sydney, Darby,
Alexander and Levi Peyton Elizabeth, and Griffin
From Richard From Brooke
Page xxvi
This is not entirely a work of nonfiction.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
A
Page 1
1
Dont Believe Everything You
Think
Students will learn to . . .
Define critical thinking
Explain the role of beliefs and claims in critical thinking
Identify issues in real-world situations
Recognize an argument
Define and identify the common cognitive biases that affect critical
thinking
Understand the terms truth and knowledge as used in this book
little before noon on December 14, 2015, a man wearing a black stocking
cap, black gloves, and a green sweat shirt with a four-leaf clover and the
words Get Lucky printed on the front entered the Sterling State Bank in
Rochester, Minnesota.* He demanded cash and gave the teller a note saying he
was armed. Police officers arrived and followed the mans tracks in the snow to
the parking lot of a Comfort Inn nearby, but by then the man had driven off in a
car.
The next day, a reporter from KIMT-TV had set up in front of the bank to
Page 2
update the story, and right then and there the same man tried to rob the same
bank again. When the teller saw the man he yelled out, Thats the robber! and
the reporter called the police. This time when the police followed the suspects
footprints they spotted his vehicle and apprehended him.
Now, educators will disagree about what exactly critical thinking is, but there
will be no disputing that, whatever it is, Get Lucky wasnt doing it. First of all,
robbing banks isnt necessarily the best way to make a living. But if you insist on
robbing a bank, then probably you dont want to leave footprints to your car, and
probably you dont want to try to rob the bank when a TV crew is filming it. Among
other things, critical thinking involves considering the possible outcomes of an
action.
Among what other things? Speaking generally, if we just think or do stuff,
thats not thinking critically. Critical thinking kicks in when we evaluate
beliefs and actionswhen we critique them. On the one hand, there is good, old-
fashioned thinking. Thats what we do when we form opinions, make judgments, arrive
at decisions, develop plans, come to conclusions, offer hypotheses, and the like. On the
other hand, there is critical thinking. Thats what we do when we rationally evaluate
the first kind of thinking. Critical thinking is thinking that critiques. It involves
critiquing opinions, judgments, decisions, plans, conclusions, and reasoning in
general. We engage in it when we consider whether our thinking (or someone elses)
abides by the criteria of good sense and logic.
If you are taking other courses, chances are your instructor will think critically
about the work you turn in. He or she will offer critical commentary on what you
submit. If you want to think critically, you have to do this yourself to your own work.
Try to leave your instructor with nothing to say except, Good job!
It can be the same in the workplace or in the military. You might perhaps be asked
to solve a problem or troubleshoot a situation or come up with a recommendation, or
any number of other things that involve arriving at conclusions. Your colleagues or
friends or supervisors may give you feedback or commentary. They are thinking
critically about your reasoning.
Of course, if you are so brilliant that you never err in your thinking, then you may
not need feedback from others. Unfortunately, there is evidence that people who think
they are experts are more likely to believe they know things they dont really know.*
Anyway, almost everyone makes mistakes. We overlook important considerations,
ignore viewpoints that conflict with our own, or in other ways dont think as clearly as
we might. Most of us benefit from a little critical commentary, and this includes
commentary that comes from ourselves. The chances of reaching defensible
conclusions improve if we dont simply conclude willy-nilly, but reflect on our
Page 3
reasoning and try to make certain it is sound.
Being able to think critically can be useful in another way. Others try to influence
what we think and do. There is much to be said for being able to critically evaluate a
sales pitch, whether it comes from a stranger or a friend, or is about kitchen gadgets or
for whom to vote for president. Critical thinking helps us recognize a scam when we
see it.
Some educators equate critical thinking with problem solving or innovative
thinking (thinking outside the box). This is fine, though at a certain point proposed
solutions and possible innovations have to be tested. Thats where critical thinking
comes in.
This is a book in critical thinking because it offers guidance about critiquing
thinking. The book and the course you are using it in, if you are, explain the minimum
criteria
