Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
1
9
for every conceivable contingency, the unexpected
happened. Initially, the challenge was simply to fg-
ure out what the problem was. If it could be correctly
identifed, then there might be some slim chance of
survival. If not, the outcome could be tragic.
As you watch the
video clip at www.mythinkinglab.com, keep in mind
that you are seeing a dramatic reenactment. The ac-
tors, music, camera angles, staging, props, and light-
ing all contribute to our overall experience. That said,
this portrayal of individual and group problem solv-
ing is highly consistent with the research on human
cognition and decision making.
i
The clip dramatizes
a group of people engaged in thinking critically to-
gether about one thing: What could the problem be?
Their approach is to apply their reasoning skills to the
best of their ability. But, more than only their thinking
skills, their mental habits of being analytical, focused,
and systematic enabled them to apply those skills
well during the moment of crisis. We suggest that you
watch the brief video prior to reading the summary
analysis of Apollo 13.
After training
02
CHAPTER
Skilled and
Eager to
Think
Q
HOW can I cultivate positive
critical thinking habits of mind?
WHAT questions can I ask to
engage my critical thinking
skills?
WHAT are induction and
deduction, and how do they
differ?
HOW can I best use this book
to develop my critical thinking
skills?
<<< In Apollo 13 Tom Hanks and Kevin Bacon por-
tray astronauts working together using critical think-
ing to identify the exact problem threatening their
mission and their lives.
Listen to the Chapter Audio on mythinkinglab.com
Read the Chapter on mythinkinglab.com
Watch the Video on mythinkinglab.com
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
0
2
2
0
problems rather than toward the other set of possibilities. Had
he categorized the problem as instrumentation, then every-
ones efforts would have been directed toward checking and
verifying that the gauges and computers were functioning
properly.
There is a very important lesson for good critical thinking in
what we see Ed Harris doing. Judging correctly what kind of
problem we are facing is essential. If we are mistaken about
what the problem is, we are likely to consume time, energy,
and resources exploring the wrong kinds of solutions. By the
time we figure out that we took the wrong road, the situa-
tion could have become much worse than when we started.
The Apollo 13 situation is a perfect example. In real life, had
the people at Mission Control in Houston classifed the prob-
lem as instrumentation, they would have used up what little
oxygen there was left aboard the spacecraft while the ground
crew spent time validating their instrument readouts.
Back on the spacecraft, Tom Hanks, who personifies the
critical thinking skills of interpretation and inference, is strug-
gling to regain navigational control. He articulates the inference
by saying that had they been hit by a meteor, they would all be
dead already. A few moments later he glances out the space-
crafts side window. Something in the rearview mirror catches
his attention. Again, his inquisitive mind will not ignore what
hes seeing. A few seconds pass as he tries to interpret what it
might be. He offers his frst observation that the craft is venting
something into space. The mental focus and stress of the entire
Houston ground crew are etched on their faces. Their expres-
sions reveal the question in their minds: What could he pos-
sibly be seeing? Seconds pass with agonizing slowness. Using
his interpretive skills, Tom Hanks categorizes with caution and
then, adding greater precision, he infers that the venting must
be some kind of a gas. He pauses to try to fgure out what the
gas might be and realizes that it must surely be the oxygen.
Kevin Bacon looks immediately to the oxygen tank gauge on
the instrument panel for information that might confrm or dis-
confrm whether it really is the oxygen. It is.
Positive Critical Thinking
Habits of Mind
The Apollo 13 sequence opens with the staff at Mission Con-
trol in Houston and the three-person crew of Apollo 13 well
into the boredom of routine housekeeping. Suddenly, the crew
of Apollo 13 hears a loud banging noise and their small, fragile
craft starts gyrating wildly. The startled look on Tom Hankss
face in the video reenactment is priceless. A full ffteen sec-
onds elapses before he speaks. During that time his critical
thinking is in overdrive. He is trying to interpret what has just
happened. His mind has to make sense of the entirely unex-
pected and unfamiliar experience. He neither dismisses nor
ignores the new information that presents itself. His attention
moves between checking the crafts instrument panel and
attending to the sounds and motions of the spacecraft itself.
He focuses his mind, forms a cautious but accurate interpreta-
tion, and with the disciplined self-control we expect of a well-
trained professional, he informs Mission Control in Houston,
Texas that they most defnitely have a problem!
ii
At frst, the astronauts in the spacecraft and the technicians
at Mission Control call out information from their desk moni-
tors and the spacecrafts instrument displays. They crave in-
formation from all sources. They know they must share what
they are learning with each other as quickly as they can in the
hope that someone will be able to make sense out of things.
They do not yet know which piece of information may be the
clue to their life-or-death problem, but they have the discipline
of mind to want to know everything that might be relevant.
And they have the confdence in their collective critical think-
ing skills to believe that this approach offers their best hope to
identify the true problem.
One member of the ground crew calls out, that O
2
Tank
Two is not showing any readings. That vital bit of information
swooshes by almost unnoticed in the torrents of data. Soon
a number of people begin proposing explanations: Perhaps
the spacecraft had been struck by a meteor. Perhaps its radio
antenna is broken. Perhaps the issue is instrumentation, rather
than something more serious, like a loss of power.
The vital critical thinking skill of Self-Regulation is personi-
fed in the movie by the character played by Ed Harris. His job
is to monitor everything that is going on and to correct the pro-
cess if he judges that it is getting off track. Harriss character
makes the claim that the problem cannot simply be instru-
mentation. The reason for that claim is clear and reasonable.
The astronauts are reporting hearing loud bangs and feeling
their spacecraft jolt and shimmy. The unspoken assump-
tion, one every pilot and technician understands in this con-
text is that these physical manifestationsthe noises and the
shakingwould not be occurring if the problem were instru-
mentation. The conclusion Harriss character expressed has
the effect of directing everyones energy and attention toward
one set of possibilities, those that would be considered real
If we were compelled to make
a choice between these personal
attributes [of a thoughtful reasoner]
and knowledge about the principles
of logical reasoning together with
some degree of technical skill
in manipulating special logical
processes, we should decide for
the former.
John Dewey, How We Think
iii
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
S
k
i
l
l
e
d
a
n
d
E
a
g
e
r
t
o
T
h
i
n
k
2
1
Being by habit inclined to anticipate consequences, every-
one silently contemplates the potential tragedy implied by the
loss of oxygen. As truth-seekers, they must accept the fnding.
They cannot fathom denying it or hiding from it. Their somber
response comes in the form of Mission Controls grim but ob-
jective acknowledgment that the spacecraft is venting.
OK, now we have the truth. What are we going to do about
it? The characters depicted in this movie are driven by a pow-
erful orientation toward using critical thinking to resolve what-
ever problems they encounter. The room erupts with noise
as each person refocuses on their little piece of the problem.
People are moving quickly, talking fast, pulling headset wires
out of sockets in their haste. The chaos and cacophony in the
room reveal that the group is not yet taking a systematic, or-
ganized approach. Monitoring this, Ed Harriss character inter-
jects another self-correction into the groups critical thinking.
Epidemiologic investigations conducted
by our group and others have suggested
that during childhood and early adult life
breast tissue is particularly sensitive to fac-
tors that infuence the likelihood of develop-
ing cancer many years later. For example,
if the breast is exposed to multiple x-rays or
other types of radiation during this early pe-
riod, the risk of breast cancer rises steadily
with higher doses, but after age 40 radia-
tion has little effect. Also, we have seen that
being overweight before age 20 is paradoxi-
cally associated with a reduced risk of breast
cancer for the rest of a womans life, although
subsequent weight gain and becoming over-
weight after menopause increases risk of
breast cancer in these later years. These fnd-
ings led us to develop sets of questions focus-
ing on diet and physical activity during the high
school years. . . . In addition, to assess the
validity of the recalled dietary data, we invited
a sample of mothers of NHS II participants to
also complete a questionnaire about the high
school diets of their NHS II daughters; strong
correlation between the motherdaughter re-
ports supported the validity of our dietary data.
We have now begun to examine the relation
of high school diet and activity patterns to
subsequent risk of breast cancer. We have
seen that higher intake of red meat dur-
ing high school years is related to a greater
risk of premenopausal breast cancer. Also,
higher levels of physical activity during high
school were associated with lower risk of
breast cancer before menopause. This is
particularly important, as many schools do
not include regular physical activity in the
curriculum, and many girls are now quite in-
active during these years.
Early Life Factors and Risk of Breast Cancer
INDUCTIVE REASONING
Drawing probabilistic inferences regarding what is most likely
to be true or most likely not true, given certain information, is
known as inductive reasoning. Here are some examples.
When I stop at a traffc light, I hear this funny, rattling sound
coming from under my car. It is sort of in the middle or
maybe toward the back, but defnitely not toward the front.
I only hear it when the car is idling, not when Im driving
along at a reasonable speed. My Dad said once that the
metal baffes inside a muffer can loosen up if the muffer is
old and rusty. He said that a loose baffe makes a rattling
sound when it vibrates, like when the engine is idling or
when the tires are out of alignment. My muffer is at least
nine years old. So, Im thinking that probably the rattling
sound is coming from the muffer.
We interviewed three people, and each one was very per-
sonable. I think that the frst person had the strongest re-
sume. But the second person seemed a lot smarter. I liked
the enthusiasm and energy that the third person had, but
analysis of the concept of critical thinking skills to assist stu-
dents and teachers in fnding examples and exercises that could
help strengthen these skills. But, remember that critical think-
ing does not refer to a package of skills. Rather, critical thinking
is what we do with the skillswhich is making purposeful refec-
tive judgments about what to believe or what to do. So, make
sure to use this table as an awareness tool, not a map.
A First Look at Inductive and
Deductive Reasoning
The table describing the core critical thinking skills (see page
33) mentions inductive or deductive reasoning in the subskill
column of the inference row and on the evaluation row.
Conceiving of inferential reasoning as being either induction or
deduction has a long and rich history going back to Aristotle
(384322 BCE).
xviii
Over the centuries, logicians studying de-
ductive reasoning developed deductive logic systems that
are useful in felds like mathematics and computer science.
xix
Statisticians have developed advanced techniques of statis-
tical analysis that are useful for the kinds of probabilistic in-
ductive inferences characteristic of scientific research and
economics.
xx
But, as you will see from the examples in this
section and later in the book, we all use inductive and deduc-
tive reasoning in making everyday inferences about what to
believe or what to do. Lets take a quick preliminary look frst
at inductive reasoning and then at deductive reasoning. In later
chapters we will return again and again to explore how critical
thinking skills relate to induction and deduction.
NURSES HEALTH STUDYDECADES
OF DATA
One powerful example of research that uses inductive
reasoning is the Nurses Health Study. This project is per-
haps the most comprehensive descriptive investigation of
health-related behavior ever conducted. Since its inception
in 1976, over 238,000 nurses have provided information.
xxi
The details in the box entitled Early Life Factors and Risk
of Breast Cancer, report findings based on statistical
analyses of millions of data points. As you can see, some
remarkable, unexpected, and important correlations were
discovered.
xxii
Measured expressions like investigations
. . . suggested . . ., . . . is associated with reduced risk
. . ., and strong correlations . . . support . . . character-
ize the report. The scientists who conducted this research
are presenting probabilistic conclusions. Their conclusions
are warranted because the statistical analyses provide suf-
ficient confidence to assert that the relationships on which
they report are highly unlikely to have occurred by random
chance.
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
S
k
i
l
l
e
d
a
n
d
E
a
g
e
r
t
o
T
h
i
n
k
3
5
that person never worked for an organization like
ours before. Its a tough choice. But Im think-
ing that probably the second person would
be the best of the three for us to hire since
innovative ideas are more important to
us than experience or enthusiasm.
In the past whenever the TV news
programs in Chicago ran headline
stories featuring a sketch artists
drawing of a fugitive, the Chicago
Police Department (CPD) hotline
received over 200 phone calls
from people all over the city who
said that they spotted the person.
Tonight the Chicago TV news
programs are going to fea-
ture a sketch artists drawing
of a fugitive whom the police
are trying to locate. This will
probably yield hundreds of
calls to the CPD hotline.
Suppose we imagine elec-
tricity fowing through wires
in the way that water fows
through pipes. With this analogy in mind, it would be rea-
sonable to infer that wires that are larger in circumference
should be capable of carrying greater electrical loads.
Inductive reasoning is used when we are trying to diagnose
what the problem might be or deciding which of several prom-
ising options would be the most reasonable to select. Scien-
tists use inductive methods, such as experimentation, and
inductive tools, such as statistics. The Nurses Health Study
report was an example of scientific findings derived induc-
tively. When we base our predictions on our past experiences
about how things will happen in the future, we are using in-
ductive reasoning. Reasoning by analogy, exemplifed in the
example about electricity being like water, is inductive. In
strong, inductive reasoning, the evidence at hand gives us a
reasonable assurance that the conclusion we are drawing is
probably true. As long as there is the possibility that all the
reasons for a claim could be true and yet the claim itself could
turn out to be false, we are in the realm of inductive reasoning.
COSMOS VS. CHAOS
The idea that the earth is a planet revolving around the sun is
often attributed to the ffteenth-century Polish astronomer-priest
named Copernicus. But, in fact, the frst scientist known to have
reasoned to that view of the solar system was the Greek as-
tronomer mathematician Aristarchus, who lived more than two
millennia earlier. Centuries before telescopes were invented,
Aristarchus had only his eyes and, of course, his mind. Carl Sa-
gan describes the reasoning Aristarchus used in a clip from the
Cosmos series, which you can access at www.
mythinkinglab.com.
Sagan tells us that Aristarchus
deduced that the Sun had to be
much larger from the size of the
Earths shadow on the Moon
during a lunar eclipse. Aris-
tarchus used deduction to infer
that the Sun was much larger
than the Earth because there
was no other possible explana-
tion for the size of the shadow
of the Earth on the Moon dur-
i ng a l unar ecl i pse than that
the shadow is being made by a
hugely larger source of light shining
toward the Earth and the Moon from a
very great distance away.
DEDUCTIVE
REASONING
Drawing inferences in which it
appears that the conclusion can-
not possibly be false if all of the premises are true is called
deductive reasoning.
Here are some examples:
San Francisco is west of Denver. Denver is west of Detroit
and Newark. Therefore, we can infer with deductive
certitude that San Francisco is west of Newark.
Every successful president of the United States was both
diplomatic and decisive. General Dwight D. Eisenhower
served in WWII as the Commander of the Allied Armies
in Europe and then went on to become a successful U.S.
president. Therefore, President Eisenhower was decisive
and diplomatic.
Either we attended the campus Halloween party last year
or we were in Texas visiting your folks that day. We did not
go to Texas at all last year. So, we must have attended the
campus Halloween party last year.
Assume that a, b, and c are any three numbers. Where
w and y are numbers, assume that f is a mathemati-
cal function such that fwy yields z where z is the num-
ber that is the product of w multiplied by y. It follows
deductively then that (fa(fbc)) yields to the product of a
multiplied by the product of b multiplied by c.
If God intended marriage for the sole purpose of human re-
production, and if same-sex couples are entirely incapable
of human reproduction, then it follows that God did not
intend marriage for same-sex couples.
Not every argument is of equal quality. Therefore, at least
one argument is better than at least one other argument.
Watch the Video on mythinkinglab.com
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
0
2
3
6
Mathematics, algebra, geometry, and computer program-
ming rely heavily on deductive reasoning. Activities that re-
quire us to apply strict protocols, rules, or regulations that
leave no room for independent judgment call on our deduc-
tive reasoning skills. People often enjoy games and puzzles
that test their deductive reasoning skills, such as Sudoku.
When we seek to resolve questions and doubts by appeal to
frst principles, commandments, or beliefs that are assumed
to be absolute certitudes, we are often using our deductive
powers.
to that knowledgefor example to
interpret some data, to analyze argu-
ments, to draw out the consequences
of certain principles or facts, or to
explain the right methods to apply.
Take the textbooks for your other sub-
jects and review the exercises at the
end of the unit or chapter you are on.
Identify those questions, if any, that
are intended to evoke critical thinking
skills. In the case of each textbook,
write fve additional exercise ques-
tions that evoke critical thinking about
the content of the chapter.
1
A good education includes learning
content knowledge and learning skills.
Because there is so much to learn, it is
understandable that many instructors
focus a lot of attention on helping stu-
dents get the content knowledge right.
These profs often call on students in
class to answer questions that show
that they know the meanings of techni-
cal terms or have learned the material
from a previous lesson. Sprinkled in
among those questions from time to
time are critical thinking skills questions
like those given in the table on page 31.
Thinking Critically What Are Your Professors and Textbooks
Asking of You?
Here is your challenge: In each of your
classes over the next two class days,
keep a list of the questions that the
instructors ask students. Then, take
the complete list and evaluate each
question to see which were intended to
evoke the use of critical thinking skills.
Which skills were most often evoked?
2
Some textbooks include exercises
at the end of each chapter or unit.
Those exercises can address content
knowledge to be sure it is well under-
stood. They can also invite students
to apply their critical thinking skills
Deductive reasoning is a very important form of inference,
as is inductive reasoning. We require both forms of inference
to be successful in critical thinking. There is a lot more to learn
about inductive and deductive reasoning. We will explore the
uses and evaluation of both kinds of reasoning in more detail
later. Chapter 8 is on deduction and Chapter 9 is on induc-
tion. As a matter of fact, this is a good place to talk about
how this book is organized and how you can use this book
to plan your learning to strengthen your critical thinking skills
and habits of mind.
How to Get the Most Out
of this Book
Our plan from here forward is to use each chapter to empha-
size different critical thinking skills, always remembering to
apply those skills with strong positive critical thinking habits of
mind. To strengthen our critical thinking skills, we will empha-
size frst one skill and then another.
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
S
k
i
l
l
e
d
a
n
d
E
a
g
e
r
t
o
T
h
i
n
k
3
7
If your instructor has elected to supplement the basics we
present in these ffteen chapters, she or he may have added
one or more of the four additional optional chapters to your
version of this book. One of those supplemental chapters is
on how social scientists think, one on how natural scientists
think, one on ethical decision making, and one is on the logic
of declarative statements. Building the connections between
critical thinking and each of those different domains was both
enjoyable and interesting for us, as authors. We sincerely hope
that you have the opportunity to enjoy and learn from one or
more of those chapters too. We think each of them, like the 15
we proudly included in the basic version of THINK Critically,
will further strengthen your critical thinking skills and habits of
mind. And that, after all, is our the whole point. Its about you,
building up your critical thinking skills and habits of mind, and
you capitalizing on your critical thinking to achieve success in
college and throughout your whole life.
The key to getting the most out of this book is to prac-
tice your critical thinking skills as often as possible. There
are literally hundreds of exercises in this text. Look for them
not only at the ends chapters but in the Thinking Critically
boxes within each chapter. There are more exercises for
you at www.mythinkinglab.com. Youll fnd that some of
these exercises ask you to think to yourself while others ask
you to think in groups. This mirrors real life in that critical
thinking is both an individual process on some occasions
and a group problem-solving and a group decision-making
process on other occasions. The point of including all of
these exercises is that it is not enough to simply read about
critical thinking as a topic, or passively view others thinking
critically. We humans learn by doing. Building expertise at
refective judgmentthat is, at critical thinkingtakes prac-
tice, and lots of it!
But first things first! Chapter 3, on problem solving, ap-
plies critical thinking to something we all care about, namely
your being successful academically. From there we focus on
strengthening specifc skills.
We begin with interpretation and analysis in Chapters 4
and 5 when we examine how to clarify the meanings of indi-
vidual claims and how to visually display the reasoning we use
to support our claims and conclusions. In Chapters 6 through
9 we will work on evaluation, looking first at how to assess
the credibility of individual claims and then at how to evalu-
ate the quality of arguments. Strengthening our self-regulation
skill will be our emphasis in Chapters 10 and 11 as we take a
closer look at how to strengthen our real-life decision mak-
ing. Snap judgments and refective decisions are the topics for
those two chapters.
We draw everything weve learned about critical thinking
back together in Chapters 12, 13, and 14. In this set of chap-
ters, which emphasize inference and explanation, as we
focus on how human beings use their powers of reasoning
to acquire new knowledge by means of analogies, inferences
drawn from core ideological beliefs, and inferences drawn
through methodical scientific investigative inquiry. These
chapters explore the benefits, uses, strengths, and weak-
nesses of the three most powerful forms of argument making:
comparative (this is like that) reasoning, ideological (top
down) reasoning, and empirical (bottom up) reasoning.
We complete the core set of ffteen chapters with one that
addresses the vital skill of communicating in writing the criti-
cal thinking you have invested in a given question, issue, deci-
sion, or point of view. Effective writing and critical thinking just
might be the two most important things to learnperiod. The
two are connected not only in the world of education but in
every professional feld and all throughout life.
Explore the Concept on mythinkinglab.com
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
0
2
3
8
C
H
A
P
T
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
CHAPTER
We defined critical thinking and inquired into its value
for ourselves individually and for society in Chapter 1. In
this chapter we analyzed first the eager and then the
skilled parts of the phrase, skilled and eager to think
critically. The willingness comes in the form of the seven
positive habits of mind that dispose us toward engaging
problems and making decisions using our critical think-
ing. For each of these seven habits, there is an opposite
habit of mind that disposes us to be averse or hostile to-
ward using critical thinking as our way of problem solving
and decision making. We can fortify our critical thinking
habits of mind by valuing critical thinking, taking stock of
our current disposition toward critical thinking, looking for
opportunities to translate the habits into practice, and be-
ing persistent in our efforts to engage problems using our
critical thinking skills.
Being skilled at thinking is only part of the story. We
examined the six core critical thinking skills: interpreta-
tion, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and
self-regulation. By asking good questions, we fire up
those skills and their subskills. The skill of inference in-
cluded both of the domains that are traditionally known
as inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. To
clarify the difference between induction and deduction
we pointed to examples and presented definitions. But
because this was only our first look at induction and de-
duction, we did not go as deeply into these topics here
as we will in later chapters.
Knowing the plan for ones learning provides bench-
marks for progress and helps a person to clarify his or
her expectations. If the goal of this book is to assist you
in building up your critical thinking skills and habits of
mind, then there had better be a plan for achieving that
goal. There is a plan, and we wanted to share it with you
early in the book. We will first look at problem solving,
then delve deeper into the different critical thinking skills,
with the reminder to always apply those skills with strong
positive critical thinking habits of mind.
KEY TERMS
truth-seeking means that a person has intellectual integrity and a
courageous desire to actively strive for the best possible knowledge
in any given situation. A truth-seeker asks probing questions and
follows reasons and evidence wherever they lead, even if the results
go against his or her cherished beliefs.(p. 23)
open-minded means that a person is tolerant of divergent views
and sensitive to the possibility of his or her own possible biases.
An open-minded person respects the right of others to have differ-
ent opinions.(p. 23)
analytical means that a person is habitually alert to potential prob-
lems and vigilant in anticipating consequences and trying to foresee
short-term and long-term outcomes of events, decisions, and actions.
Foresightful is another word for what analytical means here. (p. 23)
systematic means that a person consistently endeavors to take
an organized and thorough approach to identifying and resolving
problems. A systematic person is orderly, focused, persistent, and
diligent in his or her approach to problem solving, learning,
and inquiry. (p. 23)
confdent in reasoning means that a person is trustful of his or
her own reasoning skills to yield good judgments. A persons or a
groups confdence in their own critical thinking may or may not be
warranted, which is another matter.(p. 23)
inquisitive means that a person habitually strives to be well-
informed, wants to know how things work, and seeks to learn new
things about a wide range of topics, even if the immediate utility of
knowing those things is not directly evident. An inquisitive person
has a strong sense of intellectual curiosity.(p. 23)
judicious means that a person approaches problems with a sense
that some are ill-structured and some can have more than one
plausible solution. A judicious person has the cognitive maturity
to realize that many questions and issues are not black and white
and that, at times, judgments must be made in contexts of uncer-
tainty.(p. 23)
interpretation is an expression of the meaning or signifcance of
a wide variety of experiences, situations, data, events, judgments,
conventions, beliefs, rules, procedures, or criteria.(p. 33)
inference identifes and secures elements needed to draw reason-
able conclusions; it forms conjectures and hypotheses, it considers
relevant information, and it educes or draws out the consequences
fowing from data, statements, principles, evidence, judgments,
02
REVIEW Study and Review on mythinkinglab.com
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
3
9
C
H
A
P
T
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
k
i
l
l
e
d
a
n
d
E
a
g
e
r
t
o
T
h
i
n
k
beliefs, opinions, concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms
of representation.(p. 33)
evaluation assesses the credibility of statements or other represen-
tations that are accounts or descriptions of a persons perception,
experience, situation, judgment, belief, or opinion; also assesses
the logical strength of the actual or intended inferential relationships
among statements, descriptions, questions, or other forms
of representation.(p. 33)
self-regulation is a process in which one monitors ones cogni-
tive activities, the elements used in those activities, and the results
educed, particularly by applying skills in analysis, and evaluation
to ones own inferential judgments with a view toward questioning,
confrming, validating, or correcting either ones reasoning or ones
results.(p. 33)
inductive reasoning is drawing probabilistic inferences regarding
what is most likely to be true or most likely not true, given certain
information.(p. 34)
deductive reasoning is drawing inferences in which it appears
that the conclusion cannot possibly be false if all of the premises
are true.(p. 35)
analysis identifes the intended and actual inferential relation-
ships among statements, questions, concepts, descriptions, or
other forms of representation intended to express belief, judgment,
experiences, reasons, information, or opinions.(p. 37)
explanation states and justifes reasoning in terms of the evidential,
conceptual, methodological, criteriological, and contextual consid-
erations upon which ones results were based; also presents ones
reasoning in the form of cogent arguments.(p. 37)
Dramatic reenactment is not real life, but then neither are so-
called reality shows. However, dramatic reenactments can be
very valuable because they often highlight ideas and decision
making in tense situations where uncertainties and risks abound.
The clips from Apollo 13 and Philadelphia certainly do that. The
transcript of Leslie Stahls interview with Victor Crawford is
dramatic for what it reveals. Access all three of these clips at
www.mythinkinglab.com.
FIND IT ON MYTHINKINGLAB.COM
When we reference a video clip in the exercises, as with the
truthiness clip from Comedy Centrals The Colbert Report, you
can also fnd it at www.mythinkinglab.com.
The video clip of the El Train scene from 12 Angry Men is a clas-
sic. Please view that scene and analyze it carefully, noticing how
the argument unfolds and how the
train of reasoning is often inter-
rupted yet always stays on track.
The movie itself is terrific, and we
urge you to watch it all the way
through. Do you think weve made
much progress on the issue of racial
profling in the past 50 years? How
about on a citizens duty to render
service as a thoughtful and diligent
juror? (p. 29)
Watch the Video on mythinkinglab.com
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
0
2
4
0
C
H
A
P
T
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
REFLECTIVE LOG
1. Mark Twain is reported to have said, I have never let my
schooling interfere with my education.
xxiii
Connect that senti-
ment with the information on page 27 in the box, The Experts
Worried That School Might Be Harmful!. What is your rea-
soned opinion on the matter? If you were critical of schooling,
what would you recommend be done to improve it? What evi-
dence do you have that your suggestions would actually work
in the real world? Now ask someone who is 10 years younger
than you what Mark Twain meant. Note the response in your
log. Then ask someone who is at least 20 years older than you
what Twains saying might mean. Log the response. Compare
the three opinions: yours, the younger persons, and the older
persons. End this notation in your log by refecting on these
fnal questions: Should K-12 schooling be designed to prevent
students from learning to think critically for themselves? Why
or why not?
2. You were specifcally asked not to defend, evaluate, or to
argue for one side or the other in the previous two exercise
items. Heres your new challenge: Keeping an open mind and
maybe stirring up a bit of courage, too, interview two profes-
sors and two students not in your critical thinking class. Present
them with the same two claims, but invite them to agree or
disagree with each one and to give their reasons. Note their
reasons respectfully, and ask follow-up questions aimed at
evoking more critical thinking. You should be able to base your
follow-up questions on the group work you did earlier when
you developed the best arguments for and against each claim.
Then, in your refective log, record the conversations and high-
light some of the places where the people you interviewed did,
in fact, engage in some deeper critical thinking about the topic.
3. Using the Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric from
Chapter 1, how would you evaluate the critical thinking
displayed by each of the four people you interviewed? Quote
some of the things each side said that led you to evaluate them
in the way that you did. [We know you caught it, but just in
case you didnt, that was another critical thinking skills ques-
tion. This one asked you to explain the evidence you used for
your evaluation.]
GROUP EXERCISE: WHAT WOULD IT BE LIKE?
family member? Given that you have the power to say no to his
requests, what are your plans with regard to his requests?
Scenario #2. You have a part-time job in a department store as a
clerk. Your old manager used to let your group solve a lot of the stores
own problems, like who is going to cover a shift if someone cant work
on a given day. But now you have a new manager. This person makes
scheduling decisions arbitrarily, and is disorganized, and this means
that your group always seems to be rushing to meet deadlines. She
also habitually does not think about the consequences of her actions.
What is it like to work for this supervisor? Given that you have the right
to complain to management about your new supervisor, is that an
option you will pursue? What other plans might you make to help you
cope with the approach taken by this new supervisor?
Our habitual attitudes affect our behavior and the way that we
interact with one another. People who are habitually intellectually
dishonest, intolerant, or indifferent act differently in household and
workplace settings than those who have opposite, positive habits.
This exercise invites you to draw on your experience to describe
what it would be like to interact regularly with a person with nega-
tive critical thinking habits of mind.
Scenario #1. You have a brother, close to your age, who is
habitually intellectually dishonest, intolerant, and imprudent in
making decisions. He has been like this since junior high school,
and he recently enrolled at your college. Now he wants to share
your apartment, borrow your car, and get you to help him with his
academic assignments. What is it like to have this person as your
Exercises
SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS
1. Consider this claim: If textbooks used more critical thinking
exercises, students would learn the material better. What are
the best arguments for and against that claim? Do not take a
position on this. Rather, work to develop the strongest argu-
ments possible for both sides. What additional information
would you need to investigate, in order to ground each sides
arguments in solid facts? What assumptions about learning
and schooling are required to make each sides arguments as
strong as possible? Again, do not evaluate (yet).
2. Consider this claim: Professors should ask content ques-
tions, not critical thinking questions. Its the responsibility of
the professor to lay out the content, but its the job of the
student to think critically about the subject matter. What are
the best arguments for and against that claim? As with the
question above, do not take a position on this. Rather, work
to develop the strongest arguments possible for both sides.
What additional information would you need to investigate, in
order to ground each sides arguments in solid facts? What
assumptions about learning and schooling are required to
make each sides arguments as strong as possible? Again, do
not evaluate (yet).
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
4
1
C
H
A
P
T
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
k
i
l
l
e
d
a
n
d
E
a
g
e
r
t
o
T
h
i
n
k
THE COLBERT REPORT
the day. How does truthiness, as Mr. Colbert defnes it, relate to
truth-seeking? Go to www.mythinkinglab.com to view the clip.
Watch the Video on mythinkinglab.com
Stephen Colbert,
a master of humor and irony, offers truthiness as his word of
APOLLO 13 QUESTION
The second or third time through, focus on trying to identify evidence
of the critical thinking skills and habits of mind. Listen to what the char-
acters say and watch their body language. Discuss the scene in detail,
and then prepare a brief description of the scene, like the description
that begins this chapter. Your description should highlight those critical
thinking skills and habits of mind you noticed the characters displaying
either individually or as a group.
Watch the Video on mythinkinglab.com
Group or Individual Exercise: The scene in Apollo 13 when the engi-
neers are put in a room and given a task is a memorable dramatization
of a critical thinking challenge. Their task is to engineer something
that will reduce the toxicity of the air in the spacecraft (a) as quickly
as possible because time is running out, (b) using only the things the
astronauts have at their disposal, and (c) using methods that the astro-
nauts can repeat so that they can build the device themselves. Go to
www.mythinkinglab.com, and watch the scene two or three times.
views. Ask at least three teachers or professors, ask three success-
ful people in business and three in other professions, and ask three
people who graduated at least 20 years ago what they think. Get
their reasons, not just their opinions. Then formulate the arguments
pro and con. Make and post a Web video that shows both sides.
WEB VIDEO PROJECT
Consider this claim: Effective writing and critical thinking are the
two most important things to learn in college. Do not take a posi-
tion on that claim; instead present the strongest possible argu-
ments pro and con. One way to gather information about this is to
ask other people their views and the reasons they have for those
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
7
1
6
6
2
4
0
0
Think Critically, by Peter Facione and Carol Ann Gittens. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.