NHCT100: CRITICAL

THINKING, LOGIC &

PROBLEM SOLVING 1

Dr E. Jakaza
INTRODUCTION TO
CRITICAL THINKING
.
The Rationale

• “It is so important that all of our citizens be encouraged to think

critically rather than merely reproduce the information pushed
towards them by proliferating media sources… I believe that those
virtues of reflection, of critical reasoning and of ethical enquiry are
ones that have gained renewed urgency in the present moment, as
humanity is faced with unprecedented challenges of a global kind -
from climate change to mass migration. (Higgins, Irish Times, Nov.
16, 2017)
• •Education is no longer solely about attaining knowledge; rather, a
large focus now rests on being able to ADAPT our thinking to the
constant development of new information and new knowledge.
• Emphasis in colleges and universities as opposed to High schools is on
fostering “higher-order thinking”: the active, intelligent evaluation of ideas
and information. (Bassham, G., Henry, WI., James, N. & M. Wallace , 2011)
• The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think
critically. —Martin Luther King J
• Why? The ultimate objective in thinking critically is to come to conclusions
that are correct and to make decisions that are wise.

RATIONALE CONT..
 Save your critical thinking for things that matter
 Do it in the morning
 Take a step back
 Play Devil’s Advocate
 Leave emotion at the door

5 TIPS FOR CRITICAL THINKING

Please identify whether the person described is more
likely to be an engineer or a lawyer

• Jack is a 45-year old man. He is married and has four children.

He is generally conservative, careful and ambitious. He shows
no interest in political and social issues and spends most of his
free time on his many hobbies which include home carpentry,
sailing and mathematical puzzles..
CRITICAL THINKING:
WHAT IS IT?
.
CRITICAL
 The word critical has been used often to mean “negative and
fault-finding.”
 But critical also means “involving or exercising skilled
judgment or observation.”
 Critical vs uncritical mind

Critical Thinking
“…is the general term given to a wide range of cognitive skills
and intellectual dispositions needed to effectively identify,
analyze, and evaluate arguments and truth claims; to discover
and overcome personal preconceptions and biases; to formulate
and present convincing reasons in support of conclusions; and
to make reasonable, intelligent decisions about what to believe
and what to do” (Bassham, et al., 2011) .
 Critical thinking is a metacognitive process, consisting of a number of skills
and dispositions, that, through purposeful, self-regulatory reflective judgment,
increases the chances of producing a logical solution to a problem or a valid
conclusion to an argument
 It’s not a monolithic skill nor a single cognitive ability
 It is a “careful, goal-directed thinking” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

CRITICAL THINKING DEFINITION

CONT..
 Dispositions
 Skills- problem solving, analysing, asking questions, inferring and evaluating
 Reflective Judgment
 Applications

CRITICAL THINKING IS ABOUT

 …the extent to which an individual is disposed, inclined or willing to perform
a given thinking skill
 A person with strong disposition towards critical thinking has the consistent
internal motivation to engage problems and make decisions by using critical
thinking, meaning:
 • the person consistently values critical thinking
 • believes that using critical thinking skills offers the greatest promise for
reaching good judgments, and
 • intends to approach problems and decisions by applying critical thinking
skills as best as he/she can.

DISPOSITIONS TOWARDS CRITICAL

THINKING
 Intellectual roots of CT can be traced back to the teaching practices of
Socrates
 He used it as a method of questioning and probing claims to knowledge
 He argues that persons might have power and high position but deeply
confused and irrational
 Socrates was later followed by Plato, Aristotle, The Rennaisance, Bacon,
Descartes, John Dewey et cetera- only trained, comprehensive, well-reasoned
thinking can take us beyond the surface
 “I think therefore, I am” Descartes (1595- 1650)

ORIGINS OF CRITICAL THINKING

SKILLS
 The main aim of education is practical and reflective judgment, a mind trained
to be critical everywhere in the use of evidence. —Brand Blanchar
 Critical thinking enables us to:
 understanding the arguments and beliefs of others
 critically evaluate those arguments and beliefs

BENEFITS OF CRITICAL THINKING

 develop and defend one’s own well-supported arguments and beliefs
 Develop good thinking and communication skills— to be quick learners who
can solve problems, think creatively, gather and analyze information, draw
appropriate conclusions from data, and communicate their ideas clearly and
effectively
 Avoid making foolish decisions; aids the mind in arriving at the knowledge of
the truth
 CT informs our behaviors, actions and decisions to “improve our ability to
reason and generate strong arguments” (Hanscomb, 2016 p. 3)

BENEFITS CONTD..
 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord; Isaiah 1 vs 18
 Logic- derived from the Greek word ‘logos’ which means ‘word’; the study of
words in dialogues, speeches etc
 “The methods and principles used in distinguishing correct from incorrect
reasoning” Copi, M
 Logic is distinguishing correct (valid) from incorrect (invalid) arguments.
(Kahane, )
 Logic is a science of laws, the basis of rules which can be used in reasoning
(Hursel, )

CRITICAL THINKING VS LOGIC

 Quite a number of theories that we can refer to
 Some of these theories include: Expected Utility Theory, Probability Theory,
Rhetoric, Pragma-Dialectic Theory of Argumentation et cetera.
 David Hume- demonstrative reasoning vs probable reasoning
 Kant- an account of means-end reasoning
 Argumentation is a verbal and social activity of reason aimed at increasing (or
decreasing) the acceptability of a controversial standpoint, by putting forward
a constellation of propositions intended to justify (or refute) the standpoint.

THEORIES OF CRITICAL THINKING

 the pragma- dialectic theory of argumentation as was developed by van
Eemeren and Grootendorst (1984, 1987, 1992, 2004) and extended by van
Eemeren and Houtlosser (2002, 2009) and van Eemeren (2009, 2010)
 “hark back to classical dialectics in concentrating on critical scrutiny of
standpoints” (van Rees 2000: 256).
 four theoretical principles which lay the foundation for the critical and
empirical analysis of argumentative discourse: externalisation, socialisation,
functionalisation and dialectification

THE ARGUMENTATION THEORY

 Externalisation: involves putting forward statements by language users and
their interpretation by other users (van Eemeren and Grootendorst 1984)-
expressed opinions, a communicative activity
 Socialisation: utterances that are made in the argumentative discussion or text
are examined as parts of a dialogue to resolve a difference of opinion by
having a critical argumentative exchange- Pro, Contra argumentation;
acceptance & rejection

METATHEORETICAL PRINCIPLES
 Functionalisation: Argumentation as a verbal activity- utterances or
propositions advanced in an argumentative discussion or text serve to perform
a particular speech act-
 Dialectification: in the argumentation, the arguers perform two-fold tasks
when they advance arguments in the defence of a standpoint- Pro and Contra
argumentation.
 The listener adopts “the position of a rational judge and also reacts to the
argument critically” (Jakaza, 2013, 97)

METATHEORETICAL PRINCIPLES
 Formulated with the aim of resolving a difference of opinion on the merits
(van Eemeren & Houtlosser 2002).
 It is influenced considerably by the dialectical notion of reasonableness. The
notion of reasonableness entails that nothing is a certainty, hence every claim
is supposed to be subjected to a critical test.
 It specifies the stages that have to be distinguished in resolving a difference of
opinion; confrontation, opening, argumentation and concluding stage

CRITICAL DISCUSSION MODEL

 Scholars vary on the number of elements of CT. However some of these
elements include:
 Observing: One has to check for inconsistencies, irregularities and
abnormalities in the immediate environment and then acknowledge the
presence of any issue or problem that requires attention
 Wonder/ Asking Questions: Questions are precursors of deep learning as
they verify the validity of something. In wondering, different perspectives,
opinions and dispositions are imagined
 Gather Information: Critical Thinkers gather information from different
sources in order to fully develop their argument. All source should be vetted

ELEMENTS OF CRITICAL THINKING

 Analyse/ Inferences: Through analysis we deconstruct arguments, reveal
implicit biases, and explore alternative viewpoints. It is a methodical process
that involves examining and re-examining
 Synthesis/ Argument: This involves putting together disparate ides, facts,
assumptions, propositions et cetera into an overarching argument.
 Reflect: Reflection involves re-assessment of one’s analysis, argumentative
logic to check for possible influences that might have impacted their reasoning

ELEMENTS OF CRITICAL THINKING

CONTD..
 Identify: After reflection, one has to identify problematic areas and isolate
inconsistancies. One should tackle one problem or inconsistancy at a time
 Decide: Make informed decisions based on solid facts and arguments.

ELEMENTS OF CT CONTD…
 Analysis: the ability to carefully examine something, whether it is a problem,
a set of data, or a text, weighing up the arguments
 Interpretation: Making sense of the meaning of the processed information is;
the process of discovering, determining, or assigning meaning
 Evaluation: the ability to make decisions based on the available information.
 Explanation: communicating your findings and reasoning clearly.
 Application: is the use of information that is recalled and understood. When
students use acquired facts and skills in a new situation, they are practicing the
transfer of solutions from one problem to another.

CRITICAL THINKING TOOLS

 Sally: Abortion is morally wrong and those who think otherwise are seeking to
justify murder!
 Bob: Abortion is not morally wrong and those who think so are right-wing
bigots who are seeking to impose their narrow-minded views on all the rest of
us!

 Is this an argument?
 Is it the same sense that we have noted under LOGIC and CRTICAL
THINKING?

ARGUMENT
 An argument should be tested whether it’s true or false- It is a statement,
claim, or idea
 A statement is a type of sentence that can be true or false and corresponds to
the grammatical category of a “declarative sentence.”
 Sally: Abortion is morally wrong because it is wrong to take the life of an
innocent human being, and a fetus is an innocent human being.
 An argument consists of a conclusion and premises
 An argument is a set of statements, some of which (the premises) attempt to
provide a reason for thinking that some other statement (the conclusion) is
true.

ARGUMENT CONTD..
 The best way to identify whether an argument is present is to ask whether
there is a statement that someone is trying to establish as true by basing it on
some other statement.
 The other way is knowing certain key words or phrases that are premise
indicators or conclusion indicators
 I have been running competitively since 1999.
 I am so happy to have finally finished that class.

IDENTIFYING ARGUMENTS
PREMISE INDICATORS CONCLUSION INDICATORS
Since Therefore
Because So
For Hence
As Thus
Given that Implies that
Seeing that Consequently
For the reason that It follows that
Is shown by the fact that We may conclude that

PREMISE AND CONCLUSION

INDICATORS
 The woman in the hat is not a witch since witches have long noses and she doesn’t
have a long nose.
 I have been wrangling cattle since before you were old enough to tie your own
shoes.
 Albert is angry with me so he probably won’t be willing to help me wash the
dishes.
 First I washed the dishes and then I dried them.
 If the road wasn’t icy, the car wouldn’t have slid off the turn.
 Albert isn’t a fireman and he isn’t a fisherman either.
 Are you seeing that rhinoceros over there? It is huge!

WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING ARE ARGUMENTS?

IF IT IS AN ARGUMENT, IDENTIFY THE
CONCLUSION OF THE ARGUMENT
 Validity relates to how well the premises support the conclusion, and it is the golden
standard that every argument should aim for.
 A valid argument is an argument whose conclusion cannot possibly be false, assuming
that the premises are true.
 An argument is valid if it isn’t possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion false
 If the premises are true then the conclusion is true
 But, it is possible for the premise to be true and yet the conclusion false= Invalid
argument
 1. George was President of the United States
 2. Therefore, George was elected President of the United States (from 1)—Gerald Ford
after Richard Nixon resigned

VALID VS INVALID ARGUMENTS

 The validity of the argument does not depend on whether or not the premises (or
conclusion) are actually true.
 Validity depends only on the logical relationship between the premises and the
conclusion.
 Though the actual truth of the premises is important to the quality of the argument, if
the premises of the argument are false, then the argument doesn’t provide any reason
for accepting the conclusion.
 Informal validity test: Imagine of a world in which the premises are true and the
conclusion is false;
 If you can imagine such a world, then the argument is invalid.
 If you cannot imagine such a world, then the argument is valid

VALID VS INVALID ARGUMENTS

CONTD..
 SCENARION 1
 1. John jumped out of an airplane without a parachute
 2. Therefore, John fell to his death (from 1)

 SCENARIO 2
 1. John jumped out of an airplane travelling 300 mph at a height of 10,000 ft
without a parachute
 2. John fell to his death (from 1)

SOME PRACTICE EXAMPLES

 A good argument is not only valid, but also sound.
 A sound argument is a valid argument that has all true premises
 All sound arguments are valid arguments, but not all valid arguments are
sound arguments
 Why? A sound argument have all true premises
 1. A person can be President of the United States only if they were born in
Kenya
 2. Obama was President of the United States
 3. Therefore, Obama was born in Kenya (from 1-2)

SOUNDNESS
 1. Craig loves Linda. Linda loves Monique. Therefore, Craig loves Monique.
 2. James is a Christian. Therefore, James communicates with God.
 3. All Muslims pray to Allah. Muhammad is a Muslim. Therefore, Muhammad
prays to Allah.
 4. Monica is a French teacher. Therefore, Monica knows how to teach French.

DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE FOLLOWING

ARGUMENTS ARE VALID BY USING THE INFORMAL TEST
OF VALIDITY. IF THE ARGUMENT IS INVALID, PROVIDE A
COUNTEREXAMPLE.
 A deductive argument is an argument whose conclusion is supposed to follow
from its premises with absolute certainty
 An inductive argument is an argument whose conclusion is supposed to follow
from its premises with a high level of probability
 The premises of good inductive arguments don’t demonstrate their
conclusions; they support them
 Tweets is a healthy, normally functioning bird and since most healthy,
normally functioning birds fly, Tweets probably flies

DEDUCTIVE VS INDUCTIVE
ARGUMENTS
 1. Tweets is a healthy, normally functioning bird
 2. Most healthy, normally functioning birds fly
 3. Therefore, Tweets probably flies
 Inductive arguments are defeasible arguments since by adding further
information or premises to the argument, we can overturn (defeat) the verdict
that the conclusion is well-supported by the premises. For example, if we add:
 4. Tweets is 6 ft tall and can run 30 mph

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
 Gary is a convicted sex-offender, so Gary is not allowed to work with
children.

RECONSTRUCT THE ARGUMENT; STATE

WHETHER IT IS VALID/INVALID,
DEDUCTIVE/INDUCTIVE, SOUND
 It is the ability to identify both the problem at hand and the goal you want to
achieve in light of this problem; and subsequent solution generation and
selection that facilitate goal attainment.
 The best strategy for solving a problem depends largely on the context of the
problem.
 It is perhaps the most important application of CT because it can be considered
as the foundation of each of the other CT applications.

PROBLEM SOLVING
 1. Define the Problem
 2. Gather & Organise the Available Information
 3. Evaluate Possible Strategies
 4. Generate Possible Solutions
 5. Monitor the Progress of the Solution Strategy
 6. Evaluate Results of the Solution Strategy
 7. Verify the Solution

STAGES IN PROBLEM SOLVING

 “Zimbabwe will continue training people and we are also changing the
philosophy of why we go to school.”
 “We go to school in order to be able to use our knowledge and skills and
attitudes to start new enterprises. We should no longer talk about brain drain.
We talk about brain circulation.
 “Brain drain assumes that the pot which is cooking people has stopped
cooking. We will continue cooking our people in our higher and tertiary
education institutions” Prof A Murwira, Minister of Higher and Tertiary
Education, Zimbabwe- Nehanda Radio

MINISTER QUESTION TIME IN

PARLIAMENT
 Analysing outcomes
 Comparing ideas
 Identifying parallels
 Evaluating ideas, information etc.
 Synthesizing information
 Drawing conclusions

APPLYING CRITICAL THINKING

BRIEF WEEKLY REPORT
BRIEF FINANCIAL REPORT
 A paraphrase is the use of different words to capture the same idea in a clearer
way
 In order to paraphrase well, you will have to rely on your understanding of
English to come up with what you think is the best way of capturing the
essence of the argument
 What is the conclusion?: Just because Jeremy’s prints were on the gun that
killed Tim and the gun was registered to Jeremy, it doesn’t follow that Jeremy
killed Tim since Jeremy’s prints would certainly be on his own gun and
someone else could have stolen Jeremy’s gun and used it to kill Tim.

COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY
 The fact that Jeremy’s prints were on the gun that killed Tim and the gun was
registered to Jeremy doesn’t mean that Jeremy killed Tim.

COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY
 1. Jeremy’s prints would be expected to be on a gun that was registered to him
 2. Someone could have stolen Jeremy’s gun and then used it to kill Tim
 3. Therefore, the fact that Jeremy’s prints were on the gun that killed Tim and
the gun was registered to Jeremy doesn’t mean that Jeremy killed Tim. (from
1-2)

COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY
 1. Tim was killed by a gun that was registered to Jeremy and had Jeremy’s
prints on it.
 2. It is possible that Jeremy’s gun was stolen from him.
 3. If Jeremy’s gun was stolen from him, then Jeremy could not have killed
Tim.
 4. Therefore, we do not know that Jeremy killed Tim. (from 1-3

COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY