Think Critically » (New Edition)

Peter Facione, PhD, wants to help everyone build up their critical thinking skills, for their own sakes, and for the sake of our freedom and democracy. Facione draws on decades of experience as a teacher, consultant, business entrepreneur, university dean, grandfather, husband, and avid “old school” pickup basketball player. Now he is taking his message about the importance of critical thinking directly to students. For improving reasoning skills for use in one’s personal, professional, and civic life, there may never before have been a more practical, enjoyable, important, comprehensive, and engaging text than this.

“I’ve paid very close attention to the way people make decisions since I was 13 years old,” says Facione. “Some people were good at solving problems and making decisions; others were not. I have always felt driven to figure out how to tell which were which.” He says that this led him as an undergraduate and later as a professor to study psychology, philosophy, logic, statistics, and information systems as he searched for how our beliefs, values, thinking skills, and habits of mind connect with the decisions we make, particularly in contexts of risk and uncertainty.

“As a teacher and as a college administrator, I focused on problem-solving and decision-making strategies so that I could be a more effective teacher and a more capable leader. I found it was always valuable when working with groups or individuals to be mindful of how they applied their cognitive skills and habits of mind to solve a problem, make a decision, or troubleshoot a situation. Careful analysis and open-minded truth seeking always worked better than any other way of approaching problems.”

A native Midwesterner, Facione earned his PhD in philosophy from Michigan State University and his BA in philosophy from Sacred Heart College in Detroit. He says, “Critical thinking has helped me be a better parent, citizen, manager, teacher, writer, and friend. It even helps a little when playing point guard!”

In academia, Facione served as provost of Loyola University—Chicago, dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Santa Clara University, and dean of the School of Human Development and Community Service at California State University—Fullerton. “As a dean and provost, I could easily see that critical thinking was alive and well in every professional field and academic discipline.”

“I’ve focused my research on the teaching and measurement of critical thinking since my earliest years as a faculty member in the 1960s and 1970s. But before you can measure something that crosses into every aspect of life, you have to be sure that you understand what it is. So in the 1980s, I first had to see whether there was a consensus among experts about the term critical thinking. After two years of research, a solid consensus emerged. That plus all the stats and behavioral science research I had studied and taught for years enabled me and my research team, during the 1990s, to design and validate tools to assess critical thinking skills and habits of mind. In the first decade of this century, our team has explored the connections between critical thinking and human decision making in its broadest sense.”

In fact, Facione spearheaded the international study to define critical thinking, sponsored by the American Philosophical Association. His research formed the basis for numerous government policy studies about critical thinking in the workplace, including research sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. Today, his tools for assessing reasoning are used around the world in educational, business, legal, military, and health sciences.

Today, Peter operates his own business, Measured Reasons. He is a speaker, writer, workshop presenter, and consultant for organizations large and small. His work focuses on strategic planning and leadership decision making, in addition to teaching and assessing critical thinking. With his wife, who is also his closest research colleague and coauthor of many books and assessment tools, he now lives in sunny Los Angeles, which suits him just fine. He welcomes questions from students and instructors–you can reach him at pfacione@measuredreasons.com.

THINK Critically is a cutting-edge self-reflective guide for improving critical thinking skills through careful analysis, reasoned inference and thoughtful evaluation of contemporary culture and ideas.

Taking cues from everyday life — education, business, health sciences, social work, law, government policy issues and current events — THINK Critically bridges the principles of critical thinking with real-world application.

With a highly-visual design, accessible narrative, and interactive approach, THINK Critically strengthens students’ skills and motivation to make reasoned judgments.

This text introduces critical thinking by showcasing what vital and central positive habits of mind are, revisiting and building upon those skills throughout the text.

Jam-packed with engaging examples and masterful exercises, THINK Critically explains how to clarify ideas, analyze arguments, and evaluate inductive, deductive, comparative, ideological and empirical reasoning.

Risk and Uncertainty Abound

Critical Thinking and a Free Society

The One and the Many

What Do We Mean by “Critical Thinking”?

Expert Consensus Conceptualization

“Critical Thinking” Does Not Mean “Negative Thinking”

How to Get the Most Out of This Book

Evaluating Critical Thinking

The Students’ Assignment

The Students’ Statements

The Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric

Chapter 2: The “Able” in “Willing and Able” to Think Critically

Core Critical Thinking Skills

Interpreting and Analyzing the Consensus Statement

The Jury Is Deliberating

Critical Thinking Skills Fire In Many Combinations

Strengthening Our Core Critical Thinking Skills

The Art of the Good Question

Skills and Subskills Defined

Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Nurses’ Health Study - Decades of Data

Inductive Reasoning

Cosmos vs. Chaos

Deductive Reasoning

Chapter 3: The “Willing” in “Willing and Able” to Think Critically

A Group Engaged in Crisis-Level Critical Thinking

The Spirit of a Strong Critical Thinker

Positive and Negative Habits of Mind

Preliminary Self-Assessment

Research on the Disposition toward Critical Thinking

Seven Positive Critical Thinking Habits of Mind

Negative Habits of Mind

Is a Good Critical Thinker Automatically a Good Person?

Building Positive Habits of Mind

Reconnecting Skills and Dispositions

Chapter 4: Clarifying Ideas

Interpretation, Context, and Purpose

How Precise Is Precise Enough?

Language and Thought

Vagueness: “Does the Term Include This Case or Not?”

Problematic Vagueness

Ambiguity: “Does the Term Mean This, or Does It Mean That?”

Problematic Ambiguity

Resolving Problematic Vagueness and Ambiguity

Contextualizing

Clarifying Original Intent

Negotiating the Meaning

Using Qualifications, Exceptions, or Exclusions

Stipulating the Meaning

Your Language Communities

National and Global Language Communities

Language Communities Formed of People with Like Interests

Academic Disciplines as Language Communities

Critical Thinking and College Introductory Courses

Chapter 5: Using Maps to Analyze Arguments and Decisions

Analyzing and Mapping Arguments

“Argument = (Reason + Claim)”

Two Reasons, Two Arguments

Two Confusions to Avoid

“Reason” and “Premise”

Distinguishing Reasons from Conclusion

Mapping Claims and Reasons

Mapping a Line of Reasoning

Mapping Implicit Ideas

Interpreting Unspoken Reasons and Claims in Context

Interpreting the Use of Irony, Humor, Sarcasm, and More

Giving Reasons and Making Arguments in Real Life

The El Train Argument from Twelve Angry Men

Huckabee and Stewart Discuss “The Pro-Life Issue — Abortion”

Analyzing and Mapping Decisions

“We Should Cancel the Spring Trip” #1

“We Should Cancel the Spring Trip” #2

Chapter 6: Evaluating Claims

Assessing the Source — Whom Should I Trust?

Claims Without Reasons

Cognitive Development and Healthy Skepticism

Authority and Expertise

Learned and Experienced

On-Topic, Up-to-Date, and Capable of Explaining

Unbiased and Truthful

Free of Conflicts of Interest, and Acting in the Client’s Interest

Unconstrained, Informed, and Mentally Stable

Assessing the Substance — What Should I Believe?

Donkey Dung Detector

Marketing, Spin, Disinformation, and Propaganda

Slanted Language and Loaded Expressions

Independent Verification

Can the Claim Be Confirmed?

Can the Claim Be Disconfirmed?

Independent Investigation and the Q-Ray Bracelet Case

Suspending Judgment

Chapter 7: Evaluating Arguments

Giving Reasons and Making Arguments

Truthfulness

Logical Strength

Relevance

Non-Circularity

The Four Tests for Evaluating Arguments

Test #1: Truthfulness of the Premises

Test #2: Logical Strength

Test #3: Relevance

Test #4: Non-Circularity

Contexts for Argument Making and Evaluative Terms

Common Reasoning Errors

Fallacies of Relevance

Appeals to Ignorance

Appeals to the Mob

Appeals to Emotion

Ad Hominem Attacks

Straw Man Fallacy

Playing with Words

Misuse of Authority

Chapter 8: Evaluating Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

Deductive Validity and Language

Reasoning Deductively about Declarative Statements

Denying the Consequent

Affirming the Antecedent

Disjunctive Syllogism

Reasoning Deductively about Classes of Objects

Applying a Generalization

Applying an Exception

The Power of “Only”

Reasoning Deductively about Relationships

Transitivity, Reflexivity, and Identity

Fallacies Masquerading as Valid Deductive Arguments

Affirming the Consequent

Denying the Antecedent

False Classification

Fallacies of Composition and Division

False Reference

Inductions and the Evidence at Hand

Evaluating Generalizations

Was the correct group sampled?

Were the data obtained in an effective way?

Were enough cases considered?

Was the sample representatively structured?

Coincidences, Correlations, and Causes

Coincidences

Correlations

Causes

Fallacies Masquerading as Strong Inductive Arguments

Erroneous Generalization

Playing with Numbers

False Dilemma

The Gambler’s Fallacy

False Cause

Slippery Slope

Chapter 9: Snap Judgments — Heuristic Thinking

Human Decision-Making Systems

The “Two-Systems” Approach to Human Decision Making

Reactive (System-1) Thinking

Reflective (System-2) Thinking

The Value of Each System

Heuristics: Their Benefits and Risks

Individual Cognitive Heuristics

1. Satisficing and 2. Temporizing

3. Affect: “Go with your Gut”

4. Simulation
5. Availability
6. Representation
7. Association
8. Stereotyping
9. “Us vs. Them”
XE "Optimistic Bias" 10. Power Differential
11. Anchoring with Adjustment
12. Illusion of Control

13. Optimistic Bias and 14. Hindsight Bias

15. Elimination by Aspect: “One Strike and You’re Out”
16. Loss and Risk Aversion
17. “All-or-Nothing”

Heuristics in Action

Chapter 10: Deciding What to Do and Doing It

Dominance Structuring: A Fortress of Conviction

“I Would Definitely Go to the Doctor”

Explaining and Defending Ourselves

A Poorly Crafted Assignment

Moving from Decision to Action

Phase 1: Pre-editing

Phase 2: Identifying One Promising Option

Phase 3: Testing the Promising Option

Phase 4: Fortifying the To-Be-Chosen Option

Benefits and Risks of Dominance Structuring

O.J. Simpson’s Vigorous Defense

Self-Regulation Critical Thinking Skill Strategies

Critical Thinking Precautions when Pre-editing

Be Sure About “the Problem”

Specify the Decision-Critical Attributes

Be Clear about Why an Option Is In or Out

Critical Thinking Precautions When Identifying the Promising Option

Scrutinize Options with Disciplined Impartiality

Listen to Both Sides First

Critical Thinking Precautions when Testing the Promising Option

Use All the Essential Criteria

Treat Equals as Equals

Diligently Engage in Truth-Seeking and Remain Impartial

Critical Thinking Precautions when Fortifying the To-Be-Chosen Option

Be Honest with Yourself

Critical Thinking Strategies for Better Decision Making

Task Independent Teams with the Same Problem

Decide When It’s Time to Decide

Analyze Indicators and Make Mid-Course Corrections

Create a Culture of Respect for Critical Thinking

Chapter 11: Comparative Reasoning — “This is Like That” Thinking

Comparative, Ideological, and Empirical Inferences

“This is Like That” — Recognizing Comparative Reasoning

Evaluating Comparative Inferences

Do the Four Tests of Acceptability Apply?

Five Criteria for Evaluating Comparative Reasoning

Familiarity

Simplicity

Comprehensiveness

Productivity

Testability

Shaping our View of the Universe for Two Thousand Years

The Many Uses of Comparative Inferences

Chapter 12: Ideological Reasoning — “Top Down” Thinking

“Top Down” Thinking — Recognizing Ideological Reasoning

Examples of Ideological Reasoning

Three Features of Ideological Reasoning

Ideological Reasoning Is Deductive in Character

Ideological Premises Are Axiomatic

The Argument Maker Takes the Ideological Absolutes on Faith

Evaluating Ideological Reasoning

Are the Ideological Premises True?

Logical Strength and Ideological Belief Systems

Relevancy, Non-Circularity and Ideological Reasoning

Uses, Benefits and Risks of Ideological Reasoning

Chapter 13: Empirical Reasoning — “Bottom — Up” Thinking

Recognizing Empirical Reasoning

Characteristics of Empirical Reasoning

Empirical Reasoning Is Inductive

Empirical Reasoning Is Self-Corrective

Empirical Reasoning Is Open to Independent Verification

Hypotheses, Conditions and Measurable Manifestations

Conducting an Investigation Scientifically

Perhaps the First Recorded Empirical Investigation

Steps in the Process an Extended Example

Evaluating Empirical Reasoning

Benefits and Risks Associated with Empirical Reasoning