ENGLISH
We all know the importance of critical thinking and think that everyone should do it. With the use of social media, it has become very easy to spread a lot of false information and this has further emphasized the importance of critical thinking. But how much do we apply this in our lives? Of course, it is easier to take information that is closer to our own thoughts, to always be right about everything; it makes us feel powerful. But unfortunately this makes you not a powerful person but a manipulable one, because the sensitive points of each opinion are so obvious that it is not difficult to manipulate people in this way. If we want to be free, we have to start thinking critically. And how do we do that?
Fundamentals of Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is a fundamental skill that empowers individuals to evaluate, analyze and comprehend information in a thoughtful and logical way. It involves the ability to question, reason and make informed decisions based on evidence and sound judgment. We are constantly interacting with the individuals and institutions that surround us. They try to convince us of their ideas, sometimes deliberately and sometimes unwittingly. Therefore, if we do not form our ideas and knowledge through critical thinking, we are allowing other people or institutions to use us for their own purposes. For this we need to study the basics of critical thinking.
Logic and Argumentation
Logic is a science of argumentation. Arguments consist of premises and a conclusion. To have a good argument, the premises must be true and plausible, i.e. they must be constructed in a way that incorporates community values (truth condition), and these premises must lead to a conclusion (logic condition) Argument analysis is a two-step process. First, it is assessed whether the premises lead to the conclusion, and if they do, the truth or falsity of the premises is investigated.
* All birds can fly.
* The penguin is a bird.
* Therefore, the penguin can fly.
In the first example, the conclusion seems to be wrong, so I don’t even need to evaluate the premises, because the conclusion of a good argument is correct.
* All birds can fly.
* The eagle is a bird.
* Therefore, the eagle can fly.
In the second example, the conclusion is correct but the first premise is wrong. So there is no good argument here either.
Rhetoric
Rhetoric is defined as “the art of speaking or writing effectively or persuasively, especially the use of figures of speech and other compositional techniques”. The most important thing to be able to express your own opinion is to have an effective language of communication. For this Aristotle defined 3 basic aspects: Ethos refers to the credibility or character of the speaker. Everyone knows that speakers who are friendly, sympathetic and well versed in their field are listened to more attentively. Pathos appeals to the emotions and feelings of the listeners. A good speaker is aware of
the emotional state of his/her surroundings and acts according to this psychology so that his/her ideas are more likely to be listened to. Logos appeals to reason using reason and evidence. This is the sine qua non for making an argument, but humans are emotional beings and ethos and pathos are very important for attracting attention and increasing listenability. While rhetoric is primarily concerned with persuasion and effective communication, critical thinking focuses on analytical and evaluative skills to make well-informed judgments. Effective rhetoric often incorporates elements of critical thinking, especially when constructing well-reasoned arguments. Likewise, critical thinking benefits from the ability to communicate ideas persuasively. Both are valuable skills that can complement each other in effective communication and argumentation.
Reasoning
Reason is the capacity of applying logic consciously by drawing conclusions from new or existing information, with the aim of seeking the truth.
Reasoning involves using more-or-less rational processes of thinking and cognition to extrapolate from one’s existing knowledge to generate new knowledge, and involves the use of one’s intellect. Reasoning is what allows humans to process information and formulate explanations in order to assign meaning to observed actions and events.
Types of Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is using given factual information or data to infer other facts through logical thinking. It rearranges only the given information or data into new statements or truths; it does not provide new information. Therefore, deductive reasoning is, “If this is true, then this is also true.”
Inductive reasoning is looking at given factual information or data for a pattern or trend and inferring the trend will continue. Although there is no certainty the trend will continue, the assumption is it will. Therefore, inductive reasoning is, “Based on this trend, this is probably true.”
Abductive reasoning is similar to inductive reasoning since conclusions are based on probabilities or “guessing.” Therefore, abductive reasoning is, “Because this is probably true, then this may also be true.”
Analogical reasoning is a method of processing information that relies on an analogy to compare the similarities between two specific entities; those similarities are then used to draw a conclusion—the more similarities between the entities, the stronger the argument.
Barriers to Critical Thinking
Bias
Critical thinking, in its simplest definition, is thinking about every new piece of information by questioning it and looking at it from different perspectives. Why can’t we practice it when everyone is so aware of its importance? One of the biggest reasons is bias. When we are prejudiced against something, either positively or negatively, it puts us in a closed and judgmental position. In this state, it is not possible to listen to, let alone understand, an opposing opinion. These biases can come from a “I am always right” self-confidence, from a tendency to choose what is in line with one’s previous beliefs, ideas or values, from an inability to see things from the perspective of those who are not from your own culture or country, from the positive or negative connotations of the options, from statistical data and the opinions of the group you belong to. The result of all this is extrajudicial execution, i.e. accepting things as true or false without evaluating them on their own merits.
Framing, as a method of manipulation, can be quite difficult to detect. It refers to the way options are presented in a positive or negative light when making a choice. For instance, imagine a law being proposed in a country to capture and kill stray dogs. To gain public support, the issue might be framed by emphasizing that stray dogs are extremely aggressive and, while adults can protect themselves, children are at risk of death. As a result, people may not see this as a mass culling but rather as the state taking necessary action to protect its citizens. Anyone opposing this could then be accused of wanting children to die, effectively silencing dissent. This framing creates the illusion that only two options exist: either the dogs die or the children die. People who would otherwise see harming any living creature as wrong may come to believe it is a necessary measure to protect children.
In contrast, a critical thinker would try to find alternative solutions, investigate the actual number of incidents involving children and stray dogs, and question the validity of the claims being made. However, in deeply polarized societies, critical thinking is often scarce, making it easy for those in power to exploit such framing strategies.
Fallacies
Another obstacle are fallacies; they are logically ill-reasoned but psychologically convincing. There are two types of errors that can occur in arguments: If there is a factual fallacy, it is not a question of logic, but rather of whether it contains true or false information, which can be proved by scientific data. If it is a logical fallacy, the premises do not support the conclusion. It can often be used to persuade to a fact. A reason is attached to only one conclusion and it is pretended that nothing else can be true, or one attacks a person’s behavior, character or inconsistency in order to refute the argument. In fact, the discussion of ideas should be independent of individuals, because everyone applies the same idea in different ways. Having the same ideas does not make us the same person. Another mistake is to accept the majority opinion as correct, which can lead to very dangerous things. Another dangerous kind of fallacy is to try to be right by deflecting or evading questions without allowing the original argument to be discussed, and this kind of fallacy is very common even in our daily lives. It prevents the real question from being discussed and ensures that it can never be resolved.
Conspiracy Theories
A conspiracy theory is the belief that certain situations or events are being created or controlled by secret forces. It is often based on misinformation or misinterpretation of accurate information. It divides the world into good and evil, and the claim is often difficult to refute, because if you try to refute it, you become “one of them”. What we need to do to gauge the truth of conspiracy theories is quite simple. We just need to check the information that is readily available, such as whether the person making the claim is competent, who supports the claim, what sources they used to make the claim, and whether it is supported by independent websites. Also, if the person making the claim refuses to accept any other point of view, asks questions instead of answering them, demonizes the person they think is the hidden power, and uses emotional anecdotes to convince others, then we can say that their claims are not based on factual data. When talking to such people it is very important not to make fun of them, but to listen and try to understand them. By asking questions, you can make him/her skeptical about his/her theory. You can also show him/her with scientific data that his/her information is wrong, but the important thing here is not to prove yourself right, but to really understand why he/she thinks the way he/she does, otherwise the person who believes in the conspiracy theory will shut down and stop listening to you, seeing you on the other side.
If we can use the tools that enable critical thinking without these barriers, we are not easily led and we can easily distinguish right from wrong.
Conclusion
Evaluating information without bias, logical fallacies, or falling into conspiracy theories can be challenging at first. However, increasing our awareness of these obstacles and learning to analyze information without their influence is vital in a world where both true and false information spreads rapidly. Critical thinking enables us to better understand our own beliefs as well as the perspectives of others. It shields us from being manipulated by others’ agendas because we have a clear grasp of what we think and why we think it, allowing us to approach new ideas or information with a critical and questioning mindset. This, in turn, prevents us from being exploited by individuals seeking to use us for their own gain. By resisting manipulation, we become freer and more conscious individuals. Moreover, when a majority of people are similarly resistant to manipulation, we form a freer and more conscious society as a whole.
References
- ATP 2-33.4. (2020). Intelligence Analysis. Headquarters, Department of the (U.S.) Army. Washington, DC.
- DeLaplante, Kevin (2020). Critical Thinker Academy: Learn to Think Like a Philosopher [MOOC]. Udemy.
- Essential Critical Thinking Skills: Get Woke, Earn More Cash | Udemy.
- Fisher, A. and Scriven, M. (1997). Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment. Edgepress and Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia.
- Critical Thinker Academy: https://criticalthinkeracademy.com/courses/2514/lectures/751630
- University of Hong Kong – What is Logic?: https://philosophy.hku.hk/think/logic/whatislogic.php
- Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy – Aristotle’s Logic: https://iep.utm.edu/aristotle-logic
- https://www.montclair.edu/center-for-writing-excellence/digitaldashboard/resources-for-writers/r hetoric-composition/http://rhetoric.byu.edu/
- YouTube – Objective Reasoning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOu4AjaZp8E
- YouTube – Subjective Thinking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwyVCJxiVdM
- Rescher, N. (2005). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy.
- Fisher, A. (2011). Critical Thinking: An Introduction.
- Steinbock, Bonnie (1978). “Speciesism and the Idea of Equality”. Philosophy, 53(204), 247–256.
- ATP 2-33.4 (2020). Intelligence Analysis. Headquarters, Department of the (U.S.) Army. Washington, DC.
- Gimpel, Henner (2008). “Cognitive Biases in Negotiation Processes.” In Negotiation, Auctions, and Market Engineering, pp. 213–226. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
- Moore, Don A.; Healy, Paul J. (2008). “The trouble with overconfidence.” Psychological Review, 115(2), 502–517.
- ATP 2-33.4. (2020). Intelligence Analysis. Headquarters, Department of the (U.S.) Army. Washington, DC.
- Storey, M., College, B.(2013). Critical Thinking.
- ATP 2-33.4. (2020). Intelligence Analysis. Headquarters, Department of the (U.S.) Army. Washington, DC.
- Storey, M., College, B.(2013). Critical Thinking.
Author : Ayse Nur Dikyurt
