BEYOND FEELINGS

Problems people face with critical thinking:
 Errors of Perspective
 Errors of Procedure
 Errors of Expression
 Errors of Reaction

Errors of Perspective

The error How to Recognize and Deal with It
Poverty of aspect Limiting one’s perspective on issues; having tunnel vision. Poverty of aspect sometimes is attributable to intellectual sloth; other times it is a by-product of specialized education and training. To avoid poverty of aspect when evaluating issues, look beyond the familiar, examine all relevant points of view, and understand before judging.

Unwarranted assumptions Assumptions are ideas that are taken for granted rather than consciously reasoned out. When what is taken for granted is unjustified by one’s experience or by the situation, the assumption is unwarranted. Because assumptions seldom are expressed directly, the only way to identify them is to “read between the lines” for what is unstated but clearly implied.

Either/or outlook The expectation that the only reasonable view of any issue will be total affirmation or total rejection. This error rules out the possibility that the most reasonable view might lie between the extremes. To avoid this error, consider all possible alternatives.

Mindless conformity Adopting others’ views unthinkingly because we are too lazy or fearful to form our own. To overcome this error, develop the habit of resisting the internal and external pressures and make up your own mind.

Absolutism The belief that rules do not admit of exceptions. This belief causes us to demand that the truth be neat and simple, when in reality it is often messy and complex. To avoid this error, accept the truth as you find it rather than requiring that it [fit] your preconceptions.

Relativism The belief that no view is better than any other, that any idea you choose to embrace is automatically correct. To avoid relativism, remind yourself that some ideas and some standards of conduct are better than others and that the challenge of critical thinking is to discover the best ones.

Bias for or against change Bias for change assumes that change is always for the best; bias against change assumes that change is always for the worst. To avoid both errors, give any proposal for change a fair hearing and decide, apart from your predisposition, whether the change is actually positive or negative.

Errors of Procedure

The Error How to Recognize and Deal with It
Biased consideration of evidence One form of this error is seeking evidence that confirm your bias and ignoring evidence that challenges it. Another is interpreting evidence in a way that favors your bias. To avoid this error, begin your investigation by seeking out individuals whose views oppose your bias, then go on to those whose views support it. Also, choose the most reasonable interpretation of the evidence.

Double standard Using one set of criteria for judging arguments we agree with and another standard for judging arguments we disagree with. To avoid this error, decide in advance what judgment criteria you will use and apply those criteria consistently, regardless of whether the data in question support your view.

Hasty conclusion A premature judgment–that is, a judgment made without sufficient evidence. To avoid drawing a hasty conclusion, identify all possible conclusions you select any one. Then decide whether you have sufficient evidence to support any of those conclusions and, if so, which conclusion that is.

Overgeneralization and stereotyping Overgeneralization is ascribing to all the members of a group a quality that fits only some members. A stereotype is an overgeneralization that is rigidly maintained. To avoid these errors, resist the urge to force individual people, places, and things into hard categories. And keep in mind that the more limited your experience, the more modest your assertions should be.

Oversimplification Oversimplification goes beyond making complex ideas easier to grasp–it twists and distorts the ideas. Instead of informing people, oversimplification misleads them. To avoid this error, refuse to adopt superficial views and make a special effort to understand issues in their complexity.

Post hoc fallacy this error is rooted in the idea that when one thing occurs after another, it must be the result of the other, when in reality the sequence may be coincidental. To avoid the post hoc fallacy, withhold judgment of a cause-and effect relationship until you have ruled out other possible causes, including coincidence.

Errors of Expression

The Error How to Recognize and Deal with It
Contradiction To claim that a statement is both true and false at the same time in the same way. To avoid this error, monitor what you say and write. The moment you detect any inconsistency, examine it carefully. Decide whether it is explainable or whether it constitutes a contradiction. If it is a contradiction, revise your statement to make it consistent and reasonable.

Arguing in a circle Attempting to prove a statement by repeating it in a different form. To avoid this error, check your arguments to be sure you are offering genuine evidence and not merely repeating your claim.

Meaningless statement A statement in which the reasoning presented makes no sense. To avoid this error, check to be sure that the reasons you offer to explain your thoughts and actions really do explain them.

Mistaken authority Ascribing authority to someone who does not possess it. To avoid this error, check to be sure that all the sources you cite as authorities possess expertise in the particular subject you are writing or speaking about.

False analogy An analogy is an attempt to explain something relatively unfamiliar by referring to something different but more familiar, saying, in effect, “This is like that.” A false analogy claims similarities that do not withstand scrutiny. To avoid this error, test your analogies to be sure that the similarities they claim are real and reasonable and that no important dissimilarities exist.

Irrational appeal Appeals to emotion, tradition, moderation, authority, common belief, and tolerance may be either rational or irrational. They are irrational, and therefore unacceptable, when they are unreasonable in the particular situation under discussion and/or when they discourage thought. To avoid this error, make sure your appeals complement thought rather than substitute for it.

Errors of Reaction

The Error How to Recognize and Deal with It
Automatic rejection The refusal to give criticism of your ideas (or behaviors) a fair hearing. To avoid this error, think of your ideas as possessions that you can keep or discard rather than as extensions of your ego. This will make you less defensive about them.

Changing the subject Abruptly and deceptively turning a discussion away from the issue under discussion. To avoid this error, face difficult questions head-on rather than trying to avoid them.

Shifting the burden of proof Demanding that others disprove our assertions. To avoid this error, understand that the burden of supporting any assertions rests with the person who makes it rather than the one who questions it. Accept the responsibility of supporting your assertions.

Straw man To commit the error of straw man is to put false words in someone else’s mouth and then expose their falsity, conveniently forgetting that the other person never said them. To avoid this error, be scrupulously accurate in quoting or paraphrasing other people’s words.

Attacking the critic Attempting to discredit an idea or argument by disparaging the person who expressed it. To avoid attacking the critic, focus your critical thinking on ideas rather than on people who expressed them.

(taken from: Beyond Feelings, A Guide to Critical Thinking, 8th ed. by Vincent Ryan Ruggiero; www.mhhe.com)