Reasoning

Emotions can be insensitive to certain attributes of a situation: Fear of flying is not always reduced by remembering air crash probabilities. A large body of evidence shows that information on probabilities, large numerical counts, and intentions is frequently disregarded in the elicitation and regulation of emotions. To date, no existing theory comprehensively accounts for the features that tend to be overlooked by emotion. In this paper, I call attention to the common denominator of such features: they do not contribute (...) to the iconic representation of events. For instance, the exceedingly low probability of a plane crash does not affect its imagistic representation (i.e., the iconic representation of the event is silent about the event’s probability). This paper introduces the Iconic Prioritization Hypothesis, positing that the prioritization of input in the iconic format by emotions can explain the neglect of information that is representationally silent in this format. Delving into the causes of this format prioritization, I argue that emotion might favour iconicity as it is the format of immediate information about our surroundings (perception) and of stored first-hand evidence (episodic memory). Lastly, the hypothesis's compatibility with philosophical theories of emotion causation and its implications for experimental research are examined. (shrink)

From academic writing to personal and public discourse, the need for good arguments and better ways of arguing is greater than ever before. This timely fifth edition of A Rulebook for Arguments sharpens an already-classic text, adding updated examples and a new chapter on public debates that provides rules for the etiquette and ethics of sound public dialogue as well as clear and sound thinking in general.

Recognizing arguments -- Analyzing arguments -- Evaluating arguments -- Some valid argument forms -- More valid argument forms: categorical reasoning and venn diagrams -- Causal analysis -- Argument by analogy and models -- Errors in reasoning: fallacies -- Definition -- Vagueness and ambiguity -- Reasonable beliefs -- Rules for writing.

Critical thinking -- Critical reading: getting started -- Critical reading: getting deeper into arguments -- Visual rhetoric: thinking about images as arguments -- Writing an analysis of an argument -- Developing an argument of your own -- Using sources -- A philosopher's view : the Toulmin model -- A logician's view : deduction, induction, fallacies -- A psychologist's view : Rogerian argument -- A literary critic's view: arguing about literature -- A debater's view: individual oral presentations and debate -- Student (...) loans : should some indebtedness be forgiven? -- Technology in the classroom: useful or distracting? -- The local food movement : is it a better way to eat? -- The current state of childhood: is "helicopter parenting" or "free-range childhood" better for kids? -- Genetic modification of human beings : is it acceptable? -- Mandatory military service: should it be required? -- College education : what is its purpose? -- Race and police violence: how do we solve the problem? -- Junk food : should the government regulate our intake? -- Online versus IRL: how has social networking changed how we relate to one another? -- Immigration: what is to be done? -- The carceral state: why are so many Americans in jail? -- American exceptionalism: how should the United States teach about its past? -- What is the ideal society? -- How free is the will of the individual within society? -- What is happiness? (shrink)

Now reissued for contemporary readers, this entertaining primer on critical thinking has been teaching people to think and speak more clearly for more than four decades. Do you know when you're being deceived? Can you trust the information coming from Washington, the media, and the Internet? This classic work on critical thinking uses a novel approach to teach the basics of informal logic. On the assumption that "it takes one to know one," the authors have written the book from the (...) point of view of someone who wishes to deceive, mislead, or manipulate others. Having mastered the art of deception, readers will then be able to detect the misuse or abuse of logic when they encounter it in others -- whether in a heated political debate or while trying to evaluate the claims of a persuasive sales person. Using a host of real-world examples, the authors show you how to win an argument, defend a case, recognize a fallacy, see through deception, persuade a skeptic, and turn defeat into victory. Whether you're evaluating a social media rumor or you just want to become more adept at making your points and analyzing others' arguments, The Art of Deception--now with an updated preface--will give you the intellectual tools to become a more effective thinker and speaker. Helpful exercises and discussion questions are also included. (shrink)

Introduction: Close encounter with the strange -- The possibility to impossible -- Arguments good, bad, and weird -- Knowledge, belief, and evidence -- Looking for truth in personal experience -- Science and its pretenders -- Case studies in the extraordinary -- Relativism, truth, and reality.

Philosophy can be an extremely technical and complex affair, one whose terminology and procedures are often intimidating to the beginner and demanding even for the professional. Like that of surgery, the art of philosophy requires mastering a body of knowledge as well as acquiring precision and skill with a set of instruments or tools. The Philosopher's Toolkit may be thought of as a collection of just such tools. Unlike those of a surgeon or a master woodworker, however, the instruments presented (...) by this text are conceptual - tools that can be used to enter, analyse, criticise, and evaluate philosophical concepts, arguments, visions, and theories. The Toolkit can be used in a variety of ways. It can be read cover to cover by those looking for instruction on the essentials of philosophical reflection. Or it can be used as a course book on basic philosophical method or critical thinking. It can also be used as a reference book to which general readers and more advanced philosophers can turn in order to find quick and clear accounts of the key concepts and methods of philosophy. The book is assembled so that there is a natural, logical order from start to finish, but one can also start wherever one likes, just as one might play any song on a record album first. The aim of the book, in other words, is to act as a conceptual toolbox from which all those from neophytes to master artisans can draw instruments that would otherwise be distributed over a diverse set of texts and require long periods of study to acquire. (shrink)

In this witty, incisive guide to critical thinking the author provides you with the tools to allow you to question beliefs and assumptions held by those who claim to know what they're talking about.

The Power of Critical Thinking: Effective Reasoning About Ordinary and Extraordinary Claims, Seventh Edition, provides the broadest range of tools to show students how critical thinking applies in their lives and the world around them. It explores the essentials of critical reasoning,argumentation, logic, and argumentative essay writing while also incorporating important topics that most other texts leave out, such as "inference to the best explanation," scientific reasoning, evidence and authority, visual reasoning, and obstacles to critical thinking.

Can AI systems such as ChatGPT think? We present an argument from rationality for the negative answer to this question. The argument is founded on two central ideas. The first is that if ChatGPT thinks, it is not rational, in the sense that it does not respond correctly to its evidence. The second idea, which appears in several different forms in philosophical literature, is that thinkers are by their nature rational. Putting the two ideas together yields the result that ChatGPT (...) is not a thinker. The paper sets out the argument in detail and shows how it can withstand numerous objections. We end the paper by contrasting the argument from rationality with a more well-known argument often taken to show that ChatGPT doesn’t think, due to Bender and Koller. (shrink)

The central idea of this book is that such an understanding is possible, useful, and empowering. Being able to distinguish good reasons from bad will not only improve your decision-making ability; it will also give you a powerful weapon against all forms of hucksterism.

This third edition of Concise Guide to Critical Thinking covers all the fundamentals of critical thinking and does so as clearly and directly as possible.

Sense and Uncertainty presents a phenomenological account of the possibility of rational action amid the challenges posed by violence, volatile conditions, uncertain outcomes, and social dependence. The book asks us to consider the following: We are often forced through violence to do things that do not make sense for us except to avoid retaliations, punishments, or the various evils that others might inflict on us. We inhabit a world that escapes our control. This involves living in uncertainty concerning the things (...) that we might suffer and do, that is, the things that might happen to us and the results of our actions. We are dependent on others and collaborate with them in ways that make it impossible to fully understand the sense of our own actions and practical intentions. Rationality involves insightful thinking about the world and our emotional responses to it, something we do in our everyday lives, whether consciously or without awareness. Sense and Uncertainty attempts to make explicit and to clarify the implications of this conceptually neglected aspect of our rationality: namely, that it involves paying attention to our emotions and values. An ethical life in which we can act meaningfully in the face of violence and uncertainty, and in which we can make sense of our vulnerability and dependence on others, demands that we think about and seek insight into how we love, why we hope, and in whom or in what we trust. The phenomenological ethics presented in Sense and Uncertainty draws on the works of Western canonical philosophers like Edmund Husserl, Max Scheler, Simone de Beauvoir, Anthony Steinbock, and José Ortega y Gasset, as well as on those of Latin American thinkers such as Luis Villoro, Rita Segato, and Augusto Salazar Bondy, among others. (shrink)

This paper develops a natural-language agent-based model of argumentation (ABMA). Its artificial deliberative agents (ADAs) are constructed with the help of so-called neural language models recently developed in AI and computational linguistics. ADAs are equipped with a minimalist belief system and may generate and submit novel contributions to a conversation. The natural-language ABMA allows us to simulate collective deliberation in English, i.e. with arguments, reasons, and claims themselves — rather than with their mathematical representations (as in symbolic models). This paper (...) uses the natural-language ABMA to test the robustness of symbolic reason-balancing models of argumentation (Mäs & Flache 2013; Singer et al. 2019): First of all, as long as ADAs remain passive, confirmation bias and homophily updating trigger polarization, which is consistent with results from symbolic models. However, once ADAs start to actively generate new contributions, the evolution of a conversation is dominated by properties of the agents as authors. This suggests that the creation of new arguments, reasons, and claims critically affects a conversation and is of pivotal importance for understanding the dynamics of collective deliberation. The paper closes by pointing out further fruitful applications of the model and challenges for future research. (shrink)

This paper takes a first step towards a critical thinking curriculum for neural auto-regressive language models. We introduce a synthetic corpus of deductively valid arguments, and generate artificial argumentative texts to train and evaluate GPT-2. Significant transfer learning effects can be observed: Training a model on three simple core schemes allows it to accurately complete conclusions of different, and more complex types of arguments, too. The language models generalize the core argument schemes in a correct way. Moreover, we obtain consistent (...) and promising results for NLU benchmarks. In particular, pre-training on the argument schemes raises zero-shot accuracy on the GLUE diagnostics by up to 15 percentage points. The findings suggest that intermediary pre-training on texts that exemplify basic reasoning abilities (such as typically covered in critical thinking textbooks) might help language models to acquire a broad range of reasoning skills. The synthetic argumentative texts presented in this paper are a promising starting point for building such a "critical thinking curriculum for language models.". (shrink)

This essay aims to delineate a definition of "thought" in accordance with the exposition provided in Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. In the first part, the analysis will focus on Wittgenstein’s response to the question: "What is thought?". Subsequently, a critical examination of this definition will be undertaken, offering a personal reinterpretation and comparison with it. The ultimate goal is to enrich the debate on the topic by integrating Wittgenstein’s perspective with new insights and food for thought.

According to many philosophers, rationality is, at least in part, a matter of one’s attitudes cohering with one another. Theorists who endorse this idea have devoted much attention to formulating various coherence requirements. Surprisingly, they have said very little about what it takes for a set of attitudes to be coherent in general. We articulate and defend a general account on which a set of attitudes is coherent just in case and because it is logically possible for the attitudes to (...) be jointly satisfied in the sense of jointly fitting the world. In addition, we show how the account can help adjudicate debates about how to formulate various rational requirements. (shrink)

This paper introduces and motivates the claim that we possess doxastic agent’s awareness. I argue that this is a form of agentive awareness concerning our belief states that we enjoy in virtue of deliberating and judging. Namely, we experience these activities as those of making up our mind and keeping it made up regarding our beliefs. Following related work in the philosophy of action, I understand this awareness as a form of conscious experience which can then ground our self-ascriptions. As (...) such, this enables me to also propose a new account of self-knowledge of belief and the way in which deliberating and concluding that p can warrant us in self-ascribing the belief that p (i.e., employing the so-called ‘transparency method’). Philosophers often appeal to our arguably agentive relation to our beliefs in explaining this. I, though, I extend work in the philosophy of action in a way that is surprisingly flatfooted way given that belief is a state and not an action. (shrink)

How to: win an argument, defend a case, recognize a fallacy, see through deception, persuade a skeptic, turn defeat into victory.

Good Reasoning Matters! is an informal logic/critical thinking textbook designed to teach students a variety of reasoning strategies which can significantly improve their reasoning skills. This second edition updates and revises the original. It retains an emphasis on good reasoning butsimplifies presentation of key concepts and adds new features which will help students and facilitate discussion and review. The new edition updated examples, exercises, and answers to many selected exercises.

With 'Thinking from A to Z', Nigel Warburton presents an alphabetically arranged guide to help readers understand the art of arguing. This fully updated edition has many new entries including lawyer's answer, least worst option, stonewalling, sunk-cost fallacy and tautology.

Basic tools for arguments -- More advanced tools -- Tools for assessment -- Tools for conceptual distinctions -- Tools of historical schools and philosophers -- Tools for radical critique -- Tools at the limit.

A practical, step-by-step guide to improving skills in analysis, critical thinking, and the effective communication of arguments and explanations.

Good Reasoning Matters!: A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking, fifth edition, offers a straightforward and practical introduction to the principles of good reasoning. In addition to examining the most common features of faulty reasoning, the text introduces a variety of argument schemes and rhetorical techniques that will help students solve problems and construct sound arguments. Extensive exercises and examples taken from sources such as social media sites, newspapers, and topical news articles encourage students to consider a wide range of views (...) and perspectives. With new features including a glossary, chapter summaries, and extensive revised exercises throughout, Good Reasoning Matters! is an essential text for courses in critical reasoning. (shrink)

We are pleased to release this digital edition of Ralph Johnson’s The Rise of Informal Logic as Volume 2 in the series Windsor Studies in Argumentation. This edition is a reprint of the previous Vale Press edition with some minor corrections. We have decided to make this the second volume in the series because it is such a compelling account of the formation of informal logic as a discipline, written by one of the founders of the field. The book includes (...) essential chapters on the history and development of informal logic. Other chapters are key reflections on the theoretical issues raised by the attempt to understand informal argument. Many of the papers were previously published in important journals. A number of them were co-authored with J. Anthony Blair. Three of them have appeared only in the present book. (shrink)

PACKAGE THIS TITLE WITH OUR 2016 MLA SUPPLEMENT, Documenting Sources in MLA Style (package ISBN-13: 9781319084387). Get the most recent updates on MLA citation in a convenient, 40-page resource based on The MLA Handbook, 8th Edition, with plenty of models. Browse our catalog or contact your representative for a full listing of updated titles and packages, or to request a custom ISBN. The unique collaborative effort of a professor of English and a professor of philosophy, Current Issues and Enduring Questions (...) is an extensive resource for teaching argument, persuasive writing, and rigorous critical thinking. This extraordinarily versatile text and reader continues to address current student interests and trends in argument, research, and writing.Its comprehensive coverage of classic and contemporary approaches to argument includes Aristotelian, Toulmin, and a range of alternative views, including a new chapter on analyzing and writing about arguments in popular culture. Readings on contemporary controversies (including student loan debt, locavorism, and the boundaries of online privacy) and classical philosophical questions (such as How free is the will of the individual?) are sure to spark student interest and lively discussion and writing, and new e-Pages take advantage of what the Web can do by including videos, speeches, film trailers, and other multimodal arguments. (shrink)

"The Power of Critical Thinking offers a comprehensive introduction to the systematic, rational evaluation of the arguments, claims, and evidence that lead to beliefs. In clear and accessible language, the authors take students through all essential components of critical analysis--from identifying premises and conclusions, to recognizing common fallacies and misrepresentations of fact, to using deductive and inductive reasoning to deconstruct arguments, to overcoming psychological, social, and philosophical impediments that can cloud clear thinking. Emphasizing the importance of critical thinking to personal (...) development and success with expanded "Field Problems" and new "Everyday Problems and Decisions Boxes," The Power of Critical Thinking provides students with the skills they need to engage meaningfully with the world around them--both inside and outside the classroom."--. (shrink)

Prefață -- Partea I. Moșteniri -- Partea a II-a. Afilieri -- Partea a III-a. Concepte -- Partea a IV-a. Aplicații -- Despre autor.

I identify an undertheorized problem with decisions we make with the aid of algorithms: the problem of inauthenticity. When we make decisions with the aid of algorithms, we can make ones that go against our commitments and values in a normatively important way. In this paper, I present a framework for algorithm-aided decision-making that can lead to inauthenticity. I then construct a taxonomy of the features of the decision environment that make such outcomes likely, and I discuss three possible solutions (...) to the problem. (shrink)

This paper develops an account of committed beliefs: beliefs we commit to through reflection and conscious reasoning. To help make sense of committed beliefs, I present a new view of conscious reasoning, one of putting yourself in a position to become phenomenally consciously aware of evidence. By doing this for different pieces of evidence, you begin to make your up mind, making conscious reasoning, as such, a voluntary activity with an involuntary conclusion. The paper then explains how we use conscious (...) reasoning in reflection not just to form and change committed beliefs, but to become aware of existing ones. The paper concludes with an explanation of how the limitations of conscious reasoning require us to maintain committed beliefs in a system. It is our maintenance of this system that allows us to knit together individual episodes of conscious reasoning into one enduring performance as a committed systematic believer. (shrink)

A peculiar feature of our species is that we settle what to believe, value, and do by reasoning through narratives. A narrative is adiachronic, information-rich story that contains persons, objects, and at least one event. When we reason through narrative, we usenarrative to settle what to do, to make predictions, to guide normative expectations, and to ground which reactive attitudes we think areappropriate in a situation. Narratives explain, justify, and provide understanding. Narratives play a ubiquitous role in human reasoning. Andyet, (...) narratives do not seem up to the task. Narratives are often unmoored representations (either because they are do not purport to referto the actual world, or because they are grossly oversimplified, or because are known to be literally false). Against this, I argue thatnarratives guide our reasoning by shaping our grasp of modal structure: what is possible, probable, plausible, permissible, required,relevant, desirable and good. Narratives are good guides to reasoning when they guide us to accurate judgments about modal space. Icall this the modal model of narrative. In this paper, I develop an account of how narratives function in reasoning, as well as an account ofwhen reasoning through narrative counts as good reasoning. (shrink)

Michael T. Stuart (2021 and 2022) has proposed imagination as an intellectual dual‐process virtue, consisting of imagination1 (underwritten by cognitive Type 1 processing) and imagination2 (supported by Type 2 processing). This paper investigates the consequences of taking such an account seriously. It proposes that the dual‐process view of imagination allows us to incorporate recent insights from virtue epistemology, providing a fresh perspective on how imagination can be epistemically reliable. The argument centers on the distinction between General Reliability (GR) and Functional (...) System Reliability (FSR), for example in relation to Kengo Miyazono and Uko Tooming's (2023) argument for epistemic generativity. Furthermore, the paper claims that the dual‐process virtue account enables us to integrate a wide range of findings from the literature on epistemology and imagination. Moreover, it suggests a novel way to distinguish the virtues of creativity and imagination and presents a case for viewing imagination as a virtue rather than a skill. (shrink)

Learn to think critically with the leading introduction to reasoning and argumentation. Highlights In clear, reader-friendly language, The Power of Critical Thinking provides an engaging introduction to argumentation, deductive and inductive reasoning, inferencing, and evaluating scientific theories New Critical Thinking and the Media boxes in each chapter apply the principles of critical thinking to the realms of media, advertising, and news New content on "fake news," the COVID-19 pandemic, and other important contemporary topics reflects the changing world in which today's (...) students must apply their critical thinking abilities New and updated exercises offer extensive opportunities for students to practise the skills through which they will become active, engaged critical thinkers Additional online resources-including a study guide and practice quizzes for students as well as an instructor's manual, a test bank, and PowerPoint slides for instructors-offer stimulating materials to enhance the learning and teaching experiences. About the Authors Chris MacDonald is an associate professor and chair of the Law and Business Department at the Ted Rogers School of Management, Toronto Metropolitan University. Lewis Vaughn is an independent scholar and author of several textbooks on philosophy, ethics, and critical thinking. (shrink)

Arguments, understood initially as premise-conclusion complexes of propositions, figure in our practices of giving reasons. Among other uses, we use arguments to advance reasons to explain why we believe or did something, to justify our beliefs or actions, to persuade others to do or to believe something, and (following Pinto 2001b) to advance reasons to worry or to fear that something is true. This book is about our uses of arguments to advance their premises as reasons for believing their conclusions, (...) i.e., as reasons for believing that their conclusions are true. The focus here is reason-giving centered on such reason-to-believe uses of arguments. Accordingly, the book does not discuss uses of arguments to advance their premises as reasons for believing that the conclusion is plausible, compelling, reasonable, nontrivial, helpful, plausibly deniable, or possible in principle. For ease of reference, hereafter I'll refer to uses of arguments to advance their premises as reasons for believing that their conclusions are true simply as reason-giving uses of argument. The book focuses on reason-giving uses of arguments that have three features, put briefly as follows. (shrink)

Recent studies on mind‐wandering reveal its potential role in goal exploration and planning future actions. How to understand these explorative functions and their impact on planning remains unclear. Given certain conceptions of intentions and beliefs, the explorative functions of mind‐wandering could lead to regular reconsideration of one's intentions. However, this would be in tension with the stability of intentions central to rational planning agency. We analyze the potential issue of excessive reconsideration caused by mind‐wandering. Our response resolves this tension, presenting (...) a model that aligns the roles of mind‐wandering in planning with empirical evidence and the sustained stability of intentions. (shrink)

Nebraska University Studies, V25, No. 2-4.