Critical thinking

1.

Definition of Critical thinking:

Critical thinking is the use of reason in reading and writing. It enables the reader to evaluate the material being read, to recognize argument patterns and to detect inappropriate reasoning. And it allows the writer to present his or her points in a logical and reasonable manner.

2.

Deductive Reasoning:

A deductive argument is formed from one or more premises and a conclusion. The conclusion is the opinion the author is attempting to prove is true. The premises are the reasons given in order to persuade the reader that the conclusion is true.

Indicator words

Premise indicators: Because, Since

Conclusion indicators: Si, Hence, Therefore

Inductive Reasoning

An inductive argument is to produce generalizations from matters of fact or experience. It is not as old as deductive argumentation, nor is it as well respected. An inductive argument is formed from one or more premises and a conclusion. And like a deductive argument, the purpose of an inductive argument is to persuade the reader that the conclusion is true, and the premises are given as reasons to believe that the conclusion is true.

Indicators words:

Premise indicators: Because, Since Conclusion indicators: Si, Hence, Therefore

Abductive Reasoning:

it's now the most common form of argument in the sciences, for it involves the postulation of theories which explain some event or regularity. The form of an inference to the best explanation differs from that of deductive or inductive argument, though (confusingly) the same indicator words are used. In an abduction, the conclusion is some event or regularity which needs to be explained, while the premises are the theories or sets of conditions which do the explaining.

Indicators words:

Premise indicators: Because, Since Conclusion indicators: Si, Hence, Therefore

Also, the word "why" is usted frequently in explanations.

3. Deductive Reasoning errors

There are two ways a deductive argument can fail: (i) the premises may be false, or (ii) the conclusion may not follow from the premises

Inductive Reasoning errors

False Analogy. The two things being compared are not similar in a way which is relevant to the conclusion.

Statistical generalizations are arguments which use some sort of sample to draw a conclusion about apopulation.

Abductive Reasoning errors

Non-support.

Subverted Support. The argument which supports the 'fact' is not a good argument.

Untestibility. Theories which cannot be tested are not good theories. Theories are tested by being used to make a prediction. If a theory cannot be used to make a prediction, then it is a poor theory.

Better Alternative. If another theory can explain the same phenomenon and is a better theory, then the new theory can be used to criticize the old.

Cruz Martínez Misael

Barrera Miranda Eli

Lira Ortega Joshua Miguel