Addis Abeba University

AAIT Section 16

Logic and critical thinking group assignment

Title- critical thinking

Group 5

Group members Id no
1.Abel Alemayehu……………………………………………
2.Abreham Workneh………………………………………….
3.Biniyam Tekle………………………………………………
4.Birhanu GebreYohannes……………………………………UGR/5643/17
5.Biruk Wodaje…………………………………….…………UGR/8325/17
6.Bisrat WoldeGorgis………………………………………..
7. Bonsa Tadesse……………………………………………...UGR/4815/17
8.Fetehya Kassahun…………………………………………..UGR/9637/17
9.Finote Meseret……………………………………………...UGR/2977/17
10.Jemil Eshak………………………………………………..
11.Jemila Ibrahim…………………………………………….UGR/1449/17

Submitted to
Submisson date
Table of contents

1. Basic concepts of critcal thinking………………………………………………………………………1

2. Codes of intellectual conduct for effective discussion…………………………………………………..1
3. Principle of good argument……………………………………………………………………………...2
4. Principles of critcal thinking……………………………………………………………………………3
5. Basic traits of critcal thinkers……………………………………………………………………………4
6. Barriers of critcal thinking……………………………………………………………………………….5
7. Benefits critcal thinking…………………………………………………………………………………7
8. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………….7
Basic Concepts of Critical Thinking
Introduction
Critical thinking refers to a range of cognitive skills and dispositions essential
for analyzing, evaluating, and reasoning about information in an effective and
unbiased manner. It involves thinking clearly, rationally, objectively, and
independently to make sound, well-reasoned decisions. Intelligence alone
doesn’t guarantee critical thinking; it requires active engagement and skillful
reasoning.
John Dewey defined critical thinking as an "active, persistent, and careful
consideration" of beliefs, emphasizing three key points: it’s an active process
(not passively absorbing ideas), requires persistence, and relies on grounds or
evidence supporting beliefs and their implications. Dewey stresses the
importance of reasoned analysis and not just quick, unreflective judgments.
Edward Glaser extended Dewey’s ideas by highlighting the importance of a
thoughtful attitude, knowledge of logical methods, and skill in applying them.
Robert Ennis added a decision-making aspect, viewing critical thinking as a
reflective approach to deciding what to believe or do. Richard Paul introduced
metacognition (thinking about one’s thinking) to enhance critical thinking,
while Michael Scriven emphasized the skilled, active interpretation and
evaluation of information, arguing that critical thinking has standards like
clarity, relevance, and reasonableness.
The concept of "criticocreative thinking" combines critical and creative
thinking, stressing that evaluating ideas effectively also requires creativity—
imagining alternatives, looking at different perspectives, and thinking beyond
what’s presented. In essence, critical thinking is an evaluative, open-minded,
and creative approach that seeks high-quality reasoning to support beliefs or
actions.
Codes of Intellectual Conduct for Effective Discussion
1. Clarity: This is the cornerstone of effective communication and thought.
Without clarity, ideas are ambiguous and difficult to understand, making it
impossible to judge accuracy or relevance. Clear thoughts are free of vagueness
and are understandable by others.
2. Precision: Precision builds on clarity by focusing on exact details. Where
clarity makes an idea understandable, precision ensures it is specific. For
example, rather than asking, “What are the consequences?” a precise question
would ask, “What specific outcomes have resulted from this change?”
3. Accuracy: Ensuring that information aligns with reality is crucial.
Misleading or incorrect information can lead to flawed conclusions, reinforcing
the "garbage in, garbage out" principle. Critical thinkers seek valid and reliable
information for well-founded conclusions.
4. Relevance: Relevant information directly pertains to the issue at hand,
helping to filter out distractions. This focus speeds up and strengthens analysis
by excluding data that doesn’t logically connect to the problem.

1
5. Coherence: Coherence is the consistency between beliefs and actions, and
within one’s thoughts. It has two parts: logical coherence, where beliefs don’t
conflict with each other, and practical coherence, where actions align with
stated beliefs.
6. Logical Correctness: This standard requires reasoning that follows logical
rules. Logical correctness ensures that conclusions are logically derived from
premises, making arguments internally consistent and mutually reinforcing.
7. Comprehensiveness: This emphasizes depth and breadth in analysis,
ensuring all facets of an issue are considered. Complex issues require thorough
exploration to be understood and addressed fully.
8. Fairness: Fair-mindedness requires setting aside personal biases to
objectively assess an issue. Critical thinkers strive to balance perspectives
without prejudice, understanding that fairness enhances objectivity and honesty.
When integrated, these standards encourage rigorous, systematic thinking that
helps individuals objectively assess ideas, build logical arguments, and make
unbiased decisions. This approach benefits not only complex problem-solving
but also everyday decision-making by promoting reflective, thoughtful
reasoning.
Principles of a Good Argument:
1. The Structural Principle: An argument must be structurally sound, i.e., its
conclusion logically follows from its premises. In deductive arguments, it must
follow necessarily and, in inductive arguments, probably. This structure is
obviously violated when the premises are at odds with each other or with their
own conclusion, or for that matter, when they contain some sort of incompatible
statements. Those arguments that do not hold to this structural soundness cannot
provide meaningful insight or resolution.
2. The Relevance Principle: Only those premises relevant to the truth or merit
of the conclusion should appear. A premise is relevant if it adds reason to
believe the conclusion. Irrelevant premises weaken the strength of an argument
and divert attention away from its main point. Critical questions that help
evaluate relevance include the following: Does the premise have an effect on
belief in the conclusion? Does it provide any insight into the truth of the
conclusion?.
3. The Acceptability Principle: Arguments should be based upon premises that
a reasonable, adult human being would be willing to accept as true. Rather than
the word "truth," the word "acceptability" takes into consideration that real-life
argumentation is usually based upon such premises that can reasonably be
expected to be accepted by one's audience under the circumstances and given
the evidence available. Acceptability avoids the unworkable demand for
absolute truth, which is unattainable for the most part, and focuses on what can
readily and reasonably be accepted in context.

2
4. The Sufficiency Principle: The premises relevant and acceptable should be
adequate in number and weight to support the conclusion. This principle once
again embodies the challenge of weighting evidence; participants may attach
different importance to the supporting points. Questions to consider: Are the
premises sufficient for the purpose of justifying the conclusion? Is there any key
missing evidence which may render the premises insufficient?.
5. Rebuttal principle: A strong argument can predict and answer those
criticisms that may arise or any counterarguments. The more an argument can
take on the opposing points of view and still acknowledge weak points, the
stronger it is. Strong rebuttals contain no diversions: misrepresenting criticism,
taking up a trifling issue, or ridiculing, rather than making a response. Showing
and countering major counterarguments bolsters the integrity of a full argument.
Structure, relevance, acceptability, sufficiency, and rebuttal are the principles
that set a disciplined context for reasoning. It can only be through these
disciplines that well-reasoned and logically sound arguments which can further
raise good discussions and develop critical thinking can be constructed.
Principles of Critical Thinking
1. The Fallibility Principle: Consider one's belief to be in an error. The
readiness to alter or discard one's belief encourages responsible investigation
and actually opens up the honest search for truth.

3
2. The Truth-Seeking Principle: A critical thinker has to be genuinely truth-
seeking, and for this, he has to be open to different perspectives and even to any
sort of criticism. True truth-seeking requires actually considering opposing
arguments and being impartial in the process.
3. The Clarity Principle: There should not be ambiguous or vague language in
any argument but rather crystal clear so that all parties receive distinct positions
and critiques. Lays the foundation for effective communication.
4. The Burden of Proof Principle: Presenters of a claim are expected to
produce evidence in its support, if so requested, to take responsibility for the
arguments. Exemptions include cases where the claims are either so general or
widely accepted that no one would consider arguing against them. Here, the
burden falls on the head of a challenger.
5. The Principle of Charity: This principle requires the fair presentation of the
opposing argument: one is supposed to rephrase an opponent's argument in its
strongest form, and only then can one criticise it. That would be treating the
other person's original intention with respect, without misrepresentation.
6. The Suspension of Judgment Principle: Unless one argument significantly
outweighs another, or evidence is insufficient, a decision-maker should
withhold judgment. This will help avoid quick decisions that could be wrong
and enable one to make better choices with the availability of sufficient
evidence.
7. The Resolution Principle: Questions are taken as resolved when one
argument at least meets the criteria for a cogent argument: structural cogency,
relevance, adequacy and satisfactorily responds to significant criticisms.
However, the argument is subject to revision if additional information comes to
light.
These standards result in fair and rational discussion, and take critical thinkers
into reasoned argumentation in which truth and clarity are more important than
'winning' or sustaining a given position.
Basic Traits of Critical Thinkers
Traits of Critical Thinkers:
 Are honest with themselves – they acknowledge what they don’t know,
recognize their own limitations, and remain vigilant about their own errors.
 See challenges in problems and controversies – they approach complex
issues as stimulating opportunities for growth.
 Pursue understanding with patience and curiosity – they maintain
curiosity, stay patient with complex topics, and are willing to invest time to
work through confusion.
 Rely on evidence over personal preferences – they base their judgments
on factual evidence, delay conclusions when information is lacking, and
adjust their views when new evidence surfaces.
 Value others’ perspectives – they show genuine interest in other people's
ideas, reading and listening thoughtfully even when they disagree.

4
 Avoid extreme positions – recognizing that extremes are rarely accurate,
they practice fairness, aiming for balanced, well-rounded views.
 Exercise emotional restraint – they control their emotions rather than
being driven by them, carefully thinking things through before acting.
Traits of Uncritical Thinkers:
 Pretend to know more than they do – they overlook their own limitations
and assume their views are free from error.
 View problems and controversies as threats – rather than opportunities,
they see challenging issues as nuisances or attacks on their ego.
 Lack patience with complexity – they avoid making the effort to
understand difficult topics, choosing to remain confused rather than digging
deeper.
 Rely on first impressions and gut reactions – they make judgments
without regard for evidence quality or quantity, clinging stubbornly to initial
views.
 Focus on their own opinions – they are self-centered and dismissive of
others’ perspectives, often thinking, “How can I refute this?” at any sign of
disagreement.
 Disregard the need for balance – they favor perspectives that reinforce
their existing beliefs, ignoring alternative viewpoints.
 Act impulsively based on emotions – rather than exercising control, they
follow their feelings without careful thought.
comparison
Critical thinkers are driven by standards of clarity, precision, and accuracy,
while uncritical thinkers often display unclear, imprecise, and inaccurate
thinking. Critical thinkers also recognize potential biases, such as egocentrism
and wishful thinking, and work to avoid them; uncritical thinkers, however,
frequently fall into such traps.
In evaluating arguments, critical thinkers strive to understand and assess
viewpoints fairly, drawing logical conclusions from evidence, while uncritical
thinkers may misunderstand and draw unsupported conclusions. Critical
thinkers are intellectually honest, aware of their limitations, and open to
criticism, while uncritical thinkers often pretend to know more than they do and
resist opposing views.
Critical thinkers base beliefs on facts and evidence, understanding the influence
of biases on their perceptions, whereas uncritical thinkers rely on personal
preferences, lacking awareness of their biases. Critical thinkers think
independently, avoiding “groupthink,” and show courage in questioning even
their fundamental beliefs; uncritical thinkers often follow the crowd and resist
challenges to their assumptions.

5
Finally, critical thinkers are motivated by a pursuit of truth, curiosity, and
perseverance, tackling obstacles to gain deeper understanding, while uncritical
thinkers are often indifferent to truth, lacking curiosity and persistence when
faced with intellectual challenges.
Barriers of critical thinking
1. Egocentrism: A self-centered perspective where in the individual considers
his interests and views superior to others. The two manifestations are the self-
interested thinking Egocentrism twists objective analysis and may block any
fair judgment of ideas.
2. Sociocentrism: This is a group-centered thinking that stresses one's group
above others. It is manifested through group bias-favoring one's group while
viewing outsiders skeptically-and through conformism, the urge to follow group
norms and authority uncritically. It decreases independent reasoning and
increases vulnerability to peer pressure.
3. Unwarranted Assumptions and Stereotypes: Assumptions are beliefs taken
as a given without evidence. Unwarranted assumptions aren't based on reality
and lead to stereotyping, assuming into others the traits that come from a group
identity, not individual attributes.
4. Relativistic Thinking: Relativistic thinking, a challenge to critical thinking,
is the belief that truth is subjective and depends on individual or cultural
perspectives. The two main forms are subjectivism and cultural relativism:
4.1 Subjectivism holds that truth is based on individual beliefs, with no
objective truth outside personal opinions. For example, if one person believes
abortion is wrong and another does not, both are “true” for each individual.
4.2 Cultural Relativism argues that truth depends on cultural or societal norms.
For instance, drinking wine might be deemed wrong in Iran but acceptable in
France, meaning each belief is "true" within its respective culture.
Moral Relativism is a prevalent form, splitting into moral subjectivism (moral
truth depends on individual beliefs) and cultural moral relativism (moral truth
depends on cultural norms). Cultural moral relativism attracts many because it
highlights ethical disagreement and appears to promote tolerance. People tend
to see ethics as more subjective than science or math, where disagreements are
less pervasive and often resolvable.
However, cultural moral relativism faces criticisms. First, the existence of deep
ethical disagreement doesn’t mean there’s no objective moral truth. Just as
religious disagreement doesn’t negate the possibility of a real answer about
God’s existence, ethical truth could exist independently of cultural opinions.
Second, relativism does not inherently promote tolerance. If one lives in an
intolerant culture, cultural relativism would imply one should also be intolerant.
Instead of endorsing relativism, ethical disagreements should encourage us to be
thoughtful and open-minded about our own beliefs, especially when faced with
differing perspectives from intelligent and decent people worldwide.

6
5. Wishful Thinking: This is believing something simply because one wants it
to be true, whereas without evidence, it cannot be established as a fact. This
kind of thinking easily leads individuals to disregard facts and instead find
comfort in myth or other beliefs that have not been proven, all at the expense of
rational judgment.
Benefits of critical thinking
Skills and Benefits of Critical Thinking
Critical thinking fosters the capability to recognize, analyze, and solve problems
logically and methodically. It includes the acquisition of necessary skills to
gather pertinent information, examine assumptions, look into alternatives, and
present solutions effectively. It is an essential process for the creation of an
independent, self-regulated thinker who carries out personal development
through a mental "fitness" that would be enhanced with further practice over
time.
In the Classroom
University education attaches much importance to critical thinking: it values the
ways a student processes and acquires information rather than memorization of
certain information. Academic critical thinking requires the student to
understand other people's arguments, to gauge the validity of such arguments,
and to construct and defend one's own reasonably founded arguments. These
skills transfer across subjects and contexts, and enable students to structure
arguments, assess sources, and make informed decisions.
In Daily Life
Critical thinking prevents bad personal choices outside of academia by
promoting the appropriate reasoning and clarity of thought. It is an essential
quality for democratic societies due to the need for informed voting with
considerations to public policy; most societal ills are rooted in the lack of good
critical thinking. Finally, it enriches personal life by calling unexamined cultural
assumptions and biases into question; this kind of life suggests that such a
person is leading an "examined" life-one characterized by intellectual freedom
and self-direction, the true payoff of education.

Conclusion

7
In conclusion, critical thinking is an indispensable skill that transcends
academia, fostering logical analysis, open-mindedness, and effective decision-
making across various facets of life. This paper highlighted key components,
such as clarity, precision, accuracy, and coherence, which form the foundation
of critical thinking. Principles like the structural, relevance, acceptability,
sufficiency, and rebuttal standards guide the formation of sound arguments.
Critical thinkers also embrace essential traits—curiosity, emotional restraint,
and intellectual honesty—while avoiding barriers like egocentrism,
sociocentrism, and wishful thinking. Ultimately, critical thinking not only
improves academic and personal life but also enhances democratic societies by
promoting informed, rational discourse. As a lifelong skill, it contributes to
intellectual freedom, personal growth, and the pursuit of truth in an ever-
complex world.

References

1. Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think. New York: D.C. Heath and Company.
2. Ennis, R. H. (1987). A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities.
Educational Leadership, 44(3), 44-48.
3. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your
Learning and Your Life. Prentice Hall.
4. Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (1987). Defining Critical Thinking. The Foundation for
Critical Thinking.
5. Glaser, E. M. (1941). An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking. New
York: Teachers College, Columbia University.