7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 1/9

 

Critical Thinking 

HANDOUT FOR POLITICAL SCIENCE AND AMERICANGOVERNMENT

Definition: The application of principles of logic and reason in a deliberative process of decision-making.

The following are attributes of critical thinkers: They1. Care that their beliefs be true, and that their decisions be justified; that is,care to "get it right" to the extent possible. This includes the dispositions to

a. Seek alternative hypotheses, explanations, conclusions, plans, sources,etc., and be open to them

 b. Endorse a position to the extent that, but only to the extent that, it is justified by the information that is available

c. try to be well informedd. Consider seriously other points of view than their own

2. Care to present a position honestly and clearly, theirs as well as others'.This includes the dispositions to

a. try to be clear about the intended meaning of what is said, written, or 

otherwise communicated, seeking as much precision as the situation requires b. Determine, and maintain focus on, the conclusion or questionc. Seek and offer reasonsd. Take into account the total situatione. to be reflectively aware of their own basic beliefs

PROCESS of Critical Thinking 

1. Analyze argumentsa. Identify conclusions

 b. Identify stated reasonsc. Identify unstated reasonsd. Identify and handle irrelevancee. See the structure of an argumentf. Summarize

2. Ask and answer questions of clarification and/or challenge, such as,a. Why?

 b. What is your main point?c. What do you mean by…? 

d. What would be an example?e. What would not be an example (though close to being one)?

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 2/9

f. How does that apply to this case (describe a case, which might wellappear to be a counter example)?

g. What difference does it make?h. What are the facts?

3. Define terms.a. Clear communication requires accurate use of words. “He who defines the

terms wins the argument.”  b. Be aware of different uses of the same word and know how some words

have shifted meaning over time.c. Some terms are meant to be used with precision while others are general

in their natural use. Be sure that you know the difference.

4. Judge the credibility of a source. Major criteria include:

a. Expertise b. Lack of conflict of interestc. Agreement among sourcesd. Reputatione. Use of established proceduresf. Known risk to reputationg. Ability to give reasonsh. Careful research and methodology

5. Deduce, and judge deduction

a. Class logic b. Conditional logicc. Interpretation of logical terminology in statements, including

(1) Negation and double negation(2) Necessary and sufficient condition language(3) Such words as "only", "if and only if", "or", "some", "unless", "not

 both".

6. Induce, and judge inductiona. To generalizations. Broad considerations:(1) Typicality of data, including sampling where appropriate(2) Breadth of coverage

 b. To explanatory conclusions (including hypotheses)(1) Major types of explanatory conclusions and hypotheses:

(a) Causal claims (Correlation is NOT causation)(b) Claims about the beliefs and attitudes of people(c) Interpretation of authors’ intended meanings (d) Historical claims that certain things happened(e) Reported definitions

(f) Claims that some proposition is an unstated reason that the personactually used

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 3/9

(2) Characteristic investigative activities(a) Designing experiments, including planning to control variables(b) Seeking evidence and counterevidence(c) Seeking other possible explanations

(3) Criteria, the first three being essential, the fourth being desirable(a) The proposed conclusion would explain the evidence(b) The proposed conclusion is consistent with all known facts(c) Competitive alternative explanations are inconsistent with facts

(d) The proposed conclusion seems plausible

7. Make and judge value judgments: Important factors:a. Background facts

 b. Consequences of accepting or rejecting the judgmentc. Prima facie application of acceptable principles

d. Alternativese. Balancing, weighing, deciding

8. Attribute unstated assumptions. Determine what must be true in order for the premises to be true. If the basic assumption(s) are untrue (or suspect) thenthe conclusion is necessarily suspect. Ask this question, “What fact, if true,

would change your position?” If the answer is “nothing,” then there is little to

 be gained by continued discussion with this person.

Developing Listening Skills 

CLASS Exercise: Volunteers should be given a few minutes to review one of the following short speeches before delivering them to the class. The audienceshould be attentive to parts of the speech that:1. are opinion;2. call for an unwarranted inference;3. make a “conclusory” statement; 4. are based upon non-ascertainable “facts,” or  5. use facts that are verifiable but irrelevant.

Speech One 

Fellow students: It is with a heavy heart that I must come before you today, bringing news that the present crisis in education is worsening. Student SATscores are at an all-time low and drop-out rates are skyrocketing! Our greatestnational, resource, our youth, are in being neglected by politicians hostile tothe future. These narrow-minded, self-serving bureaucrats are destroyingAmerica’s future with their partisan bickering over budget increases. They

obviously have no concern for our children or they would stop being so stingy

with their money. IF we ever hope to make America great again, we mustincrease the national education budget and if this Congress won’t do it, we

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 4/9

must do whatever it takes to remove them from office and replace them thetrue representatives of the people- the ones who will place education FIRSTon the national agenda. Thank You.

Speech Two 

Friends, I am grateful to share with you a matter of great importance to us all.My little daughter was injured last fall when a wheel came off of a defectivestroller. Thank goodness she was not seriously injured as she could have beenvery badly hurt. At first I thought it was just a fluke- that my stroller was theonly one. I heard later that many strollers of this model have been sent out bythe manufacturer and that several other children might have been similarly putat risk. Dozens of children under the age of eighteen months old have beendumped from their strollers because of this defect and yet, the manufacturer 

continues to knowingly sell these dangerous devices. I would like to ask youto join me in putting pressure on Congress so that new legislation may beintroduced to force manufacturers and retailers to improve their qualitycontrol measures. It is vital that further risk be minimized, and compensationmight be made to those whose children have been injured. Thank You

Speech Three 

 Note to speaker: First- write the words “Dihydrogen Monoxide” on the black 

 board. Then give the short speech that follows. Emphasize each of the 7 “bad” 

conditions in the strongest way possible.**********

I am here today to implore you join me in demanding strict control or totalelimination of the chemical "dihydrogen monoxide." This chemical causes thefollowing conditions:

1. cause excessive sweating and vomiting;2. it is a major component in acid rain;3. it can cause severe burns in its gaseous state;

4. accidental inhalation can kill you;5. it contributes to erosion;6. it decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes; and,7. it has been found in tumors of terminal cancer patients.

Because of the foregoing evidence, I have a petition demanding that our legislators ban this obnoxious substance. I am going to ask you to raise your hands if you will sign the petition that I am going to circulate.********

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 5/9

Wait a few seconds and look at the audience expectantly. ( see how manyraise their hands) Thank them for their good citizenship.

 NOTE *****

A freshman at Eagle Rock Junior High won first prize at the Greater IdahoFalls Science Fair, April 26 (97?). He was attempting to show howconditioned we have become to alarmists practicing junk science andspreading fear of everything in our environment.

He asked 50 people if they supported a ban of the chemical. Forty-three saidyes, six were undecided, and only one knew that the chemical was water.The title of his prize winning project was, "How Gullible Are We?" He feelsthe conclusion is obvious.

Speech Four 

I've done a little research, and what I've discovered should make anyone think twice....

1. More than 98 percent of convicted felons are bread users.2. Fully HALF of all children who grow up in bread-consuming householdsscore below average on standardized tests.3. In the 18th century, when virtually all bread was baked in the home, the

average life expectancy was less than 50 years; infant mortality rates wereunacceptably high; many women died in childbirth; and diseases such astyphoid, yellow fever, and influenza ravaged whole nations.4. More than 90 percent of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours of eating bread.5. Bread is made from a substance called "dough." It has been proven that aslittle as one pound of dough can be used to suffocate a mouse. The averageAmerican eats more bread than that in one month!6. Primitive tribal societies that have no bread exhibit a low incidence of cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, and osteoporosis.

7. Bread has been proven to be addictive. Subjects deprived of bread andgiven only water to eat begged for bread after as little as two days.8. Bread is often a "gateway" food item, leading the user to "harder" itemssuch as butter, jelly, peanut butter, and even cold cuts.9. Bread has been proven to absorb water. Since the human body is more than90 percent water, it follows that eating bread could lead to your body beingtaken over by this absorptive food product, turning you into a soggy, gooey

 bread-pudding person.10. Newborn babies can choke on bread.

11. Bread is baked at temperatures as high as 400 degrees Fahrenheit! Thatkind of heat can kill an adult in less than one minute.

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 6/9

12. Most American bread eaters are utterly unable to distinguish betweensignificant scientific fact and meaningless statistical babbling.

In light of these frightening statistics, I urge my fellow citizens to join thiscrusade immediately. I propose the following bread restrictions:

1. No sale of bread to minors.2. A nationwide "Just Say No To Toast" campaign, complete celebrity TVspots and bumper stickers.3. A 300 percent federal tax on all bread to pay for all the societal ills wemight associate with bread.4. No animal or human images, nor any primary colors (which may appeal tochildren) may be used to promote bread usage.5. The establishment of "Bread-free" zones around schools.

Send comments to: jsterling@lawandliberty.org

Disclaimer: This material was largely assembled from the Internet and isdistributed for educational purposes only. May be dangerous in the wronghands. Adult supervision is strongly encouraged. Do not try these exercises athome. Offer void where prohibited.

http://www.lawandliberty.org/critical.htm

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 7/9

 

http://www.victoria.ac.nz/hppi/courses/PHIL-123.aspx 

  School Staff 

  Contact Us

SCHOOL OF HISTORY, PHILOSOPHY, POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONALRELATIONS

   Home

  About Us  Study and Careers 

  ResearchYou are here:

  Home

  > Study and Careers

  > Courses Offered

Critical Thinking

PHIL 123 – Critical Thinking

Points: 20 Prerequisites: None

Faculty:  Humanities & Soc Sc Corequisites:  None

School:  History, Phil, Pol Sci & IR Restrictions:  None

This course provides an introduction to the theory of critical thinking. Students will learn how to evaluate arguments

and weigh up the evidence in support of a conclusion. Students will also learn how to make rational decisions based

on the hypotheses they come to believe after consideration of such arguments. 70% internal assessment, 30%

examination.

Tuition Fees

2012: domestic $755.00 international $3,341.60

2011: domestic $726.00 international $3,241.60

Set Text

PHIL 123 Book of Readings. Available from Vicbooks, Student Union Building

Trimester 2 2011

* indicates instructor is the course coordinator.

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 8/9

CRN From/To Days Time Building [Campus] Room Instructor

1309311 Jul – 16 Oct 2011

Mon, Wed,Thu 1310 - 1400

Maclaurin[Kelburn]  LT101 Stuart Brock  

Trimester 1 2012

* indicates instructor is the course coordinator.

CRN From/To Days Time Building [Campus] Room Instructor

130935 Mar – 10 Jun 2012

Mon, Wed,Fri 1000 - 1050

Maclaurin[Kelburn]  LT101

College Students Lack Critical Thinking Skills, ButWho’s To Blame? DOUG MATACONIS  · TUESDAY, JANUARY 18, 2011 ·  75 COMMENTS 

 A new study suggests that American universities are failing in what is supposed to beone of the their core missions: NEW YORK — An unprecedented study that followed several thousand undergraduatesthrough four years of college found that large numbers didn’t learn the critical thinking,

complex reasoning and written communication skills that are widely assumed to be at thecore of a college education.Many of the students graduated without knowing how to sift fact from opinion, make aclear written argument or objectively review conflicting reports of a situation or event,according to New York University sociologist Richard Arum, lead author of the study. Thestudents, for example, couldn’t determine the cause of an increase in neighborhood crimeor how best to respond without being swayed by emotional testimony and political spin. Arum, whose book ―Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses‖(University of Chicago Press) comes out this month, followed 2,322 traditional-age studentsfrom the fall of 2005 to the spring of 2009 and examined testing data and student surveysat a broad range of 24 U.S. colleges and universities, from the highly selective to the lessselective.

Forty-five percent of students made no significant improvement in their critical thinking,reasoning or writing skills during the first two years of college, according to the study. After

7/29/2019 Critical Thinking in Political Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/critical-thinking-in-political-science 9/9

four years, 36 percent showed no significant gains in these so-called ―higher order‖ thinkingskills.Combining the hours spent studying and in class, students devoted less than a fifth of theirtime each week to academic pursuits. By contrast, students spent 51 percent of their time — or 85 hours a week — socializing or in extracurricular activities.The study also showed that students who studied alone made more significant gains in

learning than those who studied in groups.

Perhaps most the most interesting thing about the study is the manner in which the resultsseem skewed by field of study:Students who majored in the traditional liberal arts — including the social sciences,humanities, natural sciences and mathematics — showed significantly greater gains overtime than other students in critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing skills.Students majoring in business, education, social work and communications showed theleast gains in learning. However, the authors note that their findings don’t preclude thepossibility that such students ―are developing subject-specific or occupationally relevantskills.‖ Greater gains in liberal arts subjects are at least partly the result of faculty requiring higherlevels of reading and writing, as well as students spending more time studying, the study’sauthors found. Students who took courses heavy on both reading (more than 40 pages a week) and writing (more than 20 pages in a semester) showed higher rates of learning.That’s welcome news to liberal arts advocates.

I would think it would be, but on some level such an analysis would seem to ignore thereasons that students go to college today. Unlike in the past, when a college education was viewed as an opportunity for learning, there seems to be more of a focus today on learningskills that will lead to a high rate of monetary return after college. Majoring in history orpolitical science may help you to learn to think critically, and that is a skill that is valuablein fields like medicine and law, but its unlikely to lead to the same level of monetary rewardas someone who pursues, say, a Masters In Business Administration. On some level,colleges have become vocational school almost as much as they are ―institutions of higher

learning.‖ I’m not sure whether that is a good or a bad thing, but it’s the world that we livein and it’s unlikely to change.  Ann Althouse, who teaches law at the University of Wisconsin,  wonders why the study concentrates so much on the students and not the professors: I’d like a study analyzing whether the  professors know how to sift fact from opinion, make aclear written argument, and objectively review conflicting reports of a situation or event.

It strikes me as a fair point considering that it is sort of difficult to teach someone a skill youdon’t possess yourself.  Another blogger points out that this isn’t just an indictment of college education inthe U.S.: By the time our kids get to college it is too late to change habits por learn new skills thatshould have been taught to them in grade k-12 in my opinion. This study does not merely 

condemn colleges, it throws a harsh light on our primary education system on this country.In general, the US doesn’t pay our teachers well (compared to other professions andother nations), nor do we reward them for excellence, nor do we often provide them with asystem that accurately assesses their efforts (i.e., No child left behind ring any bells?).

This is a fair point. Students do not walk into college blank slates, but as products of theeducation they received for twelve years before that. If colleges are failing at their primary mission, it isn’t necessarily their fault. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/college-students-lack-critical-thinking-skills-but-whos-to-

blame/