CLAIMS AND CRITICAL THINKING

1
CLAIMS AND CRITICAL THINKING

• The principal goal of critical thinking is
  determining when it is reasonable to accept
  claims.
• Not all claims are explicitly supported by
  argument. Whether or not a claim which is
  presented without explicit supporting argument
  should be accepted depends on
• 1. The content of the claim (what it is about)
• 2. The source of the claim (where it comes
  from)

2
ASSESSING AN UNSUPPORTED CLAIM

• Generally speaking, it is reasonable to accept an
  unsupported claim
• 1. If it does not conflict with our own
  observations, our background information, or
  other credible claims and
• 2. If it comes from a credible source that gives
  us no reason to suspect bias.
• Remember that accepting or rejecting claims need
  not be done with absolute confidence, but the
  degree of confidence with which we accept (or
  reject) a claim can vary quite a bit, from very
  tentative to thoroughly convinced.

3
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS I

• A persons most reliable source of information
  about the world is her own observations.
• Accordingly, if a claim conflicts with what we
  know based on our personal experience, it is
  reasonable to be suspicious of the claim and to
  reject the claim as false, at least
  provisionally.
• However, it is important to note that
  observations are not infallible.

4
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS II

• Personal observations are not infallible, since
  various things can affect the quality of
  observations or make perception difficult, such
  as
• quality of lighting or weather (e.g., rain or
  fog)
• mental distractions or fatigue
• emotional factors
• impaired senses
• Beliefs, hopes, fears, expectations, personal
  interests, and biases.
• In addition, the reliability of our observations
  depends in turn on the reliability of our memory,
  which can be faulty at times.
• However, even though firsthand observations are
  not infallible, they are still the best source of
  information which we have any factual report
  that conflicts with our own direct observations
  is subject to serious doubt.

5
BACKGROUND INFORMATION I

• Background information df. The immense body of
  justified beliefs that consists of facts we learn
  from our own direct observations and facts we
  learn from others.
• This information is termed background because
  we may not be able to say where or when we
  learned it, but it is something which we mentally
  retain from the past as we think and act in the
  present.

6
BACKGROUND INFORMATION II

• Background information is typically
  well-confirmed by a variety of sources.
• Factual claims must be evaluated against our
  background information.
• Factual claims that conflict with our background
  information are usually quite properly dismissed,
  even if we cannot disprove them through direct
  observation.

7
THE CHALLENGE OF SKEPTICISM

• It is possible to talk about skepticism in a
  stronger and a weaker sense
• Skepticism in the weaker sense df. Doubting the
  truth of any claim until evidence in favor of the
  claim is either thought to be conclusive, or is
  thought to be adequate to accepting the truth of
  the claim.
• Skepticism in the stronger sense df. Denial
  that any knowledge is possible, or denial that
  any claim can be known to be true, where
  knownindicates certainty.
• A certain amount of skepticism is healthy for
  both philosophy and the kind of critical thinking
  required in ordinary living.
• However, skepticism can be overdone in the lived
  world it is not necessary to be able to prove
  what we know or what we take ourselves to know
  about reality with mathematical certainty.

8
INITIALLY ASSESSING A CLAIM

• Claims are initially assessed in relation to our
  background information.
• A claim which seems initially plausible seems so
  because it does not conflict with our background
  information.
• In this case we give the claim a high degree of
  initial plausibility we lean toward accepting
  it.
• A claim which does not seem initially plausible
  does not seem so because it conflicts with our
  background information.
• In this case we give the claim low initial
  plausibility and lean toward rejecting it unless
  very strong evidence can be produced on its
  behalf.

9
BACKGROUND INFORMATION III

• If your background information does not
  adequately relate to the subject matter of a
  particular claim, then you will not be in a
  position to evaluate the claim adequately.
• The broader your background information, the more
  likely you are to be able to evaluate any given
  claim or assertion effectively.

10
CREDIBLE SOURCES

• Our guiding principle in evaluating unsupported
  informational claims requires that they come from
  credible sources.
• In general, the more knowledgeable a person is
  about a given subject, the more reason there is
  to accept what the person says about that
  subject.
• When considering the credibility of the person
  who asserts a claim, an important factor is that
  persons relevant background information.

11
OBSERVATION REPORTS

• An observation report df. An eyewitness record
  or recollection of an event.
• Many informative claims are based on observation
  reports e.g. I saw Jones cheating, that is why
  he deserved to fail.
• Not all observation reports are equally good, but
  some are better than others.
• If someone observes something in an area in which
  she is an expert, then her report of the event is
  more credible than that of a person who is not an
  expert.
• This is because her observations will be more
  accurate and reliable than those of a non-expert.
• For instance, if Sam is an expert music critic,
  then his report of the quality of a pianists
  playing is better than that of a novice.

12
SHARPENING, LEVELING, AND DISTORTION

• In sharpening a person exaggerates what he or she
  thinks is the main point of a topic, issue, or
  story.
• In leveling the person either de-emphasizes or
  fails to consider elements of the topic, issue,
  or story which he or she considers to be
  peripheral or irrelevant.
• Because certain things are emphasized and others
  are not, a distortion of the topic, issue, or
  story can occur.

13
CAUSES OF EXAGGERATION

• People tend to emphasize those things which they
  remember, and we tend to remember things which
  are different or unusual so we tend to
  exaggerate differences rather than similarities
  between things.
• We want other people to find what we say to be
  interesting, and differences are more interesting
  than similarities between things so we tend to
  think that, by exaggerating differences, what we
  say will be more interesting.

14
EXPERTS I

• An expert df. A person who, through education,
  training, or experience, or a combination
  thereof has special knowledge or ability or
  both in a subject.
• One should give a great deal of initial
  plausibility to a claim made by an expert when
  the claim pertains to the subject or field in
  which the person making the claim is an expert.
• If two or more reports of firsthand observations
  conflict, and one of the reports is made by an
  expert in the field which the observation
  concerns, then the observation made by the expert
  should be considered to be more reliable.

15
EXPERTS II

• Remember that being an expert in one thing does
  not mean being an expert in everything, so even
  an experts opinion about something in a field in
  which he is not an expert should be questioned.
• Also, possessing the ability to become an expert
  is entirely different from actually being an
  expert.
• A person who is an expert in physics might have
  the ability to become an expert in philosophy,
  but, until such expertise is acquired and
  demonstrated, then what the physicist says about
  philosophy should not be treated with the same
  respect given to what he says about physics.

16
FACTORS DETERMINING EXPERTISE

• 1. Education. This includes but is not limited
  to formal education.
• 2. Experience. Kind and amount of experience are
  important however, time alone doing something
  will not guarantee that the person is good at
  what he does.
• 3. Accomplishments. These are important to
  determining a persons expertise, but only when
  the accomplishments are directly related to the
  issue being considered a Nobel prize in
  chemistry is irrelevant to a persons opinion
  about politics or art.
• 4. Reputation. This is always relative to a
  particular group of people, but the important
  group is the group of people who are experts in
  the same field in which the person in question
  is also an expert.
• 5. Position. Such as director of a major museum,
  head of a university, or coach of a team
  position indicates what other people think of
  your expertise.

17
DISAGREEMENT OF EXPERTS

• It is important to recognize that experts in a
  field can and do sometimes disagree with one
  another about things in their field.
• This is especially true when the issues are
  complicated, or when something is at stake, such
  as a grant for research.
• When experts disagree, a critical thinker is
  obliged to suspend judgment about which expert to
  endorse, unless
• one expert clearly represents a majority view
  among experts in the field, or
• one expert can be established as more
  authoritative or less biased than the others.

18
MAJORITY AGREEMENT OF EXPERTS

• One must be careful though, because even the
  majority of experts can be wrong.
• In addition, even the best expert is not
  infallible, but can be wrong and can make
  mistakes.
• Still, it is good critical practice to side with
  the experts, and the authority among experts
  until it is shown that they are wrong.
• The reasonable position is one that agrees with
  the most authoritative opinion but allows for
  enough open-mindedness to change if the evidence
  changes.
• Recall too that, sometimes, suspending judgement
  makes the most sense, especially if we are
  suspicious of evidence or sources or both.

19
AN EXCEPTION TO A RULE

• Generally speaking, its reasonable to accept an
  unsupported claim if it comes from a credible
  source and does not conflict with your
  observations, your background information, or
  other credible claims.
• There are exceptions to this principle when there
  is something very important at stake.
• When that is the case subject the claim to the
  most stringent tests you can.
• For instance, get a second or third opinion if a
  doctor recommends a serious operation, or if a
  financial advisor recommends a major change in
  your portfolio.

20
IRRELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS

• Sometimes irrelevant things can affect how we
  judge things and what claims we will accept.
• We may give more weight than we should to the
  opinions of those we are emotionally attached to
  or have greatly influenced us.
• Peoples mannerisms, facial expressions,
  composure, or even manner of dress can affect how
  much weight we attach to what they say.
• Also, we unconsciously tend to modify our beliefs
  to please those who flatter us.
• Logically irrelevant considerations do affect our
  assessments of credibility and beliefs in general.

21
THE NEWS MEDIA I

• Major kinds of news media include newspapers,
  newsmagazines, television news, radio news, and
  Internet sites of major news agencies.
• The broadest and most detailed coverage is
  offered by print media, but the breadth and depth
  of coverage in any medium is affected by such
  factors as
• Space or time.
• The interests of the audience.
• Concerns of advertisers, government officials,
  and pressure groups.
• The quality and amount of information given to a
  reporter.
• Biases of the reporter or the news organization
  for whom the reporter works.

22
THE NEWS MEDIA II

• The news media whether print or electronic
  determines not only what news it will present,
  but can use various devices to affect how the
  news is perceived.
• For instance, where news is placed in space or
  when it is presented in time suggests how
  important it is in a headline on the first
  page, at the start of the news.
• News is selectively reported since each news
  organization has to determine what it is going to
  report, and to what degree of depth.
• Also, there is no guarantee that the media have
  reported the story accurately, and if it is not
  reported accurately then it can at best be
  partially true and may be wholly false.

23
THE NEWS MEDIA III

• Any news organization is a business, and so must
  make money.
• So only a small amount of money can be allotted
  for expensive investigative reporting.
• The great bulk of news is given to reporters.
• So news tends to be shaped by the purposes and
  interests of those people who are supplying it.
• Reporters cannot afford to offend their sources
  if they want future news.
• News organizations cannot afford to offend their
  readers or advertisers if they want future
  revenues.

24
THE NEWS MEDIA IV

• It is good that news organizations are private
  businesses it makes them independent of the
  government.
• The bad aspect is that, as businesses, they need
  to make a profit, and this need can affect both
  what they report and how they report it.
• They do not want to offend either their sources
  or their readers or (especially) their
  advertisers (the source of most of their income
  is advertising.)
• The tastes, interests, and education of the
  public affects what and how news is presented.
• The main effect of the public on the news is that
  it tends to be oversimplified
• This is because most people are unwilling or
  unable to comprehend complicated issues.

25
NEWS AND ENTERTAINMENT I

• Many or most important world events are
  complicated and boring (at least by everyday
  standards).
• Accordingly, sensational, unusual, and easily
  understood subjects get more attention than the
  unexciting, the usual, and the complicated, even
  if the latter are much more important in the long
  run.
• These factors not only help determine what gets
  reported and how it gets reported, they also help
  determine which people are featured on tv
  programs.
• The number of movie stars and celebrities
  interviewed on talk shows is wildly
  disproportionate to
• the effect that these people have on our lives
• the importance of their contribution to society
  and culture.

26
NEWS AND ENTERTAINMENT II

• The overindulgence of our desire to be
  entertained comes at the expense of our need to
  be informed.
• In the process, we become passive citizens rather
  than active participants in society.
• While for the most part we can trust most
  reporting of the major news agencies, competition
  for readers and viewers has become so fierce that
  the tactics the media employ to attract an
  audience have begun to endanger the very idea of
  an independent, honest, straightforward press.

27
THE INTERNET

• Information on the Internet must be evaluated
  with even more caution than information from the
  print media, radio, or television.
• The Internet has commercial and institutional
  sources, and individual and group sites on the
  Web.
• Just because something appears on the Internet
  does not make it true any individual or group
  can put up a Web site and they can say anything
  they want on it.
• Remember that the information you get from a
  source is only as good as that source.

28
SUMMARY I

• When informational claims do not conflict with
  our observations or background information and
  come from sources which are credible and
  unbiased, then it is generally reasonable to
  accept them, even if they are not presented with
  supporting argument.
• Background information consists of our general
  knowledge of reality, facts and data which we
  have accumulated over the years and on which we
  constantly depend.
• The less initial plausibility a claim has the
  more suspicious of it we should be.

29
SUMMARY II

• We have better reason to accept a claim made by a
  person when that person is an expert in the field
  which his claim concerns.
• The claims of experts are more reliable, but
  experts can and do disagree, and the claims of
  experts are no more reliable than anyone elses
  if the claim does not concern their field.
• All claims which may show bias, whether that of
  an expert or not, should be regarded with
  suspicion.
• One should keep an open mind about what is
  presented in the news, although major print and
  electronic news agencies are typically reliable
  sources of information.
• Be especially careful about claims made on the
  Internet.