baltic pr awards critical thinking v03
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 2: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
01 - Argumentation 02 - Scientific Method 03 - Cognitive Biases 04 - Media Literacy …
A set of tools and habits.
![Page 3: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
01 - Argumentation 02 - Scientific Method 03 - Cognitive Biases 04 - Media Literacy …
A set of tools and habits.
![Page 4: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Reason 1 Reason 2 Reason 3 … __________________________________ Conclusion
What is an argument?
?
![Page 5: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Two simple ways how arguments can go wrong
Relevance
#Sufficiency
$
![Page 6: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
The reasons provided, while psychologically persuasive, are logically irrelevant to the conclusion they are supposed to support.
Fallacies of relevance.
#
![Page 7: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Pointing out someone’s personal characteristics in an attempt to discredit his/her argument.
Personal attack (ad hominem).
![Page 8: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Suggesting that a conclusion is correct just because it is linked with some past or present tradition.
Appeal to tradition.
![Page 9: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Providing someone’s opinion as a reason for accepting a conclusion, even though the individual has no relevant expertise on the topic.
Appeal to irrelevant authority.
![Page 10: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
While the reasons provided are logically relevant, without additional support they are insufficient to warrant the conclusion.
Fallacies of sufficiency.
$
![Page 11: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Using personal experience or isolated examples as evidence in support of a conclusion.
Anecdotal evidence.
![Page 12: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Suggestion that, just because B happened after or simultaneously with A, B happened because of A.
Correlation implies causation.
![Page 13: Baltic pr awards critical thinking v03](https://reader033.vdocument.in/reader033/viewer/2022042723/5882589f1a28abd40e8b51f1/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Become familiar with the most important tools.
Critical thinking - the way forward.
Apply them regularly, create habits.
Reason well, make good decisions.