Copy of Chapter 8: Critical Thinking & Argumentation
Published on Mar 15, 2016
No Description
MORE DECKS TO EXPLORE
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Chapter 8
Critical Thinking and Argumentation in Groups
Brief Introduction of each member.
today's lecture: critical and argumentation
I guess, we have experienced conflicts
today's lecture will guide a similar problem that might happen in the groups.
Before we start off, Eoor.
today's lecture: critical and argumentation
I guess, we have experienced conflicts
today's lecture will guide a similar problem that might happen in the groups.
Before we start off, Eoor.
Introduction
- Critical Thinking and Argument
- Structuring/Supporting/ Refuting Arguements
- Adapting to Argumentation Style
so , two purpose of today's lecture
1. definition of them
2. how can we improve from critical thinkgin to argumentation to reach out the best option for a group.
critical thinking- a kind of think that we use when analyze and evaluate what read /see/hear to arrive at a justified conclusion.
Argumentation
1. definition of them
2. how can we improve from critical thinkgin to argumentation to reach out the best option for a group.
critical thinking- a kind of think that we use when analyze and evaluate what read /see/hear to arrive at a justified conclusion.
Argumentation
Photo by Kurayba
Cooperative Group Argumentation
- Effective arguers balance their personal desire to win argument with the group’s need to solve a problem or make a decision.
- Cooperative arguers focus on the group’s shared goal of solving a problem or making the best decision.
- Others’ ideas and arguments are as important as your own.
Photo by Zé.Valdi
The Value of Argumentation
- Promotes Understanding.
- Promotes Critical Thinking.
- Decreases the Risk of Groupthink
- Improves group decision making
Photo by GotCredit
Structuring Arguments
- The Toulmin Model of an Argument.
- Six components: Claim, Evidence, warrant, Backing, Reservation and Qualifier
Photo by Keith Allison
Claim, Evidence, and Warrant
- Claim: the conclusion or position you advocate, a statement you wish others to believe.
- Evidence: describes the facts, statistics, opinions, examples and other materials you use to support your claim.
- Warrant: Answer questions like "why does that evidence lead you to that conclusion?"
Claim: the conclusion or position you advocate- a statement you wish others to believe.
Evidence: describes the facts, statistics,opinions,examples and other materials you use to support your claim.
For example；the statement"My group will do well on our class project" is a claim. the evidence for this claim might be the fact that during the first meeting, all members of the group said they would work hard on the project
Warrant: answer questions"why does that evidence lead you to that conclusion
these three components are essential in all arguments
Evidence: describes the facts, statistics,opinions,examples and other materials you use to support your claim.
For example；the statement"My group will do well on our class project" is a claim. the evidence for this claim might be the fact that during the first meeting, all members of the group said they would work hard on the project
Warrant: answer questions"why does that evidence lead you to that conclusion
these three components are essential in all arguments
Photo by winterofdiscontent
Backing, Reservation, Qualifier
- Backing: provides support for argument's warrant
- Reservation: recognizes exceptions to an argument or indicates that a claim may not be true under certain cases
- Qualifier: states the degree to which the claim appears to be true.( usually words like possibly, certainly, unlikely)
in the class project example， backing for the warrant might be the fact that the group that worked the hardest on the last assignments received the best grade. if you believe that members may doubt the validity of your evidence, make sure you have backing to support it
at the first meeting, group members said they would work hard. if however, some members do not attend the planning meetings, the group is less likely to do well.
a claim with a qualifier might be " the group will probably do well on the class project."
The second three components help clarify the nature and power of an argument
at the first meeting, group members said they would work hard. if however, some members do not attend the planning meetings, the group is less likely to do well.
a claim with a qualifier might be " the group will probably do well on the class project."
The second three components help clarify the nature and power of an argument
Photo by fPat
Example
- Initial Claim: The Ravens will win the super bowl this year.
- Evidence: They have the best defense in the league.
- Warrant: A good defensive team is the key to winning a Super Bowl.
- Backing: The team with the best defense has won the Super Bowl each of the last five years.
Photo by Doundounba
Example
- Reservation: Raven's defense might have a lot of injuries
- Qualifier: I believe Ravens have the best chance
- Revised Claim: The Ravens will probably win the Super Bowl this year.
Photo by itistobeanythingatall
Types of Evidence
- Facts and Opinions
- Definitions and Descriptions
- Examples and illustrations
- Statistics
Supporting arguments
after we build our argument, we need to do research and find evidence to support it
a fact is a verifiable observation, experience, or event, something known to be true. An opinion is a personal conclusion regarding the meaning or implications of facts
when used as evidence, look for a variety of opinions will be better when we choose evidence.
after we build our argument, we need to do research and find evidence to support it
a fact is a verifiable observation, experience, or event, something known to be true. An opinion is a personal conclusion regarding the meaning or implications of facts
when used as evidence, look for a variety of opinions will be better when we choose evidence.
Photo by gazzat
Tests of evidence
- Is the source identified and credible?
- Is the source unbiased?
- Is the information recent?
- Is the information consistent?
- Are the statistics valid?
Test evidence before using it in an argument or sharing it with group members.
usually we test our evidence by asking following questions
usually we test our evidence by asking following questions
Photo by thewrongglass
State your claim
- A claim identifies a position on an issue
- Claim of Conjecture - suggests that something will or will not happen
- Claim of Value - asserts that something is worthwhile
- Claim of Policy - recommends a particular course of action
- Claim of Fact - attempts to prove something is true
Photo by Roel Wijnants
Support your claim
- The fact that a claim is stated does not mean it is true
- You must support your claim with strong and valid evidence
- Provide Reasons using facts, definitions, examples, etc.
Photo by kennymatic
Summarize your argument
- Restate the original claim
- Summarize supporting evidence
- Be brief. Don't repeat reasons
- Lengthy and complicated arguments almost always require a conclusion
Photo by pomranka
ProCedure for presenting arguments
- State your claim
- Support your claim
- Provide Reasons
- Summarize your Argument
Photo by JH Images.co.uk
Refutation
- Trying to prove an argument false
- Goal is to decrease the validity or strength of your opponent's argument
- Groups need to refute unsupported claims
- Not evaluating arguments can result in groupthink
- Groupthink is setting aside your beliefs and adopting the group's beliefs
Photo by just.Luc
REfute your argument
- Listen to the argument- comprehend, ask, analyze, and formulate a response
- State the opposing claim- repeat the claim aloud that you are opposing to make sure you understand it correctly
- Preview your objections- give a brief overview of your concerns; make sure the group understands the direction of your argument
Photo by Stuart Barr
REfute your Argument
- Assess the evidence- prove evidence faulty, present contradictory evidence, and highlight potential weaknesses
- Assess the reasoning- identify fallacies (arguments based on false reasoning), and explain where reasoning is false
- Summarize your refutation- restate the major points of your respons
Photo by bdebaca
Gender Differences
- Men are competitive and view arguments as 2-sided
- Women seek consensus and view arguments from many perspectives
- Women are expected to be nicer and men are expected to be more aggressive
- There is no difference in the way we use facts, opinions, statistics, and evidence
- We voice objections equally
Photo by Elephant Gun Studios
Cultural Differences
- Cultures dictate who should argue.
- In some cultures, the young don't argue with an older adult.
- The validity of some evidence is different throughout cultures.
- Such as: Bible stories for Devout Christians ; "facts" for European Americans; Chinese discounting physical evidence; and African cultures disregard eyewitnesses.
Cultural differences
-Cultures often dictate who should and shouldn't argue.
-In some cultures, a young person wouldn't challenge or argue with an older adult.
-Among some of the American Indian and African cultures, the elderly rightfully claim more wisdom and knowledge than the younger members.
-One of the most significant ways is the way people use evidence for a claim.
*Devout Christians and Muslims find parables and stories from the Bible or Koran to be powerful evidence.
*European Americans prefer physical evidence and eyewitness and see "facts" as the supreme kind of evidence.
*In certain portions of Chinese culture, physical evidence is discounted because no connection is seen between the physical world and human actions.
*In certain African cultures, the word of a witness would be discounted and even totally disregarded because people believe that if you speak up about seeing something, you must have a particular agenda in mind; in other words, no one is regarded as objective.
-Cultures often dictate who should and shouldn't argue.
-In some cultures, a young person wouldn't challenge or argue with an older adult.
-Among some of the American Indian and African cultures, the elderly rightfully claim more wisdom and knowledge than the younger members.
-One of the most significant ways is the way people use evidence for a claim.
*Devout Christians and Muslims find parables and stories from the Bible or Koran to be powerful evidence.
*European Americans prefer physical evidence and eyewitness and see "facts" as the supreme kind of evidence.
*In certain portions of Chinese culture, physical evidence is discounted because no connection is seen between the physical world and human actions.
*In certain African cultures, the word of a witness would be discounted and even totally disregarded because people believe that if you speak up about seeing something, you must have a particular agenda in mind; in other words, no one is regarded as objective.
Photo by Stuck in Customs
Ethics in groups
- The Research Responsibility.
- The Common Good Responsibility.
- The Reasoning Responsibility.
- The Social Code Responsibility.
1. The Research Responsibility- Group members should be well-informed and prepared to discuss the issues.
*Don't distort or suppress important information and evidence.
*Never fabricate or make up information.
*Reveal the sources of information so others can evaluate them.
2.The Common Good Responsibility- Ethical arguers look beyond their own needs and consider the circumstances of others.
*Consider the interests of those affected by the decision.
*Promote the group's goals as more important than winning an argument
3. The Reasoning Responsibility- Group members understand the structure of an argument and apply that knowledge to presenting arguments and recognizing fallacies.
*Don't misrepresent the views of others.
*Use sound reasoning supported by evidence.
*Avoid making or accepting fallacious arguments.
4. The Social Code Responsibility- Group members promote an open and supportive climate for argumentation.
*Treat other members as equals.
*Give everyone, including those who disagree, the opportunity to respond to an argument.
*Don't insult or attack the character of a group member.
*Give the group an opportunity to review the evidence.
*Don't distort or suppress important information and evidence.
*Never fabricate or make up information.
*Reveal the sources of information so others can evaluate them.
2.The Common Good Responsibility- Ethical arguers look beyond their own needs and consider the circumstances of others.
*Consider the interests of those affected by the decision.
*Promote the group's goals as more important than winning an argument
3. The Reasoning Responsibility- Group members understand the structure of an argument and apply that knowledge to presenting arguments and recognizing fallacies.
*Don't misrepresent the views of others.
*Use sound reasoning supported by evidence.
*Avoid making or accepting fallacious arguments.
4. The Social Code Responsibility- Group members promote an open and supportive climate for argumentation.
*Treat other members as equals.
*Give everyone, including those who disagree, the opportunity to respond to an argument.
*Don't insult or attack the character of a group member.
*Give the group an opportunity to review the evidence.
Photo by MAZZALIARMADI.IT
Emotional INtelligence: Part 1
- It's the capacity for recognizing our own feelings & those of others, for motivating ourselves, & for managing emotions well in ourselves & relationships.
- Is needed when proposing something controversial, breaking bad news, etc.
- Role of emotions is to express appropriate ones & vice versa.
Emotional Intelligence
-It is needed when group members argue about the wisdom of adopting a controversial proposal, whether to hire an unconventional job applicant, or how to break bad news to colleagues, they may need emotional intelligence to help you achieve their goals.
-In some cases, members must restrain their emotions and in other circumstances they can exert influence by heating up a discussion and by expressing strong emotions.
- Psychologist Antonio Damasio was one of the first researchers to link emotions to communication, critical thinking, and decision-making ability.
-He saw while studying patients with trauma to the emotional center of the brain that they made terrible decisions despite having high IQs and thus contended that feelings are indispensable for rational decision making.
-Daniel Goleman took his findings a step further and extended the concept of emotional intelligence beyond behavior of brain damaged patients.
-Emotional Intelligence is the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships.
-Emotions play a significant role in arguments.
-It should be noted that some mental disorders range in the significance of how impacting they are to emotional intelligence, one of the main ones is Asperger's Syndrome. This is a developmental disorder characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction and nonverbal communication, along with other symptoms.
-It is needed when group members argue about the wisdom of adopting a controversial proposal, whether to hire an unconventional job applicant, or how to break bad news to colleagues, they may need emotional intelligence to help you achieve their goals.
-In some cases, members must restrain their emotions and in other circumstances they can exert influence by heating up a discussion and by expressing strong emotions.
- Psychologist Antonio Damasio was one of the first researchers to link emotions to communication, critical thinking, and decision-making ability.
-He saw while studying patients with trauma to the emotional center of the brain that they made terrible decisions despite having high IQs and thus contended that feelings are indispensable for rational decision making.
-Daniel Goleman took his findings a step further and extended the concept of emotional intelligence beyond behavior of brain damaged patients.
-Emotional Intelligence is the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships.
-Emotions play a significant role in arguments.
-It should be noted that some mental disorders range in the significance of how impacting they are to emotional intelligence, one of the main ones is Asperger's Syndrome. This is a developmental disorder characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction and nonverbal communication, along with other symptoms.
Photo by My Last Free Breath
EMotional Intelligence: part 2
- Self-awareness: Tuning into feelings and be willing to share.
- Self-regulation: Handling emotions.
- Self-confidence: Showing willingness to work things out by talking.
- Self-control: Neutrally stating point of view.
- Empathy: Finding a mutual resolution.
-The role of emotions in critical thinking and argumentation can take the forms of curbing inappropriate emotions and expressing appropriate emotions.
-Effective group members understand the need for both and learn how to balance them.
-There are five skills that can help you and your group members improve your emotional intelligence and your group's ability to think critically and argue reasonably.
1. self-awareness: Tune into your own feelings, calm down, and be willing to share them with others.
2. self-regulation: Handle your emotions responsibly. Delay personal gratification and focus on achieving group goals.
3. self-confidence: Show that you're willing to work things out by talking over the issue rather than escalating it.
4.self-control: State your own point of view in a neutral tone rather than using an antagonistic tone or combative words.
5.Empathy: Looking for an equitable way to resolve the dispute by working with those who disagree to find a resolutions that both sides can embrace
-If you care about your group and its goals, express your emotions openly to emphasize what you say.
-Emotions capture attention and operate as warnings, alarms, and motivators.
-They generate powerful nonverbal messages by conveying crucial information without words.
-Effective group members understand the need for both and learn how to balance them.
-There are five skills that can help you and your group members improve your emotional intelligence and your group's ability to think critically and argue reasonably.
1. self-awareness: Tune into your own feelings, calm down, and be willing to share them with others.
2. self-regulation: Handle your emotions responsibly. Delay personal gratification and focus on achieving group goals.
3. self-confidence: Show that you're willing to work things out by talking over the issue rather than escalating it.
4.self-control: State your own point of view in a neutral tone rather than using an antagonistic tone or combative words.
5.Empathy: Looking for an equitable way to resolve the dispute by working with those who disagree to find a resolutions that both sides can embrace
-If you care about your group and its goals, express your emotions openly to emphasize what you say.
-Emotions capture attention and operate as warnings, alarms, and motivators.
-They generate powerful nonverbal messages by conveying crucial information without words.
Photo by My Last Free Breath
Video Examples
Anchorman & Reservoir Dogs
Bad Argument
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (argument scene)- 00:00-01:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1-gI4G8S8Q
Good Argument
Reservoir Dogs (tipping scene)- 00:30-2:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4sbYy0WdGQ
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (argument scene)- 00:00-01:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1-gI4G8S8Q
Good Argument
Reservoir Dogs (tipping scene)- 00:30-2:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4sbYy0WdGQ
Photo by JanneM
