Fluent Essays

KNOWLEDGE, EVIDENCE, & ERRORS IN THINKING The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to understand the sources of knowledge used in critical thinking. * Good critical thinking skills require a sound knowledge base Knowledge is information or experience we believe to be true and for which we have justification or evidence. Understanding how knowledge is acquired, as well as having an awareness of the limits of human understanding, is essential in logical reasoning. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Rationalism and empiricism Our views of the world are shaped by our understanding of truth and the ultimate sources of knowledge. Rationalists, like the Greek philosopher Plato, claim that most human knowledge and truth derives from reason. Empiricists, on the other hand, claim that truth and knowledge are derived through empirical evidence collected by our physical senses. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Kant, a German philosopher, rejected both rationalism and empiricism. He argued that our experience of reality is not a matter of reasoning or empirical evidence, but is dependent on the structure of our minds. This means we do not see reality “as it is,” but rather as our brain interprets it by structuring and processing incoming information. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Evaluating evidence Evidence is something that tends to prove or disprove a particular view. It can come from a variety of sources, and as good critical thinkers we must evaluate all evidence before we employ it in critical analysis. Learning how to evaluate the credibility and accuracy of evidence is a key skill in critical thinking and logic. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The fallibility of direct experience As noted previously, our brains organize and interpret, rather than directly record, sensory experience. As a result, direct sense experience, while widely relied upon, is not infallible. Memories are subject to influence from a range of factors, including time, language, and external suggestion. Also, our brains often create false memories of events, and these false memories can be as compelling and believable as real memories. This phenomenon is known as false memory syndrome. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Many of the witnesses of the 1986 Challenger explosion dramatically altered their memories of the disaster, even “seeing” things that never happened. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The 2002 Beltway sniper had been using a blue car, not the white van “seen” by an eyewitness. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hearsay and anecdotal evidence Two types of evidence are notoriously unreliable and require us to approach their claims with skepticism: Hearsay evidence is evidence that is heard by one person, then repeated to one or more other persons. Anecdotal evidence, evidence based on personal testimony, is also unreliable due to problems of inaccurate memory, as well as the human tendency toward exaggeration and distortion. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hearsay and the game of Telephone * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Experts and credibility Although experts are generally among the most credible information sources, it is always important to examine their credentials before accepting their arguments. Four factors used to determine expertise: Education or training from a reputable source Experience in making judgments in the field Reputation among peers in the field Accomplishments in the field, such as publications and/or awards * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Inadequate research can lead to misrepresentation of a product. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Evaluating claims Our analysis of the evidence for a claim should be accurate, unbiased, and as complete as possible. One thing we must watch out for when evaluating claims is confirmation bias, the tendency to look only for evidence that confirms our assumptions and to resist evidence that contradicts them. As critical thinkers, we need to consciously develop strategies that compel us to examine evidence—especially that which confirms our prior views—more skeptically, and to be more open-minded about evidence that contradicts our views. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Joe Scarborough on socialism vs. capitalism and Olympic medal winners * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hot or Not? Do you tend to distort evidence to fit with your beliefs? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Research is the key to knowledge Good critical thinkers spend time researching claims and collecting information before drawing conclusions. Recommended research resources Expert interviews Dictionaries and encyclopedias Library catalogues and scholarly journals Government documents and Internet sites When doing research, take accurate notes, cite your sources, and use quotations to acknowledge sources. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Rachel Carson * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Da Vinci Code * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Cognitive and perceptual errors in thinking Most people underestimate the critical role that cognitive and social factors play in our interpretation of sensory data. Although emotion has traditionally been blamed for faulty reasoning, studies suggest many of our errors in thinking are neurological in nature. Most of these errors are either cognitive or perceptual errors. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Perceptual errors Our minds are not like recording devices. Instead, our brains construct a picture of reality like an artist does, filtering our perceptions and filling in missing information based in part on our expectations. These processes result in a number of perceptual error predispositions, including distortion of objects, misperception of random data, memorable events error, probability errors, self-serving biases, and self-fulfilling prophecies. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. War of the Worlds * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The St. Louis Arch * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Inkblots * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Radar photo of 2005 Hurricane Katrina, which some saw as similar to the image of a fetus in the womb and concluded the storm was punishment for the presence of abortion clinics. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Statistically, there is a greater chance of being killed in a car accident than in an airplane crash. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Gambler’s error is based on a misunderstanding of the random nature of probability. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Irrational beliefs and depression * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Rumors of impending bank failures during the Great Depression led to mass panic. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Social errors and biases As highly social animals, social norms and cultural expectations exert a strong influence on how we perceive the world. These norms and expectations often act as barriers to critical thinking. Some examples of social errors include the “one of us / one of them” error, social expectations, stereotyping, group pressure and conformity, and group diffusion of responsibility. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Much of the violence between conflicting cultural groups is born of the “One of Us/One of Them” error. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Red states vs. blue states * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Salem witch hunts targeted those mistakenly believed to be responsible for society’s ills. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Asch experiment * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. “Diffusion of responsibility” was illustrated when no one came to the aid of a hit-and-run victim in 2009. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Conclusions Although knowledge is a crucial component of effective critical thinking, we must recognize that the sources of knowledge, reason, and experience are subject to distortion. As critical thinkers, we must be aware of these limitations and conduct research thoroughly, with minds open to both supportive and contradictory evidence as we collect and analyze information. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Peter Reilly * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. INFORMAL FALLACIES The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to recognize and resist fallacious arguments. * Fallacies are dangerous Fallacies, or flawed arguments, are often used by cult recruiters on college campuses to target freshmen. Critical thinking is the antidote to fallacious arguments. By recognizing fallacies and other types of flawed arguments, we can protect ourselves against those seeking to control or manipulate us. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Fallacies: formal and informal An argument is the process of supporting a claim by providing reasons or evidence for that claim. An argument contains a fallacy when it appears to be initially correct, but upon further examination is found to be incorrect. In formal fallacies, the form of the argument itself is invalid. An informal fallacy is mistaken reasoning that occurs when an argument is psychologically or emotionally persuasive but logically incorrect. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hot or Not? Is the use of fallacies a legitimate political campaign tactic? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Fallacies of ambiguity Arguments that contain ambiguous words or phrases, sloppy grammar, or confusion between two closely-related concepts can lead to fallacies of ambiguity. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Fallacies of ambiguity (continued) Four types of fallacies of ambiguity: Equivocation occurs when a key term in an argument is ambiguous—when it has more than one meaning. Amphiboly occurs when an argument contains a grammatical mistake. Fallacies of accent occur when an argument’s meaning changes depending on which words or phrases are emphasized. Fallacies of division occur when we make erroneous inferences from group characteristics about those of individuals within the group. Fallacies of composition occur when a characteristic of a member of a group is erroneously assumed to be characteristic of the whole group. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Tiger Woods is a good golfer, therefore Tiger Woods is a good husband. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Men are taller than women. Danny DeVito is a man. Therefore, Danny DeVito is taller than the average woman. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Fallacies of relevance In fallacies of relevance, one or more of the premises is logically irrelevant, or unrelated, to the conclusion. Fallacies of relevance include personal attacks or ad hominem fallacies; appeals to force or scare tactics; appeals to pity; popular appeals; appeals to ignorance; hasty generalizations; straw man fallacies; and red herrings. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Ad hominem and appeal to force The ad hominem fallacy occurs when we disagree with another’s conclusion and attack them personally instead of presenting a valid counter-argument. The appeal to force fallacy occurs when we use or threaten to use force in an attempt to get others to back down or accept our conclusions. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The ad hominem fallacy may occur between people in personal relationships. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Darwin’s descent from the apes * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Appeal to pity and popular appeal The appeal to pity fallacy occurs when we try to evoke feelings of pity in others when pity is irrelevant to the conclusion. The fallacy of popular appeal occurs when we appeal to popular opinion to gain support for our conclusion. Two types of this fallacy include the bandwagon approach and the snob approach. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The appeal to pity on this billboard is not fallacious. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. “I shouldn’t get a ticket because everyone speeds.” * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Appeal to ignorance and hasty generalization The appeal to ignorance fallacy occurs when we try to argue something is true because no one has proven it false. The fallacy of popular appeal occurs when we generalize from a sample that is too small or biased. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hot or Not? Does celebrity endorsement of a product make you more likely to buy that product? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * “You’ve come a long way, baby.” * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. “I want to be like Victoria Beckham, so I’ll buy the type of purse she is carrying.” * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Straw man and red herring fallacies The straw man fallacy occurs when a person distorts or misrepresents the opponent’s argument, making it easier to knock down or refute. The red herring fallacy occurs when a person tries to sidetrack an argument by going off on a tangent and bringing up a different issue directed toward a different conclusion. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Rhetoric When we start with a position statement, rather than with an open-ended question that invites exploration and analysis of an issue, we are using rhetoric. Rhetoric, also known as the art of persuasion, is used to promote a particular position or worldview. Although it has its uses, rhetoric becomes a problem when it is substituted for unbiased research and logical argumentation. When using rhetoric this way, people only present claims that support their own position. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Argumentation Whereas the purpose of rhetoric is to persuade people of what you consider to be the truth, the purpose of argumentation is to discover the truth. Unlike rhetoric, arguments are open to multiple perspectives. Good arguments provide evidence and reasons and invite feedback analysis. * * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Fallacies involving unwarranted assumptions Fallacies involving unwarranted assumptions occur when an argument includes an assumption that is not supported by evidence. Fallacies involving unwarranted assumptions include begging the question, inappropriate appeal to authority, loaded question, false dilemma, questionable cause, slippery slope, and the naturalistic fallacy. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Begging the question and inappropriate appeal to authority The begging the question fallacy occurs when an argument’s conclusion is simply the rewording of its premise. This fallacy is also known as circular reasoning. The inappropriate appeal to authority fallacy occurs when we look to an authority in a field that is unrelated or not under investigation. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. A uniform gives the idea that the person is an authority in fields that may be beyond his or her expertise. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Loaded question and false dilemma The loaded question fallacy occurs when a question is asked that assumes a particular answer to another unasked question. The false dilemma fallacy reduces responses to complex issues to an either/or choice. By doing so, this fallacy polarizes stands on issues and ignores common ground or other solutions. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. It’s not a choice of only oil or alternative energies. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Questionable cause and slippery slope The questionable cause or post hoc fallacy occurs when a person assumes, without sufficient evidence, that one thing is the cause of another. According to the slippery slope fallacy, if we permit a certain action, then all actions of this type, even extreme ones, will soon be permissible. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Babe Ruth jinxed the Red Sox in 1920. Their World Series win in 2004 was attributed to “the end of the curse.” * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The naturalistic fallacy The naturalistic fallacy is based on the unwarranted assumption that what is natural is good or morally acceptable and that what is unnatural is bad or morally unacceptable. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Same-sex parents are often discriminated against because many people only see “parents” as a mother and father. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Strategies for avoiding fallacies Once you have learned to identify informal fallacies, the next step is to develop strategies to avoid them. The following strategies are recommended: Know yourself and the fallacies you are most susceptible to. Build your self-confidence and self-esteem. Cultivate good listening skills; study others’ arguments for fallacies. Avoid ambiguous, vague terms and faulty grammar. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. More fallacy avoidance strategies Avoid confusing the soundness of an argument with the character or circumstances of the person making the argument. Know your topic. Do your research. Adopt a skeptical “default” position. Watch your body language. Avoid inflammatory actions. Don’t be set on winning every argument. Seek the truth, not victory. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Conclusions Use of fallacies in communication can damage relationships and impair sound critical thinking. Identification and avoidance of fallacies through the use of effective strategies can improve our relationships with others and increase the credibility of our arguments. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Perspectives on going to war in Iraq * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. RECOGNIZING, ANALYZING, AND CONSTRUCTING ARGUMENTS The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to recognize, analyze, and evaluate arguments. * How do politicians use logical arguments and rhetoric in political debates? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Arguments and issues Arguments help us to analyze issues and to assess whether positions on issues are reasonable or unreasonable. An issue is an ill-defined complex of problems involving a controversy or uncertainty. Identifying an issue requires clear thinking as well as good communication skills. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Argument recognition Rhetoric is the art of persuasion—it is the defense of a particular position usually without adequate consideration of opposing evidence. Rhetoric can be useful once you have come to a reasoned conclusion, and are now trying to convince others of this conclusion. The goal of rhetoric is to “win.” The purpose of argumentation, in contrast, is to discover the truth. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Are the two people in this photo engaging in rhetoric or argumentation? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hot or Not? Is it acceptable to use rhetoric if you’re sure of your position? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Argument recognition (continued) Arguments are made up of two or more propositions, one of which, the conclusion, is supported by the other(s), the premise(s). There are two types of arguments Deductive arguments contain a conclusion that necessarily follows from the premise. In inductive arguments, the premises provide support but not necessarily proof for the conclusion. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Propositions, conclusions, and premises Propositions are statements that express a complete thought. A proposition can either be true or false. The conclusion of an argument is the proposition that is supported or denied on the basis of other propositions or reasons. Also called claims, viewpoints, and positions, it is what the argument is trying to prove. A conclusion can appear anywhere in an argument. Premises are propositions that support or give reasons for acceptance of the argument. Reasoning proceeds from the premises to the conclusion. Good premises are based on fact and experience. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Proposition: “The Earth revolves around the sun.” * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Types of premises There are several types of premises. Descriptive premises are based on empirical facts: scientific observation and/or sensory experience. Prescriptive premises, in contrast, contain value statements. Analogical premises take the form of an analogy in which a comparison is made between two similar events or things. Definitional premises contain a definition of a key term for purposes of precision or clarification. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Nonarguments: explanations and conditional statements Sometimes we confuse arguments with explanations and conditional statements. An explanation is a statement about why or how something is the case. A conditional statement is an “If…then…” statement that offers no claim or conclusion. Unlike explanations and conditional statements, an argument tries to prove that something is true. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Conditional statement: “If 18-year-olds are emotionally mature enough to go to war, then they should be allowed to drink alcohol.” * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Breaking down arguments Knowing how to diagram and identify parts of an argument allows us to visualize the entire argument, its propositions, and its premise/conclusion relationship. Before you can diagram an argument, you must first break it down into its propositions. First, bracket the propositions; second, identify the conclusion; third, identify the premises. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Bracket the propositions: “[Students who site in front of a classroom generally earn higher grades.] Therefore, [you should move up to the front of the class], since [I know you want to improve your grade point average].” * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Diagramming arguments using symbols Diagramming arguments involves the use of specific symbols to identify the different parts of an argument and their relationships to each other. A circled number is used to indicate a proposition and where it appears in the argument. A broken circle is used to indicate an unstated premise or conclusion. An arrow is used to indicate the relationship between an independent premise and the conclusion. A line is used to connect dependent premises. A line with an arrow below it is used to indicate the relationship between dependent premises and the conclusion. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Argument with dependent premises * 1 [The Bible states in Leviticus 20:26, “You should not practice augury or witchcraft.”] Therefore, [the Harry Potter books are not suitable reading for children,] since [Harry Potter is a wizard] and [wizards practice augury]. 2 3 1 3 2 4 4 © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. These people are burning Harry Potter books based on their conclusion that Harry is a wizard and witchcraft should not be practiced. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Argument with an unstated conclusion * 1 Laws that permit public colleges to discriminate against applicants on the basis of race or sex are unconstitutional. The University of Michigan’s affirmative action policy that awards extra points on the basis of a person’s race and sex discriminates against white males. 2 1 Laws that permit public colleges to discriminate against applicants on the basis of race or sex are unconstitutional. The University of Michigan’s affirmative action policy that awards extra points on the basis of a person’s race and sex discriminates against white males. Therefore, the University of Michigan’s affirmative action policy is unconstitutional. 2 3 1 2 3 © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. College students are divided regarding the morality and constitutionality of affirmative action in college admissions. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hot or Not? Does knowing how to break down and diagram arguments serve any practical purpose in your life? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Evaluating arguments Knowing how to break down and diagram arguments makes it easier for you to evaluate them. Five criteria are useful for evaluating arguments: Clarity Credibility Relevance Completeness Soundness * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Evaluating clarity and credibility Clarity: Is the argument clear and unambiguous? Clarifying another person’s argument requires good listening skills and openness to ideas that may differ from your own. Credibility: Are the premises supported by evidence? Examine each premise carefully. Be alert for assumptions that are passed off as facts. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. “Boys become doctors; girls become nurses”— if one of the premises is false, the premises do not support the conclusion. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Evaluating relevance and completeness Relevance: Are the premises relevant to the conclusion? In addition to being true, the premises should provide good reasons for accepting the conclusion. Completeness: Are there any unstated premises and conclusions? This is often the case within arguments that are incompletely researched or loaded with confirmation bias. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Evaluating soundness Soundness: Are the premises true, and do they support the conclusion? A sound argument is one in which the premises are true and they support the conclusion. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Constructing an argument Once you know how to identify, deconstruct, and evaluate arguments, you are ready to construct your own. The following eight steps are a useful guide to help you improve the quality of your arguments. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Eight steps to better arguments Begin by stating the issue. Try to use neutral language. Develop a list of premises. Remain as objective and open-minded as possible. Eliminate weak or irrelevant premises. Establish a conclusion. Organize your argument. Clearly state your conclusion, or thesis statement, in the opening paragraph. Test your argument using others. Revise your argument if necessary. If appropriate, act on your conclusion or solution. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Working collaboratively to identify and eliminate weak or biased premises can help make your argument stronger. * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Hot or Not? Does the two-party system in the United States discourage the use of logical argumentation in resolving issues? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. * Writing papers using logical arguments Writing effective college papers requires the use of good structure, both in your argument and in the paper itself. Use the following approach as a guide: Identify the issue Present the premises Present and address counterarguments End the paper with an expanded version of your conclusion. Restate the issue, and summarize your argument thoroughly. Be sure to include references for all facts and evidence used. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Conclusions Arguments are useful tools for making real-life decisions. Skilled critical thinkers employ them to recognize conflict and avoid or defuse it. They also avoid jumping to premature conclusions, only taking a stand after studying an issue from multiple perspectives. * * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Was Lincoln’s decision to stand by his conclusion that slavery should be illegal a wise one? Are there times when it is best to back down on an argument rather than risk conflict? * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Perspectives on same-sex marriage * © 2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Discussion week 2 Errors in Thinking and Irrational Beliefs Please read page 121 of your text about psychologist Albert Ellis and his thoughts about irrational beliefs. Look over the irrational beliefs listed here and try to find what their common elements are. To see what their common elements are is important! Also, study the concept of fallacies in Chapter  5 and compare it to the 'Irrational Beliefs' Albert Ellis identified. There are a lot of similarities (what are those?) -- and one significant difference (what can it be)?  These 'Irrational Beliefs' are cognitive errors that people live by. Living by these cognitive errors can relate to depression and other psychological disorders. Discuss how these cognitive errors can adversely impact a person's psychological well-being. Discuss any of these or others that may impact you, your psychological state, or you achieving your goals. Use critical thinking skills to justify your position. As you share your own experience, please remember that experience is never right or wrong. You will want to focus on your own experience and then listening as others share their own life experiences. Your third post is due by midnight on Sunday and needs to be a minimum of 200 words each. You must use references from your text or from another source (website, book, or journal article) to support or negate your position on this topic. ** Remember, when responding to other students, do not judge. Simply state your position, backed by the evidence you choose. It can be hard not to judge those you disagree with but begin practicing with our class.  Psychology Discussion Requirements: You are required to have 3 posts in each discussion, and these three posts must be made on three separate days.  The first post is the initial response to the question that appropriately and completely addresses the topic. This must be completed by 11:59 p.m. (EST) Wednesday. It is best to post it at the beginning of the week. The remaining two posts are responses to two different classmates. The first response to a classmate is due Saturday at 11:59 p.m. (EST), and the second response to a classmate is due on Sunday at 11:59 p.m. (EST).  Responses to me do not count as a response to another student; however, I will interact with each of you throughout the course. I encourage you to respond. If you do not post on three separate days, you will lose points (possible 15 point deduction). There will be a deduction of 5 points per day that the initial post is late. Posts are not accepted after the week closes on Sunday night. 1. Your initial post (your response to the topic) must contain a citation. It is your ideas supported by research. There will be a deduction of 20 points for failure to cite a source within your initial post and provide a reference at the end of your initial post. 2. Your initial post must be a minimum of 350 words, and each response must be a minimum of 250 words. Please double-check your word count. Only posts that meet the word count requirements receive credit. 3. Post your word count at the end of each post. There will be a 5 point deduction for each failure to provide a word count. 4. Please address fellow students and your professor by name. There will be a 5 point deduction for each failure to address by name. 5. Please use spell-check and proper grammar. Points will be deducted for each spelling and grammatical error up to 10 points for each post.  reply two peers Leia Lamelas  Week 2 Discussion Top of Form Some cognitive distortions include "all-or-nothing" thinking, mind reading, overgeneralizing, filtering, catastrophic thinking, and disqualifying thoughts. Albert Ellis defined irrational beliefs as such, including assumptions that one is not worthy or adequate, the world is coming to an end when things are not as one would prefer, evading problems is easier than confronting them, etc. Ellis expertly identifies and defines the illogical thinking that occurs in many of us with issues such as depressive episodes. These illogical cognitive errors absolutely distort life for someone suffering from depression. I have been there, more than I'd like to admit. It is easy to slip into a funk in which you can only find negativity and sadness about every aspect of your waking hours. This causes "emotional distress and maladaptive behavior" (Tecuta, et al., 2019). Persons experiencing this distorted thought process are irritable, sad, unmotivated, and isolated. Social media is a powerful yet toxic, decieving platform in which users see only the positive, distorted reality of life. A recent study suggests that society has shifted toward this distortion. Viewing these beautiful pictures, new clothes, and happy families causes us to forget that there are negative aspects behind the scenes. Filtering is an example of cognitive distortion in which a person is given both positive feedback and constructive criticism, yet the person will specifically focus on the critique rather than the positive. This is similar to the "glass is half empty" thought pattern. Over time, the person will be full of negativity and only believe that the world sees them negatively. Anxiety, depression, and panic disorders will spike and become worse. Goals will become harder to reach, and seemingly further away and less attainable than they might have before. The thought process of "I can't do it" instead of "I think I can" is exhausting and will not get you anywhere in life. As hard as it is to overcome these thought patterns, the best decision you can make is to seek help. Once the person realizes how distorted and irrational the thought process is, it can be discredited and replaced with a more positive solution. WC: 347 References Adrianna Rukenbrod  week 2 COLLAPSE Top of Form There are plenty of similarities that I have discovered in Albert Ellis's irrational beliefs. A lot of these belifes involve internal demands. There is a specific word that must be used, that word is "must." Each of these demand a perfect and convenient life for them to handle. These are thoughts that cause us to over think our lives. Fallacies and irrational beliefs sound as if they are synonymous, they all have different meanings. Fallacies are an argument that appears to be correct (p. 137, para. 1). Whereas irrational beliefs are primary source of depression, rage, feelings, and sefl-hatred (p. 121, para. 1). I think that irrational beliefs are able to be corrected and or treated when fallacies have no correction because fallacies involves logic errors. Cognitive errors affect our daily lives, our mental sanity, and our personal well-being and personalities as a whole. Cognitive errors cause us to be depressed, angry, and anxious. All of the emotions you experiance affect our psychological state of mind. For example if you are always upset, then the way you make your decisons or live your daily life is effected. I do believe that I struggle with being in charge of things that happen in  my life because I always need to make sure it is going ok and I need reassurance a lot. I know that I struggle to not be in control sometimes but I do let my husband take control sometimes when it is something he is interested in. There are definitly times when I let my fallacies get the best of me and take control which causes me to become angry when things do not go as planned. I tend to get upset when something does not go my way because I tend to get my own hopes up very often.  Boss, J. A. (2016). Think: Critical Thinking and Logic Skills for Everyday Life (4th ed.). McGraw Hill.  Bottom of Form Bottom of Form