HAWASSA UNIVERSITY

Logic and Critical Thinking

GROUP ASSIGNMENT-I
Course Code: PHIL 1011
Group members Id No
1.YONATAN ABEBE NaScR 2732/13

2. DESYILAL SEYOUM NaScR

0846/13

3. ERMIYAS WEYU NaScR 0975/13

4. MINTESINOT MASRESHA NaScR 1840/13

5 .DAGNACHEW TAZEB NaScR 0736 /13

6. MULUKEN CHALA NaScR 1892 /13

7. ENANU MELKAMU NaScR 0941 /13

Section 59

SUBMITTED TO- Mr. Kedir Abdellah

SUBMISSION DATE -09/12/2013 E.C

1. Discuss the fundamental epistemological debates concerning the

source of human knowledge.
The term “epistemology” comes from the Greek words “episteme” and “logos”. “Episteme” can
be translated as “knowledge” or “understanding” or “acquaintance”, while “logos” can be
translated as “account” or “argument” or “reason”. In different parts of its extensive history,
different facets of epistemology have attracted attention. Plato’s epistemology was an attempt to
understand what it was to know, and how knowledge (unlike mere true opinion) is good for the
knower. Locke’s epistemology was an attempt to understand the operations of human
understanding, Kant’s epistemology was an attempt to understand the conditions of the
possibility of human understanding, and Russell’s epistemology was an attempt to understand
how modern science could be justified by appeal to sensory experience. In all these cases,
epistemology seeks to understand one or another kind of cognitive success.

Debates Concerning the Sources of Knowledge and Justification

A major aspect of epistemology relates to the sources of human knowledge. Beliefs arise in
people for a wide variety of causes. . For true beliefs to count as knowledge, it is necessary that
they originate in sources we have good reason to consider reliable. These are Empiricism,
Rationalism, Intuition, Revelation (Gnosticism), Authority and Tenacity.

Empiricism : We can know many things about the external world, and their characteristics
through our senses i.e., by seeing, smelling, touching, tasting and hearing. One family of
epistemological issues about perception arises when we concern ourselves with the
psychological nature of the perceptual processes through which we acquire knowledge of
external objects. It appears to be built into the very nature of human experience. This source of
knowledge harmed by illness and it is universal and immediate. It is a theory that states that
knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience. It is one of several views of
epistemology, along with rationalism and skepticism.

Rationalism : A belief or theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and
knowledge rather than on religious belief or emotional response: This type of knowledge is
arrived at by means of reasoning. There are two types of reasoning which serve as the source of
knowledge: deductive and inductive.

Authority : is based on information received from books, people, a supreme being. Authoritative
knowledge is accepted as true because it comes from experts or has been sanctified over time as
tradition.The person must really be an authority, one who is a specialist in his field of
knowledge. Whenever one accepts another person’s statement on authority, he should be able to
find out for himself or verify the knowledge. For example, we can empirically check the truth of
Einstein’s theory of relativity, though it would take years of special training and
experimentation. – The authority should be able to provide evidential proof for the knowledge he
possesses and present a logical explain – The knowledge claimed by the authority should have
acceptance by the other experts in that area.
Intuition : the power of obtaining knowledge that cannot be acquired either by inference or
observation, by reason or experience. Intuition has been claimed under varying circumstances as
a source of both religious and secular knowledge. The weakness or danger of intuition is that it
does not appear to be a safe method of obtaining knowledge when used alone.

Revelation (Gnosticism) : This source has the same problem as intuition. Sometimes one claims
to know something by means of revelation. For example, “It was revealed to me in a dream” (or
a vision). What if one person had a vision that told him one thing, and another person had a
vision that told him the opposite? The fact that the person had a dream or a vision does not show
that its message is true or can be trusted. If what it says is true, its truth can be discovered only
by other means. – Faith: This source of knowledge overlaps the previous one having the same
problems. “I know this through faith”; “I have faith in it, so it must be true”; “I believe it through
faith, and this faith gives me knowledge”. It is an attitude of belief in something in the absence of
evidence. What feeling or attitude one has towards the belief, and whether that belief is true, are
two very different things. So it cannot be a valid source of knowledge.

Tenacity : Tenacity is something, which psychologically force the people to accept it. – the
slogans of various political parties, advertisement of different commercial products, and
repetitive propaganda for something. When such things are repeated many times in media such
as in newspapers, televisions, or even in rallies, people believe them to be true.

2. List and explain the types of arguments with examples.

Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that
the conclusion is probably true. Example:

 Milen is a graduate of HWU, and she is energetic and dependable.

 Abreham is a graduate of HWU.
 Therefore, most likely, Abreham is energetic and dependable too.

Strong Inductive Argument: An inductive argument in which the truth of the premises really
does prove that the conclusion is probably true. Example:

 Most soccer players have talent.

 Isco Alarcon is a soccer player.
 Therefore, Isco probably has talent.

Weak Inductive Argument: An inductive argument in which the truth of the premises really
does not prove that the conclusion is probably true. Example:

 Joe Biden is the president of U.S.A.

 Joe Biden is white.
 Therefore, most Presidents of U.S.A are white.
Cogent Inductive Argument: A strong inductive argument in which all the premises are actually
true. Example:

 Duol was born in South Sudan.

 Duol wasn't born in North Sudan.
 It's thus quite probable that Duol was born in Juba.

Uncogent Inductive Argument: A strong inductive argument in which even one premise is
actually false. Example:

 All previous U.S Presidents have been Democrats.

 Therefore, the next U.S. President will be a Democrat.

Deductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to necessitate
the truth of the conclusion, i.e. if all the premises are true, the conclusion has to be true.
Example:

 All athletes work out in the gym.

 Usain Bolt is an athlete.
 Therefore, Usain Bolt works out in the gym.

Valid Deductive Argument: A deductive argument in which the truth of the premises really does
necessitate the truth of the conclusion, i.e. it's NOT for all the premises to be true and the
conclusion still be false. Example:

 I like watching horror movies.

 "The Avengers" is a horror movie.
 I like watching the avengers.

Invalid Deductive Argument: A deductive argument in which the truth of the premises really
does not necessitate the truth of the conclusion, i.e. it's possible for all the premises to be true
and the conclusion still be false.Example:- If Ermias is a cheater, then he sits in the back row.

 Ermias is not a cheater.

 Ermias does not sit in the back row.

Sound Deductive Argument: A valid deductive argument in which all the premises are actually
true. Example:

 All cats are mammals.

 All mammals are animals.
 All cats are animals.
Unsound Deductive Argument: A valid deductive argument in which even one premise is
actually false.Example:

 All men are married.

 Some doctors are not married.
 Some doctors are men.

3. Discuss briefly the similarities and differences between deductive and inductive
arguments. Support your discussion with your own examples.

Similarities

 Both of them are arguments.As a result, both of them have premises and conclusions.
 Both of them use special indicator words.

Examples of deductive indicator words include, necessarily, definitely, certainly, absolutely,...

Examples of inductive indicator words include, probably, improbably, likely, plausibly,

implausibly, reasonable to conclude,...

 Both arguments involve an inferential claim- the claim that the conclusion is supposed to
follow from the premises.
 Both arguments make a claim that their premises provide grounds for the truth of the
conclusion.

Differences

Deductive arguments claim that...

 If the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true.

 The conclusion follows necessarily from the premises.
 The premises provide conclusive evidence for the truth of the conclusion
 It is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
 It is logically inconsistent to assert the premises, and deny the conclusion, i.e. if you
accept the premises, you must accept the conclusion.

Inductive arguments claim that...

 If the premises are true, then the conclusion is probably true.

 The conclusion follows probably from the premises.
 The premises provide good (but not conclusive) evidence for the truth of the conclusion.
 It is unlikely for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
 Although it is logically consistent to assert the premises and deny the conclusion, i.e. the
conclusion is probably true if the premises are true.
 4. Explain the relationship between logic and language.

Human being needs language and logic to make sound thinking, to make accurate and precise
judgments and to use valid and consistent arguments. Language, which is the most important
sign and means of human and civilization, allows people to express their feelings, thoughts and
desires, as well as maintain their lives. Language, which is the carrier of thought or meaning, is
indispensable for the transmission of thought. When the logic, which plays an important role in
the thought being correct and consistent, is known, we can say that the truth can be distinguished
from the wrong and invalid, as well as the comprehension of the meaning from the wrong one.
The subject of logic is logical thinking. Therefore, logic is defined as “knowledge of correct
thinking rules”. The common denominator of logic and language is 'thinking'. Because both logic
and language are closely related to ‘Thinking’. Considering the relationship of language with
thought and the relationship of thought with logic, logic is also closely related to language.

Logic is the means of thinking right. Language is the dress of thought. Thoughts must be
expressed in language, because if we do not express our thoughts in language, we will not be
able to analyze them logically. Reasoning is a form of thinking. Reasoning needs to be expressed
in language and take the form of an argument. Arguments also form the subject of logic. It can
be said that logic is actually an outward process that continues with thought and has the
opportunity to express itself through language. When logic is said, it is thought to express the
language with thought. For this reason, language, thought and logic have a strict and tight
relationship among themselves.

One of the reasons why we can easily talk about the existence of a close relationship between
language and logic is: Grammar gives the rules of speaking correctly and logic thinking
correctly. What language relates to words is the relationship between logic and concepts.
However, logic refers to the laws of the thought of all mankind, while it contains rules about the
language of a grammatical nation. Logic, which protects our minds from falling into error, finds
a space for expression through language. Thoughts and concepts that qualify as right or wrong
occur through language. Therefore, in order to determine the logical validity of any reasoning, it
must be expressed through language and gained an argument form. So logic deals with
arguments that are the linguistic expression of reasoning. Therefore, the logic that deals with
arguments has a bond and relationship that does not break with language.

Logic means internal speech and external speech. The inner speech is the mind-setting of the
minded meanings. The logic renders the outer speech error-free after solidifying the inner speech
phase. Foreign speech takes place in language. It is possible for language to change from very
meaningful to single meaning with the rules of logic. In short, we can say that internal speech is
logic and external speech is language designed with logic rules. For this reason, language and
logic belong to a whole.
In short, people who use language in all areas of life must also use logic. Because if the human
does not act in accordance with the rules of logic, it is inevitable for the human mind to fall into
error . For this reason, logic is important together with language in the lives of people who are
often in communication. Because logic without language and language without logic is
insignificant . Therefore, it is not possible to think of “language” without “logic” and “logic”
without “language”.

5. Discuss the standard rules of a lexical definition. Support your discussion

with your own examples.
The lexical definition is a type of definition closely matching the meaning of the term in
common usage which is used to report the meaning that a word already has in a language.

A lexical rule is in a form of syntactic rule used within many theories of natural language syntax.
These rules alter the argument structures of lexical items in order to alter their combinatory
properties.Lexical rules affect in particular specific word classes and morphemes. Moreover,
they may have exceptions, do not apply across word boundaries and can only apply to underlying
forms.There are 8 lexical definition standard rules. Let us discuss them separately:-

Rule 1: A Lexical Definition Should Conform to the Standards of Proper Grammar.

A definition, like any other form of expression, should be grammatically correct

Examples: Vacation is when you don't have to go to work or school

Vacation means a period during which activity is suspended from work or school

Rule 2: A Lexical Definition Should Convey the Essential Meaning of the word being defined.

A definition cannot be helpful if it fails to convey the essential meaning of the definiendum. Any
definition that defines the word "human" as ―"featherless biped", for instance, cannot be helpful
since it fails to convey the essential meaning of "human" as the word is used in ordinary English.
It says nothing about the important attributes that distinguish humans from the other animals,
namely, the capacity to reason and to use language on a sophisticated level. Thus, a more
adequate definition would be "human" means the animal that has the capacity to reason and to
speak."

Rule 3: A Lexical Definition Should Be Neither Too Broad nor Too Narrow.
If a definition is too broad, the definiens includes too much; if it is too narrow, the definiens
includes too little.

E.g. "bird" were defined as any warm-blooded animal having wings, the definition would be too
broad because it would include bats, and bats are not birds.

Rule 4: A Lexical definition should avoid circularity.

A definition is circular when the definiendum is defined in terms of itself or virtually in terms of
itself; sometimes the problem of circularity appears in connection with pairs of definitions.

E.g. "Science" means the activity engaged in by scientists

"Scientist" means anyone who engages in science

Rule 5: A Lexical definition should not be negative when it can be affirmative.

Of the following two definitions, the first is affirmative, the second is negative

"Concord" means harmony.

"Concord" means the absence of discord

Rule 6: A Lexical definition should avoid figurative, obscure, vague, or ambiguous language

Figurative = if it involves metaphors or tends to paint a picture instead of exposing the essential
meaning of a term. E.g. "Love" is a battlefield.

Obscure = if its meaning is hidden as a result of defective or inappropriate language.

E.g. "Bunny" means a mammalian of the family Leporidae of the order Lagomorpha whose
young are born furless and blind.

"Bunny" means a rabbit.

Vague = if it lacks precision or if its meaning is blurred- that is, if there is no way of telling
exactly what class of things the definiens refers to. E.g."Democracy" means a kind of
government where the people are in control.

Ambiguous = if it lends itself to more than one distinct interpretation. E.g. "Triangle" means a
figure composed of three straight lines in which all the angles are equal to 180.
Rule 7: A Lexical definition should avoid affective terminology.

Affective term is any kind of word usage that plays on emotions of the reader or listener,
sarcastic and facetious lang. and any other kind of lag that could influence attitudes

Examples: "Communism" means that brilliant invention "Karl Marx" and other foolish political
visionaries in which the national wealthy is supposed to be held in common by the people.

"Theism" means belief that great Santa Claus in the sky: also breaks metaphor rule.

Rule 8: A Lexical definition should indicate the context to which the definiens pertains.

Applies to any definition in which the context of the definiens is important to the meaning of the
definiendum.
E.g. "Deuce" means a tie in point toward a game or in games toward a set is practically
meaningless without any reference to tennis.

Whenever the definiendum is a word that means different things in different contexts a reference to the
context is important.

6. Discuss and evaluate the similarities and differences between John

Dewey’s definition of critical thinking and that of Robert Ennis.
John Dewey : defines critical thinking, or as he calls it, ‘reflective thinking’, as an active
process, an activity that requires careful thought based on the grounds (reasons) on which one
stands:

Active,persistent, and careful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge in the

light of the grounds which support it and the further conclusions to which it tends.

In his book How We Think, Dewey explains reflective thinking as the ability to suspend
judgment, maintain a healthy skepticism and exercise an open mind. This definition draws out
many aspects of critical thinking and these are discussed below.
First, Dewey argues that critical thinking is an active process which requires students to think things
through, raise questions and search for information to address their queries rather than learning passively
from someone else.

Secondly, Dewey compares ‘persistent and careful’ thinking with unreflective thinking, in which one
simply makes a quick decision without thinking ‘carefully’ about it. Dewey also argues that we need to
‘persist a bit’ in our thinking. As a result, he relates critical thinking with attitudes such as suspending
judgment, maintaining a healthy skepticism and exercising an open mind. Dewey uses the terms ‘attitude’
and ‘disposition’ interchangeably in his text. Most importantly, Dewey relates belief and knowledge with
experience, marked by ‘acceptance or rejection of something as reasonably probable or improbable’. As a
result, it is important to understand that critical thinking in this sense involves both intellectual and
reflective ability to examine a problem. Therefore ,critical thinking is not just about finding a solution to
the problem; it is also a reflection on the process of deriving the solution based on the knowledge the
student has. To capture the essence of the model, Dewey advocates reflection in community; he argues
that “the experience must be formulated in order to be communicated”. He explains:

To formulate requires getting outside of [the experience]. Seeing it as another would see it, considering
what point of contact it has with the life of another so that it may be got into such form that he can
appreciate its meaning one has to assimilate, imaginatively, something of another’s experience in order to
tell him intelligently of one’s own experience. In other words, he sees the importance of exchanging
ideas with others. This collaborative reflection is the key for one to engage in critical thinking.

Robert Ennis : defines critical thinking as reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on
deciding what to believe or do. He defines critical thinking as 'uthe correct way of assessing
statements' and 'reasonable reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do.'

In his latest revised work, he suggests that this model has three basic broad dispositions:
1. Care that one’s beliefs be true, and that one’s decisions be justified; that is, care to "get it
right" to the extent possible;

2. Care to present a position honestly and clearly, one’s own as well as others;

3. Care about the dignity and worth of every person (a correlative disposition). Note that Ennis’s
dispositions expand upon those of Dewey above. On further examination of his explanation,
Ennis seems to emphasize ‘caring’ critical thinkers who are responsible for their beliefs and
actions. Besides dispositions, Ennis also identifies fifteen abilities for critical thinkers, which
include abilities involving clarification; decision-making; inference, advanced clarification;
supposition and integration. Until Ennis introduced the dispositions in his model, it can be
concluded that his prior conception of critical thinking reflected a ‘skills set’ model. Compared
with Dewey’s model above, Ennis’s model brings in additional aspects of critical thinking, i.e.
abilities definition draws out many aspects of critical thinking and i.e., abilities or skills.

7. Explain the “fallibility principle”. Do you think it contradicts with “the

truth seeking principle”?
The Fallibility Principle : is the first principle of a critical thinking. It is about accepting the fact
that he or she is fallible. Everyone needs to be open to the possibility that his or her initial
position may be wrong or have some weakness. By accepting this possibility, one is in the best
situation to allow the strength of the argument to determine which one of the arguments can be
substantiated, if none of the arguments can be substantiated, or, if all that can be determined is
which is the stronger argument.

Self-awareness of fallibility is an essential step for anyone serious about truth-seeking. The next

problem we face involves a crucial precondition for anybody being able to accept facts that
directly contradict their own maps and it depends upon the degree to which they must undo
commitments made to others. The Fallibility Principle means our position could be fallible. Or,
even if the conclusion of our argument is correct, the evidence we present to support our side of
the discussion may be invalid or fallacious in some way. The Fallibility Principle reminds us that
we are not omniscient (all knowing). We should, therefore, approach all discussions with an air
of humility and not a self-made arrogance. The Truth-Seeking Principle : The goal of each
reviewer must be to determine which position has the strongest argument. Based on the strength
of the arguments, the reviewers must determine which position can be substantiated or at least
which position is the strongest. In order to make the best determination, everyone must be
committed to thoroughly scrutinizing the strength of each position, looking for strengths in the
positions of others, and allow others to express their opinions and concerns about all aspects of
all the positions. So it can’t contradict with “the truth seeking principle”.
 8. Compare and contrast the intellectual traits of critical thinkers and
uncritical thinkers.
Critical thinking includes some skills:-Analysis, Interpretation, Self-regulation, Interface,
Explanation, evaluation. Here are the characteristics of Critical thinkers and Uncritical thinkers.

Critical Thinkers

 They have a passionate drive for clarity, precision, accuracy, and other critical thinking
standards.

 Mostly they are sensitive in ways in which critical thinking can be skewed by
egocentrism, socio-centrism, wishful thinking, and other impediments (a hindrance or
obstruction in doing something).

 Understand the value of critical thinking, both o individuals and to society as a whole.

 Are intellectually honest with themselves, acknowledging what they don’t know and
recognizing their limitations.

 They take things open-mindedly to opposing points of view and welcome criticism of
beliefs and assumptions.

 They only talk based on their beliefs or even the facts or evidence rather than on personal
preference or self-interest.

 Think independently and are not afraid to disagree with group opinions. Pursue truth and
are curious about a wide range of issues.

 They are always aware of the biases and preconceptions that shape the way they perceive
the world.

Uncritical Thinkers

 Often think in ways that are unclear, imprecise, and inaccurate.

 Often fall prey to egocentrism, socio centrism, relativistic thinking, unwarranted
assumptions, and wishful thinking.
 They don’t see critical thinking as a good value point.
 Pretend they know more than they do and ignore their limitations.
 They are close-minded people and resist criticism of beliefs and assumptions.
 Often base beliefs on mere personal preference of self-interest . Lack awareness of their
own biases and preconception.
 They always tend to engage in groupthink, uncritically following the beliefs and values of
the crowd.
 They are easily distracted and lack the ability to zero in on the essence of an issue or a
problem.
 Tend not to preserve when they encounter intellectual obstacles or difficulties.

REFERENCES
 Module of Logic and critical thinking
 Power point of the course
 Encyclopedia
 Wikipedia
 Google some website
 You tube Videos