INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT (IPAM)

UNIVERSITY OF SIERRA LEONE (USL)

MODULE TITLE: CRITICAL THINKING MODULE CODE: FOS113

SEMESTER: FIRST
LEVEL: UNDERGRADUATE (YEAR ONE)

TOPIC 1 – INTRODUCTION TO CRITICAL THINKING

CONCEPT OF CRITICAL THINKING

In our everyday language usage, the word ‘critical’ connotes that which is negative and fault-
finding. Denotatively it means inclined to find fault or judge with severity.
On one level, the concept of Critical Thinking is understood as taking nothing for granted; it
means not believing things just because they are written down or because were uttered by
people of authority or celebrities. It is simply the ability to think clearly about what to believe
and what to do.
On another level, it is seen as a process of systematically and thoughtfully analysing and
probing statements, questions and arguments of others. This involves the examining of
definition of terms, examining the premise and assumptions supporting arguments, and then
scrutinizing the logic with which arguments are developed.
Critical thinking can simply be understood as the ability to think judgementally.

According to the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking, 1987, the concept of
Critical Thinking is defined as: ”the intellectual disciplined process of actively and skilfully
conceptualizing, applying, synthesizing and evaluating information gathered from or
generated by observation, experiences, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide
to belief and action.”

More precisely, Critical Thinking is the general term given to a wide range of cognitive skills
and intellectual dispositions needed to effectively identify, analyze, and evaluate arguments
and truth claims; to discover and overcome personal preconceptions and biases; to formulate
and present convincing reasons in support of conclusions; and to make reasonable, intelligent
decisions about what to believe and what to do.

Put somewhat differently, critical thinking is disciplined thinking governed by clear

intellectual standards. Among the most important of these universal intellectual standards are
clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, consistency, completeness, logic, and fairness.
CRITICAL THINKING STANDARDS

The universal intellectual standards or Critical Thinking Standards are standards which
should be applied to thinking to ensure its quality. These standards are discussed below:

a. Clarity. Before we can effectively evaluate a person’s argument or claim, we

need to understand clearly what he or she is saying. Unfortunately, that can be
difficult because people often fail to express themselves clearly. Sometimes this
lack of clarity is due to laziness, carelessness, or a lack of skill. At other times it
results from a misguided effort to appear clever, learned, or profound.

Could you elaborate further on that point? Could you express that point in another
way? Could you give me an illustration? Could you give me an example?

It is the gateway standard. If a statement is unclear, we cannot determine whether it is

accurate or relevant. In fact we cannot tell anything about it because we don’t yet
know what it is saying. For example, the question “What can be done about the
education system in Sierra Leone?” is unclear. In order to adequately address the
question, we would need to have a clearer understanding of what the person asking
the question is considering the “the problem” to be. A clear question might be “What
can educators do to ensure that students learn the skills and abilities which help them
function successfully on the job and inn their daily decision-making?”

b. Accuracy. Is that really true? How could we check that? How could we find out if
that is true?
A statement can be clear but not accurate, as in “Most dogs weigh more than 300
pounds.”

c. Precision. Could you give me more details? Could you be more specific?
A statement can be both clear and accurate, but not precise, as in “Jack is
overweight.” (We don’t know how overweight Jack is, one pound or 500 pounds).

d. Relevance. How is that connected to the question? How does that bear on the
issue?
A statement can be clear, accurate and precise, but not relevant to the question at
issue. For example, students often think that the amount of effort they put into a
course should be used in raising their grade in a course. Often, however, “effort” does
not measure the quality of student learning, and when that is so, effort is irrelevant to
their appropriate grade.

e. Consistency. It is easy to see why consistency is essential to critical thinking.

Logic tells us that if a person holds inconsistent beliefs, at least one of those
beliefs must be false. Critical thinkers prize truth and so are constantly on the
lookout for inconsistencies, both in their own thinking and in the arguments and
assertions of others.
There are two kinds of inconsistency that we should avoid. One is logical
inconsistency, which involves saying or believing inconsistent things (i.e., things that
cannot both or all be true) about a particular matter.

2
 The other is practical inconsistency, which involves saying one thing and doing
another. Sometimes people are fully aware that their words conflict with their deeds.
The politician who cynically breaks her campaign promises once she takes office, the
TV evangelist caught in an extramarital affair, the drug counsellor arrested for
peddling drugs—such people are hypocrites pure and simple. From a critical thinking
point of view, such examples are not especially interesting. As a rule, they involve
failures of character to a greater degree than they do failures of critical reasoning.

f. Completeness. In most contexts, we rightly prefer deep and complete thinking to

shallow and superficial thinking. Thus, we justly condemn slipshod criminal
investigations, hasty jury deliberations, superficial news stories, sketchy driving
directions, and snap medical diagnoses. Of course, there are times when it is
impossible or inappropriate to discuss an issue in depth; no one would expect, for
example, a thorough and wide-ranging discussion of the ethics of human genetic
research in a short newspaper editorial. Generally speaking, however, thinking is
better when it is deep rather than shallow, thorough rather than superficial.

g. Logical. To think logically is to reason correctly—that is, to draw well-founded

conclusions from the beliefs we hold. To think critically we need accurate and
well supported beliefs. But, just as important, we need to be able to reason from
those beliefs to conclusions that logically follow from them. Unfortunately,
illogical thinking is all too common in human affairs.

Does this really make sense? Does that follow from what you said? How does that
follow?
Before you implied this and now you are saying that, I don’t see how both can
be true. When we think, we bring a variety of thoughts together into some order.
When the combinations of thoughts are mutually supporting and makes sense in
combination, the thinking is “logical.” When the combination is not mutually
supporting, is contradictory in some sense, or does not “make sense,” the combination
is “is not logical.”

h. Fairness. Critical thinking demands that our thinking be fair—that is, open
minded, impartial, and free of distorting biases and preconceptions.
Are we considering all relevant viewpoints in good faith? Are we distorting some
information to maintain our biased perspective? Are we more concerned about our
vested interests than the common good?
We naturally think from our own perspective, from a point of view which
tends to privilege our position. Fairness implies the treating of all relevant viewpoints
alike without reference to one’s own feelings or interests. Because we tend to be
biased in favour of our own viewpoint, it is important to keep the standard of fairness
at the forefront of our thinking. This is especially important when the situation may
call on us to see things we don’t want to see, or give something up that we want to
hold onto.

GOALS OF CRITICAL THINKING

A group of Psychologists reflecting on the concept of Critical Thinking in 1989 came up with
the following as the goals of Critical Thinking:

3
 a. Development of scepticism about explanations and conclusions.
b. The ability to enquire about causes and effects.
c. Increased curiosity about behaviour.
d. Knowledge of research methods.
e. The ability to analyse arguments critically.
(McGovern, 1989)

PRINCIPLES OF CRITICAL THINKING

The following are some of the principles of Critical Thinking:

a. Be sceptical. Keep an open mind. Those in the business world, politics and
even religion will try to persuade you. At times, even research reported in media and
in books may be biased. Accept nothing as truth until you have examined the
evidence.

b. Examine definition of terms. Some statements are true when a term is

defined in one way and not in the other way. For example, gay which in one sense can
mean happy and in another sense can also stand for same sex relationship such as
homosexuals and lesbians.

c. Examine the assumption or the premise of the argument. Take for example
the statement that: one cannot learn about human beings by engaging in research
with animals. A close look at the statement will reveal that one of the premises seem
to be that human beings are not animals. How will you answer the question: “are you
a plant or an animal?”

d. Be cautious in drawing conclusions from evidence. When some event is

being reported ask whether the one person’s reported experience is satisfactory as
evidence.

e. Consider alternative interpretation of research evidence. Does alcohol

cause aggression? Is the assertion that it does so truth or fiction? There is a clear
connection or correlation between alcohol and aggression, but does the evidence show
that this connection is casual? Could other factors such as gender, age, or willingness
to take risk account for both drinking and aggressive behaviour?

f. Do not oversimplify. Most human interactions involve complex interactions

of genetic and environmental influences. Consider the issue whether psychotherapy
help people with psychological problems. A broad answer to this problem, a simple
yes or no might be over simplifying. It is better to ask what type of psychotherapy,
practiced by who is most helpful to what kind of problem.

g. Do not over generalise. Let us take for example the argument that one cannot
learn about human beings by engaging in research with animals. Is the truth of the
matter an all – or – nothing issue? Are there certain kinds of information that we can
get about people from studying animal? What kind of information can we likely get
from research with people?

4
 i. Apply critical thinking to all areas of life. A sceptical attitude and a demand
for evidence are useful not only in learning institutions, but can be useful in all areas
of life. It is good to always be sceptical when you are bombarded by radio and TV
commercials, political propaganda, and the eye catching front page stories of
newspapers and sensational stories in the media. Sometimes people claim
that;”…studies have shown that…” Such claim may sound convincing but it will be
better to ask yourself who undertook the study, were the researchers neutral or were
they biased towards obtaining certain kind of results?

These are the principles that guide psychologists in their thinking as they observe behaviour;
engage in research, or advice clients on how to improve the quality of their lives. Thinking is
part of human nature. But much of our thinking by itself is biased, distorted, partial,
uninformed or prejudiced. Yet the quality of our lives depends precisely on the quality of our
thoughts. Haphazard thinking is costly both in money and in quality of life.

Critical Thinking is very important for you as students. For you to succeed in college, you
must, be in position to understand the material you are studying. A course in critical thinking
can help you with a variety of skills that, with practice, can greatly improve your ability to
understand the arguments and issues discussed in your college textbooks and classes.

In everyday life, Critical Thinking can help us avoid making foolish personal decisions. It
plays a vital role in promoting democracy and also improves the quality of our life.

BARRIERS TO CRITICAL THINKING

The preceding section raises an obvious question: If critical thinking is so important, why is it
that uncritical thinking is so common? Why is it that so many people—including many highly
educated and intelligent people—find critical thinking so difficult?

The reasons, as you might expect, are quite complex. Here is a list of some of the most
common barriers to critical thinking:
• Lack of relevant background information
• Poor reading skills
• Bias
• Prejudice
•Superstition
• Egocentrism (self-centered thinking)
• Sociocentrism (group-centered thinking)
• Peer pressure
• Conformism
• Provincialism
• Narrow-mindedness
• Closed-mindedness
• Distrust in reason
• Relativistic thinking
• Stereotyping
• Unwarranted assumptions
• Scapegoating

5
 • Rationalization
• Denial
• Wishful thinking
• Short-term thinking
• Selective perception
• Selective memory
• Overpowering emotions
• Self-deception
• Face-saving
• Fear of change

Let’s examine in detail five of these impediments—egocentrism, sociocentrism, unwarranted

assumptions, relativistic thinking, and wishful thinking— that play an especially powerful
role in hindering critical thinking.

1. EGOCENTRISM

Egocentrism is the tendency to see reality as centered on oneself. Egocentrics are selfish, self-
absorbed people who view their interests, ideas, and values as superior to everyone else’s. All
of us are affected to some degree by egocentric biases. Egocentrism can manifest itself in a
variety of ways. Two common forms are self-interested thinking and self-serving bias.

a. Self-interested thinking. It is the tendency to accept and defend beliefs that

harmonize with one’s self-interest. Almost no one is immune to self-interested
thinking. Most doctors support legislation making it more difficult for them to be
sued for malpractice; most lawyers do not. Most university lecturers strongly
support tenure, paid sabbaticals, low teaching loads, and a strong faculty voice in
university governance; many state taxpayers and university administrators do not.
Most factory workers support laws requiring advance notice of plant closings;
most factory owners do not. Self-interested thinking, however understandable it
may seem, is a major obstacle to critical thinking. Everyone finds it tempting at
times to reason that “this benefits me, therefore it must be good”; but from a
critical thinking standpoint, such “reasoning” is a sham. Implicit in such thinking
is the assumption that “What is most important is what I want and need.” But why
should I, or anyone else, accept such an arbitrary and obviously self-serving
assumption? What makes your wants and needs more important than everyone
else’s? Critical thinking condemns such special pleading. It demands that we
weigh evidence and arguments objectively and impartially. Ultimately, it demands
that we revere truth—even when it hurts.

b. Self-serving bias. It is the tendency to overrate oneself—to see oneself as better in

some respect than one actually is. We have all known braggarts or know-it alls who
claim to be more talented or knowledgeable than they really are. If you are like most
people, you probably think of yourself as being an unusually self-aware person who is
largely immune from any such self-deception. If so, then you too are probably
suffering from self-serving bias.

2. SOCIOCENTRISM

6
Sociocentrism is group-centered thinking. Just as egocentrism can hinder rational thinking by
focusing excessively on the self, so sociocentrism can hinder rational thinking by focusing
excessively on the group. Sociocentrism can distort critical thinking in many ways. Two of
the most important are group bias and conformism.

a. Group Bias. It is the tendency to see one’s own group (nation, tribe, sect, peer
group, and the like) as being inherently better than others. Social scientists tell us that
such thinking is extremely common throughout human history and across cultures.
Just as we seem naturally inclined to hold inflated views of ourselves, so we find it
easy to hold inflated views of our family, our community, or our nation. Conversely,
we find it easy to look with suspicion or disfavour on those we regard as “outsiders.”
Most people absorb group bias unconsciously, usually from early childhood. It is
common, for example, for people to grow up thinking that their society’s beliefs,
institutions, and values are better than those of other societies. Although most people
outgrow such childish nationalistic biases to some extent, few of us manage to
outgrow them completely. Clearly, this kind of “mine-is-better” thinking lies at the
root of a great deal of human conflict, intolerance, and oppression.

b. Conformism. Conformism refers to our tendency to follow the crowd—that

is, to conform (often unthinkingly) to authority or to group standards of conduct and
belief. The desire to belong, to be part of the in-group, can be among the most
powerful of human motivations. This desire to conform can seriously cripple our
powers of critical reasoning and decision making.

3. UNWARRANTED ASSUMPTIONS AND STEREOTYPE

An assumption is something we take for granted something we believe to be true without any
proof or conclusive evidence. Almost everything we think and do is based on assumptions. If
the weather report calls for rain, we take an umbrella because we assume that the
meteorologist is not lying, that the report is based on a scientific analysis of weather patterns,
that the instruments are accurate, and so forth. There may be no proof that any of this is true,
but we realize that it is wiser to take the umbrella than to insist that the weather bureau
provide exhaustive evidence to justify its prediction.

Although we often hear the injunction “Don’t assume,” it would be impossible to get through
a day without making assumptions; in fact, many of our daily actions are based on
assumptions we have drawn from the patterns in our experience. You go to class at the
scheduled time because you assume that class is being held at its normal hour and in its same
place. You don’t call the professor each day to ask if class is being held; you just assume that
it is. Such assumptions are warranted, which means that we have good reason to hold them.
When you see a driver coming toward you with the turn signal on, you have good reason to
believe that the driver intends to turn. You may be incorrect, and it might be safer to withhold
action until you are certain, but your assumption is not unreasonable.

Unwarranted assumptions, however, are unreasonable. An unwarranted assumption is

something taken for granted without good reason. Such assumptions often prevent our seeing
things clearly. For example, our attraction for someone might cause us to assume that he or
she feels the same way and thus to interpret that person’s actions incorrectly. One of the most
common types of unwarranted assumptions is a stereotype.

7
The word stereotype comes from the printing press era, when plates, or stereotypes, were
used to produce identical copies of one page. Similarly, when we stereotype, as the word is
now used, we assume that individual people have all been stamped from one plate, so all
politicians are alike, or Muslims, lecturers, women, and so forth. When we form an opinion
of someone that is based not on his or her individual qualities but, rather, on his or her
membership in a particular group, we are assuming that all or virtually all members of that
group are alike. Because people are not identical, no matter what race or other similarities
they share, stereotypical conceptions will often be false or misleading. Typically, stereotypes
are arrived at through a process known as hasty generalization, in which one draws a
conclusion about a large class of things (in this case, people) from a small sample. If we meet
one Guinean who is rude, we might jump to the conclusion that all Guineans are rude. Or we
might generalize from what we have heard from a few friends or read.

4. RELATIVISTIC THINKING

Virtually most university lecturers have had at least one conversation like the following:

John: Professor X, I don’t understand why you gave me a D on this paper.

Prof. X: Well, as I noted in my written comments, you state your opinions, but you don’t offer
any reasons to back them up.

John: Do you mean you gave me a low grade because you disagree with my opinions?

Prof. X: No, not at all, John. You received a low grade because you didn’t give any
reasons to support your opinions.

John: But isn’t everyone entitled to his or her own opinion? And can anyone ever really prove
that his or her opinion is right and everyone else’s is wrong? Why, then, do I have to give
reasons for my opinions when I’m entitled to hold them and no one can prove that they’re
wrong?

John, here, has fallen into the trap of relativistic thinking. It is crucial to understand why this
is a trap, because once one has fallen into it, it is very difficult to see any point in studying
critical thinking at all.

Relativism is the view that truth is a matter of opinion. There are two popular forms of
relativism: subjectivism and cultural relativism.

Subjectivism is the view that truth is a matter of individual opinion. This is the view John
apparently holds. According to subjectivism, whatever an individual believes is true, is true
for that person, and there is no such thing as “objective” or “absolute” truth, i.e., truth that
exists independent of what anyone believes. For example, suppose Bobby believes that
abortion is wrong and Alice believes that abortion is not always wrong. According to
subjectivism, abortion is always wrong for Bobby and not always wrong for Alice. Both
beliefs are true— for them. And truth for one individual or another is the only kind of truth
there is.

8
Cultural relativism is the view that truth is a matter of social or cultural opinion. In other
words, cultural relativism is the view that what is true for person A is what person A’s culture
or society believes is true. Drinking wine, for example, is widely considered to be wrong in
Iran but is not generally considered to be wrong in France. According to cultural relativism,
therefore, drinking wine is immoral in Iran but is morally permissible in France. Thus, for the
cultural relativist, just as for the subjectivist, there is no objective or absolute standard of
truth. What is true is whatever most people in a society or culture believe to be true. (Another
example: female genital mutilation)

Relatively few people endorse subjectivism or cultural relativism in the pure, unqualified
forms in which we have stated them. Almost everybody would admit, for example,
that 1+1= 2 is true, no matter who might be ignorant or deluded enough to deny it. What
relativists usually claim, therefore, is not that all truth is relative, but that truth is relative in
some important domain(s).

By far the most common form of relativism is moral relativism. Like relativism generally,
moral relativism comes in two major forms: moral subjectivism and cultural moral relativism.

Moral subjectivism is the view that what is morally right and good for an individual, A, is
whatever A believes is morally right and good. Thus, if Andy believes that premarital sex is
always wrong, and Jennifer believes that it is not always wrong; according to moral
subjectivism premarital sex is always wrong for Andy and is not always wrong for Jennifer.

Cultural moral relativism is the view that what is morally right and good for an individual,
A, is whatever A’s society or culture believes is morally right and good. Thus, according to
cultural moral relativism, if culture A believes that polygamy is wrong, and culture B
believes that polygamy is right, then polygamy is wrong for culture A and right for culture B.

5. WISHFUL THINKING

Have you ever been guilty of wishful thinking—believing something not because you had
good evidence for it but simply because you wished it were true? If so, you’re not alone.
Throughout human history, reason has done battle with wishful thinking and has usually
come out the loser. People fear the unknown and invent comforting myths to render the
universe less hostile and more predictable. They fear death and listen credulously to stories of
healing crystals, quack cures, and communication with the dead. They fantasize about
possessing extraordinary personal powers and accept uncritically accounts of psychic
prediction and levitation.

BASIC CONCEPTS IN CRITICAL THINKING

Central to the intellectual study of Critical Thinking are the following concepts:

Argument is a set of statements or propositions in which one or more of the statements

attempts to provide reasons or evidence for the truth of one of the statements which is
referred to as the conclusion. It normally progresses from premises to conclusion.

9
Premise is the statement in an argument that serves to provide evidence for the truth of the
conclusion or claim. It is the thesis you take for granted.

Conclusion is the statement in the argument that the other statements (premises) claim to
support or prove to be true.

Premise Indicators are terms that indicate that the premise is about to follow e.g. since,
because, for and giving that.

Conclusion Indicators are terms that indicate that the conclusion is about to follow e.g.
therefore, so, thus, hence, consequently etc.

In analysing an argument, it is important to know the statements that make up the premises
and that which is the conclusion. The premise indicators and the conclusion indicators can
help greatly in this regard. Conclusions are normally the last statements in the passage but
however, the author may even decide to put it first or in the middle.

10