Clarifying ideas - 1

Clarifying ideas - 1Clarifying ideas - 1

The process of The process of reasoningreasoning often often encountersencounters a a need forneed for clarificationclarification. Terms may be . Terms may be used, or claims be made, whose meaning used, or claims be made, whose meaning is unclear, vague, imprecise or ambiguous.is unclear, vague, imprecise or ambiguous.

In order In order to evaluate anto evaluate an argumentargument skilfully skilfully we must we must firstfirst understandunderstand it. it.

We expound some ‘We expound some ‘right questionsright questions’ which ’ which helphelp clarifyclarify what writers and speakers what writers and speakers mean – including yourself. What is needed mean – including yourself. What is needed dependsdepends onon the the audienceaudience andand on the on the purpose ofpurpose of the the clarificationclarification..


1.1. What isWhat is the problemthe problem? Is it vagueness, ? Is it vagueness, ambiguity, a need for examples or what?ambiguity, a need for examples or what?

2.2. Who is the audienceWho is the audience? What background ? What background knowledge and beliefs can they be assumed to knowledge and beliefs can they be assumed to have?have?

3.3. Given the audience, Given the audience, whatwhat will provide will provide sufficient sufficient clarificationclarification for the present purposes? for the present purposes?

4.4. Possible Possible sourcessources of clarification: of clarification:a.a. A A dictionary definitiondictionary definition (reporting normal usage). (reporting normal usage).

b.b. A definition/explanation from an A definition/explanation from an authorityauthority in the in the fieldfield (reporting specialized usage). (reporting specialized usage).

c.c. deciding on a meaning; deciding on a meaning; stipulatingstipulating a a meaningmeaning..


5.5. Ways of clarifyingWays of clarifying terms and ideas: terms and ideas:a)a) Giving a Giving a synonymoussynonymous expression or expression or

paraphrase.paraphrase.

b)b) Giving Giving necessary and sufficient conditionsnecessary and sufficient conditions (i.e. (i.e. an ‘if and only if’ definition).an ‘if and only if’ definition).

c)c) Giving Giving clear examplesclear examples (and non-examples). (and non-examples).

d)d) Drawing Drawing constrastsconstrasts (what kind of thing and (what kind of thing and what differentiates it from other things).what differentiates it from other things).

e)e) Explaining the Explaining the historyhistory of an expression. of an expression.

6.6. How much detailHow much detail is needed by this is needed by this audience in this situation?audience in this situation?

Analysis of argumentsAnalysis of arguments

1.1. WhatWhat is/are the main is/are the main conclusion/s conclusion/s (may be (may be stated or unstated; may be stated or unstated; may be recommendations, explanations, and so on; recommendations, explanations, and so on; conclusion indicator words, like ‘therefore’ conclusion indicator words, like ‘therefore’ may help).may help).

2.2. WhatWhat are the are the reasonsreasons (data, evidence) and (data, evidence) and their their structurestructure??

3.3. WhatWhat is the is the assumedassumed (that is, implicit or (that is, implicit or taken from granted, perhaps taken from granted, perhaps inin the the contextcontext)?)?

4.4. ClarifyClarify the the meaningmeaning (by the terms, claims or (by the terms, claims or arguments) which need it.arguments) which need it.

Evaluation of argumentsEvaluation of arguments5.5. Are the Are the reasonsreasons acceptableacceptable (including explicit reasons (including explicit reasons

and unstated assumptions – this may involve and unstated assumptions – this may involve evaluating factual claims, definitions and value evaluating factual claims, definitions and value judgements and judging the judgements and judging the credibilitycredibility ofof a a sourcesource)?)?

6.6. Does the Does the reasoningreasoning supportsupport its conclusion(s)its conclusion(s) (is the (is the support strong, for example ‘beyond reasonable support strong, for example ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, or weak?)doubt’, or weak?)

7.7. Are there Are there other relevant considerations/argumentsother relevant considerations/arguments which strengthen or weaken the case? (You may which strengthen or weaken the case? (You may already know these or may have to construct them.)already know these or may have to construct them.)

8.8. What is your What is your overall evaluationoverall evaluation (in the light of 1 to 7)? (in the light of 1 to 7)?

Judging Credibility - 1Judging Credibility - 1

1.1. QuestionsQuestions aboutabout the the person/sourceperson/source::

a.a. Do they have the Do they have the relevantrelevant expertiseexpertise (experience, knowledge, and formal (experience, knowledge, and formal qualifications)?qualifications)?

b.b. Do they have the Do they have the ability toability to observeobserve accurately accurately (eyesight, hearing, proximity to event, absence (eyesight, hearing, proximity to event, absence of distractions, appropriate instruments, skill in of distractions, appropriate instruments, skill in using instruments)?using instruments)?

c.c. Does their Does their reputationreputation suggest they are suggest they are reliablereliable??

d.d. Does the Does the sourcesource have a vested interest or have a vested interest or biasbias??


2.2. QuestionsQuestions aboutabout the the circumstances/contextcircumstances/context in in which the claim is made?which the claim is made?

3.3. QuestionsQuestions aboutabout the the justificationjustification the source the source offers or can offer in support of the claim:offers or can offer in support of the claim:

a.a. Did the source Did the source ‘witness X’‘witness X’ or was or was ‘told about X’‘told about X’ ? ?

b.b. Is it based on Is it based on ‘primary’‘primary’ and and ‘secondary’‘secondary’ sourcessources??

c.c. Is it based on Is it based on ‘direct’‘direct’ oror on on ‘circumstantial’‘circumstantial’ evidenceevidence??

d.d. Is it based on direct Is it based on direct reference toreference to credibilitycredibility considerations?considerations?


4.4. QuestionsQuestions about the about the nature of the nature of the

claimclaim which which influenceinfluence its its credibilitycredibility::

a.a. IsIs it very it very unlikelyunlikely, given other things we , given other things we

know; know; oror is it very is it very plausibleplausible and and easyeasy to to

believe?believe?

b.b. IsIs it a basic it a basic observationobservation statement or an statement or an

inferred inferred judgementjudgement??

5.5. Is thereIs there corroborationcorroboration from other from other

sources?sources?

Causal Models - 1Causal Models - 1 Agency concerns intervention in the world to Agency concerns intervention in the world to

change it, to see how things might be otherwise.change it, to see how things might be otherwise.

Importantly, agency is about how we represent Importantly, agency is about how we represent

intervention, how we think about changes in the intervention, how we think about changes in the

world. By representing it we can imagine world. By representing it we can imagine

changes in the world without actually changing changes in the world without actually changing

it.it.

This ability opens up the possibility of This ability opens up the possibility of

imagination, fantasy, thinking about the future, imagination, fantasy, thinking about the future,

thinking about what the past might have been.thinking about what the past might have been.

Causal Models - 2Causal Models - 2

People are selective in what they attend to. People are selective in what they attend to.

They attend to what is is stable – to They attend to what is is stable – to

invariants – because that’s where the crucial invariants – because that’s where the crucial

information is for helping them achieve goals.information is for helping them achieve goals.

Invariants can take the form of causal Invariants can take the form of causal

relations. These carry the information we relations. These carry the information we

store, that we discuss, and that we use for store, that we discuss, and that we use for

performing everyday activities that change performing everyday activities that change

the state of the world.the state of the world.


The ability to remember is useless without The ability to remember is useless without

the ability to pick and choose what is the ability to pick and choose what is

important and to put the useful pieces important and to put the useful pieces

together in meaningful ways.together in meaningful ways.

We can think of selective attention as We can think of selective attention as

solving a problem: to find those aspects of solving a problem: to find those aspects of

the environment that hold the solution, so the environment that hold the solution, so

that we can limit our attention to them.that we can limit our attention to them.


Expertise inevitably involves the ability to Expertise inevitably involves the ability to

identify invariants. The expert picks out the identify invariants. The expert picks out the

properties that explain why the system is in the properties that explain why the system is in the

current state and that predict its state in the current state and that predict its state in the

future.future.

Beyond prediction and explanation, control Beyond prediction and explanation, control

requires knowing the systematic relations requires knowing the systematic relations

between actions and their outcomes, so the between actions and their outcomes, so the

right action can be chosen at the right time.right action can be chosen at the right time.


It is not the case that the world doesn’t It is not the case that the world doesn’t change. It is the physical generating process change. It is the physical generating process that produces the world that doesn’t.that produces the world that doesn’t.

So the relations of cause and effect are a So the relations of cause and effect are a good place to look for invariance. The good place to look for invariance. The mechanisms that govern the world are the mechanisms that govern the world are the embodiment of much that doesn’t change.embodiment of much that doesn’t change.

The physical, the biological, and the social The physical, the biological, and the social worlds all are generated by mechanisms worlds all are generated by mechanisms governed by causal principles.governed by causal principles.


Prediction does not always require appeal Prediction does not always require appeal

to causal mechanisms because sometimes to causal mechanisms because sometimes

the best guess about the future is simply the best guess about the future is simply

what happened in the past.what happened in the past.

But sometimes it does, especially when But sometimes it does, especially when

there is no historical record to appeal to.there is no historical record to appeal to.

Then, explanation and control depend Then, explanation and control depend

crucially on causal understanding.crucially on causal understanding.

Causal explanation - issuesCausal explanation - issues

1.1. WhatWhat are the are the causal possibilitiescausal possibilities in this case? in this case?

2.2. WhatWhat evidenceevidence could you find that could you find that wouldwould countcount forfor or or againstagainst the likelihood of these the likelihood of these possibilities (if you could find it)?possibilities (if you could find it)?

3.3. WhatWhat evidenceevidence do you have already, or can do you have already, or can gather, that is gather, that is relevantrelevant to determining what to determining what causes what? causes what?

4.4. WhichWhich possibility is rendered possibility is rendered most likelymost likely by by the evidence? (What best explanation the evidence? (What best explanation fits fits bestbest with everything else we know and with everything else we know and believe?) believe?)

Causal explanation – Causal explanation – lessons 1lessons 1

1.1. Many kinds of events are open to Many kinds of events are open to explanationexplanation by by rival causesrival causes

2.2. ExpertsExperts can examinecan examine the same event the same event evidence and come up with evidence and come up with different causesdifferent causes to explain itto explain it

3.3. Although Although manymany explanationsexplanations can ‘ can ‘fit the fit the factsfacts’, some seem ’, some seem moremore plausibleplausible than others than others

4.4. Most Most communicatorscommunicators will will provideprovide you with you with only their only their favouredfavoured causescauses; the ; the critical thinkercritical thinker mustmust generategenerate the the rival causesrival causes

Causal explanation – Causal explanation – lessons 2lessons 2

5.5. GeneratingGenerating rival rival causescauses is a is a creativecreative

processprocess; usually such causes will ; usually such causes will notnot be be

obviousobvious

6.6. Even scientific Even scientific researchersresearchers frequently frequently failfail to to

acknowledgeacknowledge important important rival causesrival causes for for

their findingstheir findings

7.7. The The certaintycertainty of a particular causal chain is of a particular causal chain is

inversely related toinversely related to the number of plausible the number of plausible

rival causesrival causes

Causal explanation – strong Causal explanation – strong casecase

The researcher doesn’t have any personal The researcher doesn’t have any personal financial incentive in suggesting the causefinancial incentive in suggesting the cause

The researcher had at least one control group, The researcher had at least one control group, that did not get exposed to the causethat did not get exposed to the cause

Groups that were compared, differed on very few Groups that were compared, differed on very few characteristics other than the causal factor of characteristics other than the causal factor of interestinterest

Participants were randonmly assigned to groupsParticipants were randonmly assigned to groups Participants were unaware of the researchers’ Participants were unaware of the researchers’

hypotheseshypotheses Other researchers have replicated the findingsOther researchers have replicated the findings

Causal explanation – rival Causal explanation – rival causescauses

Can I think of any other way to interpret the Can I think of any other way to interpret the

evidence?evidence?

What else might have caused this act or What else might have caused this act or

these findings?these findings?

If I looked at this from another point of view, If I looked at this from another point of view,

what might I see as important causes?what might I see as important causes?

If this interpretation is incorrect, what other If this interpretation is incorrect, what other

interpretations might make sense?interpretations might make sense?

Causal explanation – clues 1Causal explanation – clues 1

Is there any evidence that the explanation has Is there any evidence that the explanation has

been critically examined?been critically examined?

Is it likely that social, political, or psychological Is it likely that social, political, or psychological

forces may bias the hypothesis?forces may bias the hypothesis?

What rival causes have not been considered? What rival causes have not been considered?

How credible is the author’s hypothesis How credible is the author’s hypothesis

compared to rival causes?compared to rival causes?

Causal explanation – clues 2Causal explanation – clues 2

Is the hypothesis thorough in accounting Is the hypothesis thorough in accounting

for many puzzling aspects of the events in for many puzzling aspects of the events in

question?question?

How consistent is the hypothesis with all How consistent is the hypothesis with all

the available valuable relevant evidence?the available valuable relevant evidence?

Is the Is the post hocpost hoc fallacy the primary fallacy the primary

reasoning being used to link the events?reasoning being used to link the events?

Statistics - deceptive?Statistics - deceptive?

Authors often provide statistics to Authors often provide statistics to

support their reasoning, and the support their reasoning, and the

statistics appear to be hard evidence.statistics appear to be hard evidence.

However, there are many ways that However, there are many ways that

statistics can be misused.statistics can be misused.

Because problematic statistics are used Because problematic statistics are used

frequently, it is important to identify any frequently, it is important to identify any

problems with them.problems with them.

Statistics – assessment Statistics – assessment clues 1clues 1

1.1. Try to find out as much as you can about Try to find out as much as you can about how the how the statisticsstatistics were were obtainedobtained. Ask . Ask “How does the author know?”“How does the author know?”

2.2. BeBe curious aboutcurious about the type of the type of averageaverage being described.being described.

3.3. Be alert to users of Be alert to users of statisticsstatistics concluding concluding one thing, but proving another.one thing, but proving another.

4.4. Blind yourself to the author’s statistics and Blind yourself to the author’s statistics and comparecompare the needed statistical the needed statistical evidenceevidence withwith the the statisticsstatistics actually actually providedprovided..

Omitted information - 1Omitted information - 1 By By asking questionsasking questions brought up in other brought up in other

sections, such as concerning ambiguity, sections, such as concerning ambiguity, assumptions, and evidence, we assumptions, and evidence, we willwill detectdetect much important much important missing informationmissing information

A more A more complete searchcomplete search for omitted for omitted information, however, is so important to information, however, is so important to critical evaluation that it critical evaluation that it deservesdeserves additional additional emphasisemphasis

Next we further sensitise to the Next we further sensitise to the importance ofimportance of what is not saidwhat is not said and remind that we react to and remind that we react to an incomplete picture of an argument when an incomplete picture of an argument when we evaluate only the explicit partswe evaluate only the explicit parts

Omitted information - 2Omitted information - 2

Almost any Almost any informationinformation we encounter we encounter hashas a a purposepurpose. Its organization was selected and . Its organization was selected and established by someone who hoped that it established by someone who hoped that it would affect our thinking in some designed would affect our thinking in some designed wayway

Those trying Those trying to persuadeto persuade usus will almost will almost always try to always try to presentpresent theirtheir positionposition in the in the strongeststrongest possible possible lightlight

It is It is wise to hesitatewise to hesitate and and think aboutthink about what what an an authorauthor may may not have told usnot have told us, something , something our critical questioning has not yet revealedour critical questioning has not yet revealed

Omitted information - 3Omitted information - 3

Omitted information is inevitable, for at Omitted information is inevitable, for at least five reasons:least five reasons:

1.1. Time and space limitationsTime and space limitations

2.2. Limited attention spanLimited attention span

3.3. Inadequacies in human knowledgeInadequacies in human knowledge

4.4. DeceptionDeception

5.5. Existence of different perspectivesExistence of different perspectives

Clues for finding omitted Clues for finding omitted informationinformation

1.1. Common counterarguments:Common counterarguments:

a.a. What reasons would someone who What reasons would someone who disagrees offer?disagrees offer?

b.b. Are there research studies that Are there research studies that contradict the studies presented?contradict the studies presented?

c.c. Are there missing examples, Are there missing examples, testimonials, or analogies that support testimonials, or analogies that support the other side of the argument?the other side of the argument?

2.2. Missing definitions:Missing definitions: How would the How would the arguments differ if key terms were arguments differ if key terms were defined in other ways?defined in other ways?


3.3. Missing value preferences or perspectives:Missing value preferences or perspectives:

a.a. From what other set of values might one From what other set of values might one approach this issue?approach this issue?

b.b. What kinds of arguments would be made by What kinds of arguments would be made by someone approaching the issue from a someone approaching the issue from a different set of values?different set of values?

4.4. Origins of “facts” alluded to in the argument:Origins of “facts” alluded to in the argument:

a.a. Where do the arguments come from?Where do the arguments come from?

b.b. Are the factual claims supported by Are the factual claims supported by competent research or by reliable sources?competent research or by reliable sources?


5.5. Details of procedures used for gathering facts:Details of procedures used for gathering facts:

a.a. How many people completed the How many people completed the

questionnaire?questionnaire?

b.b. How were the survey questions worded?How were the survey questions worded?

6.6. Alternative techniques for gathering or Alternative techniques for gathering or

organizing evidence:organizing evidence:

How might the results from an interview How might the results from an interview study study

differ from questionnaire results?differ from questionnaire results?

Clarifying ideas - 1

Documents

Transcript of Clarifying ideas - 1