Logic and Critical Thinking Essay Example For Students

Logic and Critical Thinking Essay Truth is the object of thinking. Some truths are obvious; others are difficult to acquire. Some judgments we make are simple; some judgments are complicated. Some arguments, whether made by us or others, may be straightforward and easily understood; other arguments may be complex and consist of a series of smaller arguments, each needing to be critically examined and evaluated. Almost every object of knowledge has a branch of knowledge which studies it. Planets, stars, and galaxies are studied by astronomy. Chemistry studies the structure, composition, and properties of material substances and the transformations they undergo. The origin, evolution, and development of human society is the object studied by sociology. Economics, biology, geography, and grammar all have objects of knowledge which they investigate, describe, and try to explain. Critical thinking involves a knowledge of the science of logic, including the skills of logical analysis, correct reasoning, and understanding statistical methods. Critical thinking, however, involves more than just an understanding of logical procedures. A good critical thinker must also understand the sources of knowledge, the nature of knowledge, and the nature of truth. But first, what is the science of logic? The object of knowledge involved in the science of logic is thinking, but it is thinking approached in a special way. Generally speaking, logic is that branch of knowledge which reflects upon the nature of thinking itself. But this may confuse logic with other branches of knowledge which also have the nature of thinking as a part of their specific object of investigation. We need a more detailed and accurate definition to eliminate any confusion. Logic doesnt just deal with ;thinking; in general. Logic deals with ;correct thinking.; Training in logic should enable us to develop the skills necessary to think correctly, that is, logically. A very simple definition would be: Logic is the subject which teaches you the rules for correct and proper reasoning. For those of you who want a more complete and ;sophisticated; definition of logic, you can define it this way: Logic is the science of those principles, laws, and methods, which the mind of man in its thinking must follow for the accurate and secure attainment of truth. Take your choice. Natural Logic and Scientific Logic We need to be aware of a distinction between what some call ;natural logic; or common sense and ;scientific; logic. We all have an internal sense of what is logical and what is not, which we generally refer to as ;common sense.; This ;natural; logic we have learned from the moment of birth, through our personal experiences in the world and through our acquisition of language. Scientific logic, on the other hand, is simply our natural logic trained and developed to expertness by means of well-established knowledge of the principles, laws, and methods which underlie the various operations of the mind in the pursuit of and attainment of truth. We have referred to the ;science; of logic but logic is really more than just a science. The science part is the knowledge of the principles, laws, and methods of logic itself. This is important, to be sure. But logic must be put into action or else the knowledge provided within the science of logic is of little use. We can, therefore, also speak of the ;art; of logic, that is, the practical application of the science of logic to our everyday affairs. Logic is not intended merely to inform or instruct. It is also directive and aims at assisting us in the proper use of our power of reasoning. In this sense, we can speak of logic as both a science and an art, a practical art meant to be applied in our ordinary affairs. Video Games: Why The Gender Bias? EssayThe process of reasoning means that from certain things we already know to be true, we can acquire another truth not already known but that follows necessarily from those truths already known. It may seem strange to see it described this way, especially since reasoning is something we are constantly doing all day long. Its just that we are not consciously aware of what we are actually doing. Reasoning and inference are sometimes thought to be the same process. This is true if we are talking about what is called mediate inference. Reasoning and mediate inference, which include deduction and induction (to be described later), are the same thought process. But there is another kind of inference called immediate inference, which some think is a primitive type of reasoning, wherein we draw a conclusion about something immediately without going through the process of thinking it out. Self-evident truths are an example of immediate inference. Evidence and ProofMany people are confused by the terms evidence and proof. During a discussion of the inductive method and empirical science, much more will be said about evidence and proof. For now, however, lets just consider a few general ideas regarding the use of these terms. The term evidence well define as any grounds used to assert a proposition to be true. We can also say that evidence is any supposed fact which is considered as supporting the truth of a given proposition. There are obviously many kinds of evidence. There is what we commonly call firsthand evidence that we all use as grounds for stating propositions to be true. We say, There are blue and white colored fish in the aquarium. How do we know? We look and see. If someone questions our statement, we invite that person to come look and see. We see, hear, smell, taste, and feel things firsthand. Usually, this type of evidence doesnt cause much of a problem in our everyday life. But suppose we were testifying in court about an incident we witnessed. Our evidence would be firsthand. We saw the accident. We heard the fighting words. We smelled the smoke of the fire. Presenting testimonial evidence based on a firsthand account may involve us in some complications, however, especially from an attorney on one side of the case or the other. Later, well investigate testimonial evidence more in detail. There is also the matter of circumstantial evidence we hear so much about these days in criminal trials. Circumstantial evidence involves those relevant circumstances or facts which enable us to draw legitimate inferences to some principal fact, which fact then explains the existence and presence of these relevant circumstances or facts. This is really indirect evidence, one or more steps removed from what we generally consider to be firsthand evidence. In criminal trials, the presence of and analysis of blood, DNA, fingerprints, and so on are considered circumstantial evidence if no firsthand or direct witness to the criminal event was present at the time of the event. Empirical scientists are very concerned about evidence. They collect evidence to document and support their scientific principles, laws, theories, and so forth. How do we know dinosaurs roamed the earth even though they no longer exist? Well, paleontologists and geologists have found evidence of their skeletons, eggs, and so on. How do we know that water boils at sea level when it reaches 212 degrees F.? Well, because physicists and chemists have collected evidence that it does and expressed it in a general scientific law. Every time any of us states a proposition which we assert to be true, we try to give evidence supporting the truth of the proposition. This evidence constitutes the grounds for saying the proposition is true. We gather facts which we consider to be supportive of the truth of the proposition we assert. The next chapter will discuss some ways by which we attempt to discover and provide various types of evidence. The word proof does not designate the same thing as the word evidence, and proof is what we are more concerned with in the science of logic. Logic may be said to be concerned with the question of the adequacy or probative value of different kinds of evidence. Traditionally, however, logic has devoted itself mainly to the study of what constitutes proof, that is, complete or conclusive evidence. Proof is essentially a process, an act of testing to determine the validity of an argument which will hopefully support the truth of a proposition presented as a conclusion. Proof is not a simple matter, particularly in situations where evidence has to be weighed in favor of one conclusion or the other. In deductive logic, the matter of proof is fairly straightforward and rules have been made to help us determine the validity of a deductive argument. In inductive logic and processes using scientific method, the situation is not as clear and decisive. Here we enter the world of probability, partial evidence, probable inference, and the problem of the weight of evidence. It is here, also, where arguments become controversial and, to some people at least, most exciting.