Critical thinking skills and applications

Critical Thinking and Logical Fallacies

Author and speaker Brian Tracy says that people do not make decisions rationally, or logically. He believes that individuals make decisions emotionally, and then only seek to justify them on a rational, logical, or rational thought basis. For example, purchasing a vehicle is less often the rational decision regarding what is needed, and more often influences by what the person wants to gain from an individual vehicle, and how he or she wants to be perceived. The same can be said of purchasing clothing, filling a closet full of shoes when a few pair are needed, or justifying a third scope of ice cream on a late night snack. Thus when discussing critical thinking, and logical fallacies, we are attempting to move individuals out of the normal thought process, into an environment which is totally foreign to traditional thought, and decision making.

For these reasons, the subject of logical fallacies tends to bend our imagination, or even go unnoticed. Logical fallacies are typically rooted in the emotional construct of the argument. Logical fallacies are based in emotional reasoning rather than critical, logical, or rational thought processes. In other words, when we make decisions emotionally, we most often void out logical thinking processed. While emotions serve as the motivating force behind our choices, we seek to move toward a logical basis so that our decision can be based on a foundation other than how it makes me feel.

None the less, critical thinking and logical argument are as crucial to a democratic nation today as they were to the Founding Fathers in 1700s. "Psychology is about critical thinking; life is about critical thinking" (Smith, 1995) An analysis of the construction of arguments can be found in any university logic class. While much attention has been paid by educators to critical thinking skills, little attention has been given to logical and fallacious arguments that are an essential part of critical thinking. (Duplass and Zeidler, 2002)

Any people group bring with them opinions and information that they glean from the popular culture. Content material for a discussion about current issues is readily accessible in the form of newspapers, weekly magazines, and television documentaries and newscasts. Whether a person feels like an expert or feels overwhelmed by the available information on a topic, helping separate the logical form the fallacious is a key talent to give the person control over his own destiny through teaching individuals to evaluate information through discussions with others who are also seeking accurate information and reliable sources.

Often, logical fallacies are used in an argument when the person wants to shift attention from one issue to another. In the event that the topic is becoming too personal, or too painful, the person who wants to avoid the conflict will often dip into the emotional reservoir and splash emotional gasoline onto the conversation, in hopes that the resulting explosion will allow him to escape attention, like a magician in a puff of smoke.

This tendency is particularly evident when interacting with adolescents. At an age when teens are discarding the logical and rational instruction of their parents, and taking on priorities which make them 'feel' like an individual, learning the ability to distinguish between rational discussion and logical fallacies is an important aspect of maturation. (Fauth et al., 1998) We all do it, as avoidance is one of the surest ways to deal with confrontation, or the threat of change. Therefore, understanding logical fallacies is an important task for those who want to move beyond the limitation of emotional living, and be able to take control over their thought process, and be able to communicate with others who may disagree with them.

The fallacy of look who's talking is a common appeal to the emotional relativism of a situation. The person who appeals to the "Look who's talking" fallacy seeks to downplay their own actions in light of the speaker's actions, or beliefs. As we approach the political elections in the fall of 2004, this fallacy is often at the core of political advertisements. In a 30 second television add, the ad sponsor does not often have the time to develop a well thought argument, and present their counter argument. Consequently, the approach is to diminish the perspective of the person by associating him with other disliked, or socially objectionable decisions.

For example, the current ads for president Bush highlight his opponent John Carey's record on taxes. The ad recounts a litany of adverse tax decisions made by Carey over the past decade. The result of the ad is that Carey's current promised economic changes are negated because of his previous statements and actions regarding economic policy. The look who's talking fallacy takes information from his own personal history, and uses it against him in order to discredit his current promises.

Some individuals believe that the current military action in the middle east is an example of two wrongs makes a right fallacy. The terrorists who attacked the country on 9-11 committed the first wrong action. Consequently America's equally wrong action in initiating military conflict in the middle east is the second wrong, and is justified since they struck against our nation first. The nation cannot afford to undertake military action on such a flimsy foundation as this. The nation needs to have a strategic, logical and purposeful military policy so that we do not respond to every tinhorn dictator who rattles his saber. However, this current conflict is painted into a 'two wrongs making a right' frame by many current political pundits.

The 'appeal to pity' argument is currently being tested in the juvenile justice system. The current approach of social behavior modification which is applied in the juvenile justice system is being stretched and challenged as to its effectiveness due to the increasing numbers of juvenile offenders who are being tried as adults. Due to the heinousness of their crimes, these offenders are put into the 'punishment' approach to justice in the adult system, rather than the 'rehabilitation' approach to juvenile justice which has been the foundation of the courts designed for younger offenders.