Up to this point, my database posts have been about compiling data from external sources. This database post is more organizational in nature. My goal here is to systematize the posts I’ve written in my series “Critical Thinking Toolkit”. The purpose of the series was to provide summary approaches to various areas of critical thinking that are not often taught or recognized. What I have done here is to take every post I’ve made in this series and sort them into different categories of related types of tools in the toolkit. I’ve also tried to add very brief commentary that can help a reader find what they are looking for. I hope this resource will be helpful!
Introduction: Thinking Clearly and Critically
Types of Arguments
There are three types of argument here. Deductive arguments are those that carry absolute certainty via basic rules of logic. Inductive arguments reason from specific to general, as in the scientific method (experimental science specifically). Inference to the best explanation is the kind of reasoning used by detectives and forensic scientists.
These posts all have to do with how to respond to, approach, and analyze arguments.
- Rebuttal versus Refutation
- Weighing Evidence with Bayes’ Theorem
- Ockham’s Razor
- External and Internal Contradictions
- Possible versus Plausible
- A Priori Assumptions
These posts deal with common flaws people often miss in their own reasoning as well as in public discourse.
- Non Sequiturs
- Self-Defeating Statements
- Correlation-Causation Fallacy
- Ad Hominem Fallacy
- Argument from Ignorance
- False Dilemmas
Modal logic is the proper way of reasoning with the notions of possibility, contingency, and necessity.
Having a Productive Conversation
This is a mix of different posts I think are particularly
These posts all have to do with what we mean when we say we “know” something.
(Last Updated on 1/30/2020)