Fall 2001 • ENGLISH 20 • Professor TanakaCRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODELPART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTSIn this first handout, I would like to simply give you the basic outlines of our criticalthinking <CT> model that you will be using for the rest of your assignments. Thisanalysis should be looked upon as a conceptual tool box for use in checking theorganization and development of the argumentative papers you write using our PWmodel. It can also be used to evaluate the organization and development of essayswritten by those not using our model after their essays have been reformatted.It may be difficult for you to keep the two models separate in your minds, sincethey have a number of concepts and terms in common. But you should think of PWas a guide to producing argumentative papers and the CT model as a set of tools forchecking the arguments and examples presented in the paper generated by PW.As you know, PW establishes a certain order for creating and writing or analyzing apaper. To create the arguments for a paper, you begin with your evidence and youbuild your arguments around them. On the other hand, to present your argumentsin essay form or analyze/evaluate the arguments of others, you always begin withorganization and then you move on to consider development.Since it is easier to talk about checking an argumentative essay than it is to talkabout the actual process of writing them, I am going to refer to these rules aschecking rules. They are tools to analyze and evaluate the arguments in any essay,including those you have written.So following the sequence outlined in PW, you would first use our CT rules tocheck the organization of a paper. And then you would go on to check thedevelopment. Remember that if the organization of an essay is weak, then theentire paper is weak. There is no such thing as an argument that has weakorganization and good development. On the other hand, a good organizationalplan may or may not be followed up with good development.Here in CT 1, I will give you a general overview of our critical thinking model.Then in CT2, I will present a set of specific rules to be used for checkingorganization. Finally, in CT 3, I’ll lay out another conceptual tool box for checkingdevelopment and background.2A. ARGUMENTSAn argument is an attempt to demonstrate the truth or rationality of your beliefs orideas to a specific audience. Its purpose is to persuade your audience to eitheraccept or understand your point of view.All arguments are directed towards a specific audience. What you argue and howyou argue are both functions of your audience. It follows that to argue effectivelyyou must know your audience. And knowing your audience means knowing whatbeliefs you have in common and what beliefs you do not have in common. Thisalso includes the concept of what counts as a good argument.Likewise, when evaluating an argument written by someone else, you always haveto determine who it was written for.B. THE UNCERTAINTY OF TRUTHIn a public university environment, we are supposed to share a common model forcritical thinking and argumentation. In other words, we should all use the samerules for giving reasons and explanations; we should all use the same rules fordeciding what counts as a good argument and what does not.To help establish this common model, an emphasis on critical thinking as a subjectarea has been mandated by educators at all levels of instruction in all parts of thecountry and at all grade levels. Consequently, the acquisition of critical thinkingskills is an objective of many GE courses throughout the CSU system as well ashere at CSUS.There are number of assumptions underlying this focus on critical thinking. But oneof the most important is that what people refer to as “the truth” is something thatemerges from open discussion and open debate.The reason for this openness in the search for truth is the assumption that there isno one, single, “true-for-all-time” description of reality. We all live in a world thatis uncertain and contingent, not so much because “reality” itself is changing.Rather, our concepts for understanding and interpreting the world are, for acomplex of reasons, in a state of continual flux.Now contrary to what some may want to believe, no one person, group or ideologyhas any special insight into a perfect and unchanging understanding of reality. Onereason for this is that the world as we know and experience it involves theparticipation of many people who hold different belief systems. Of course, eachgroup may believe it and it alone knows the “Truth,” but in order to communicatewith others, they need to a establish a common ground where those absolutes are,at least temporarily, suspended or put on hold.3So in a university environment, we assume that all “truths” are in a sensedependent upon the strength of the arguments that support them. In order for anidea or belief to be held as “true” or at least “reasonable,” it must meet the criticalthinking criteria shared by members of the university community.This shared model is not actually stated in any one specific place, but if you pickup any university textbook or listen to any university lecture, you will find a verysimilar set of underlying assumptions governing argumentation, problem solvingand analysis.For example, most texts and instructors would assume that before we decidewhether a statement, P, about a particular subject, X, were true or reasonable, wewould be obligated to listen to or consider the primary arguments for and against Pbefore making up our minds. We can’t close out options and possibilities simplybecause they might not be consistent with our personal beliefs and opinions.The point I have just made may seem self-evident. But in everyday life, manypeople seem to be “naturally inclined” to accept the truth of what they alreadybelieve and categorically ignore all other interpretations.One of the primary arguments as to why a university education is valuable is thatthe discipline of the university environment forces each of us to take account ofwhat we believe and why. Hence, here at CSUS, we live and work in a worldwhere reasons and explanations are not only expected but demanded of everyone,students and teachers alike.C. GE CRITICAL THINKING AND WRITING REQUIREMENTSIf you have read your course syllabus, you will know that I have already gone overthe rational for E20 as a sophomore level course that combines what you learned inyour GE Area 3A
View Full Document
Unlocking...