I will be adding the two students once they respond.
This week’s discussion is a variation on ones we engaged in earlier in the semester. In past weeks, you were asked to find examples of logical fallacies, cognitive biases, or various types of arguments and reasoning. This week, put yourself in the position of a journalist-factchecker and find examples of people NOT using critical thinking in their public statements. More precisely, find examples of statements or arguments using flawed logic, flawed reasoning, ambiguous facts – anything that one performing a critical analysis would spot as a weakness in the speaker’s or writer’s presentation. What are the flaws in the presentation? What techniques or elements could they have used to address the flaws? Are the flaws in the facts, the reasoning, the conclusion, the inference drawn, or something else entirely? Discuss what problems arise because they did not take a critical thinking approach to the problem. Consider who takes advantage of this failure to think critically and how. As usual, political advocacy provides a lot of fodder for this kind of discovery, but other areas – sports, consumerism, business, and everyday life – are full of examples, too.
Be specific in your presentations, but keep your posts narrow so as to generate discussion. You’re putting thoughts out there so others have something to respond to. And don’t forget to respond to others’ comments, especially when they are directed at your own posts. As usual, label threads clearly and specifically. Do not start a new thread on a topic already covered by a thread.