Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
critical thinking (group 26) (Critical Thinking skills: (Interpretation:…
critical thinking (group 26)
Critical Thinking skills:
Interpretation: categorisation, decoding significance and clarifying
Analysis: Examination, idenfication and reasoning
Evaluation: Determine the credibility of the source of an argument
Explanations: State results, justify procedures
Self-regulation: Meta-cognitive feedback
Inference: Drawing conclusions based on findings according to logic
The Delphi Research Method: Anonymous assortment of research from a variety of experts, summarised by a central body and redistributed until consensus is reached.
Systems 1 and 2
System 1: Intuitive --> Availability, affect, simulation , association and similarity
Different types of thinking =/ good thinking (ie: Purposive kenetic thinking)
System 2: More deliberate thinking --> Satisficing, risk/loss aversion, anchoring with adjustment, islusion of control, dominance structure and Hindsight bias
Critical thinking (good!!) --> Liberal education
Methods of fixing a belief/acquiring information/coming to a conclusion
Tenacity: Stick to your guns, based on hindsight bias, dismiss new evidence
Authority: Supported by an authority
Priori: Belief as the result of a logical argument and therefore faith in logic
Science: Emprically testing in order to derive information
Doubt leads to a dissatisfaction in the belief leading to the search for credibility
Task 6
Popper
Scientific theories are theories that are falsifiable
Science is based on facts (observations + verification) and pseudscience is based on ideas (dogma + prejudices).
Demarcation
The hypothesis should be specific
Hypothetico-deductive Method
Confirmation Bias
Falsification , Testability, Refutability (interrelated)
Unacceptable Ad Hoc Modifications = decreased scientific value of a theory
Kuhn
pre-science -> normal science -> crisis -> revolution ->paradigm change -> normal science
Lakatos
Science by definition has to fall into a current research program
Good science is part of a progressive research program (predict new things) vs. miserable science falls into a degenerative research program (explains what already has happened)
The distinction between science and pseudo/science depends political and ehtical implications