Does the conclusion follow? Are the premises true?

Valid All True Some False 1. 2. 3. 4. Sound Implausible

Strong Cogent Implausible

Weak Implausible Implausible

Was the discussion fair and balanced or did it market one position? Did the discussion help identify one position that is more reasonable? Was the discussion intellectually accessible to anyone? Would the discussion change anyone's mind?

Assignment: APA 6th https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

Critical thinking education

Epistemology = study of knowledge difference between knowledge and opinion knowledge: what is knowledge? knowing that (factual knowledge) propositional knowledge performative knowledge skills knowledge by acquaintance: I know Barack Obama, familiarity with people places

Tripartite analysis find simple components

knowledge is a psychological thing belief true justification

<Descartes> justification inferential internal geometric method: math was best way to acquire knowledge; all math reduces to logic paradox of justification; infinite regress foundationalism = theory of justification :: can get knowledge by inferring a belief from basic beliefs basic beliefs indubitable = undoubtable synthetic vs analytic analytic claims say nothing about the world indubitable- method of doubt indubitable yes no no yes synthetic no yes yes yes mathematics existence of god external world beliefs about our mind/ clear and distinct

dream skepticism I think therefore I am - axiom :: foundation of all knowledge by the very act of doubting I know my mind exists

Internalism inferential & in our mind Descartes Rationalism mind:: thinking substance innate ideas:: ideas that were born with

proves existence of God ideological argument more perfect creates less perfect Locke-Hume Empiricism sense data basic perceptual beliefs foundation of human knowledge raw sensory data born tabula rasa a blank slate external world

Externalism causal Reliabilism perceptual knowledge we can trust what we see because our senses are working properly Testimonial Knowledge what other people say so any belief weve gotten from other people

intro w. thesis evaluating and describing Baurmanns arguments main conclusion summarize his argument belief evaluation conclusion goal of Baurmanns paper: explains the rationale of fundamentalists and show that they are rational in their thinking; fundamentalist beliefs are dangerous, cause of unremitting hostilities success in our environment = success in social groups world view based on social environment belief is important Why do they believe it, not is it true or false Explanations for everything Empirical conditions = observable Open to the idea that people are insane Knowledge is like an economy, people buy ideas in case its valuable Quality of beliefs dependent on individual insight - descartes Quality of beliefs dependent on social groups acquisition of knowledge Scientifical beliefs dependent on social groups just as fundamentalist beliefs

Rational justification has subjective meaning Rational fundamentalism for the individual, subjective and contextual, not objective and universal How do we trust professionals?

Esoteric Sphere of expertise which is opaque for laypersons and which they therefore cannot evaluate Exoteric Statements which are comprehensible for laypersons and whose truth value and coherence with each other they can judge can prove esoteric knowledge by application of exoteric knowledge; technology we use trust heuristics to efficiently gather informations cognitive misers use as little energy possible to gain knowledge heuristics rule of thumb