Primary Research Analysis Essay
In the essay written by Kathryn Schulz titled, “Evidence,” she emphasizes the importance of inductive reasoning in everyday life. In her writing she defines inductive reasoning as, “the capacity to reach very big conclusions based on very little data” (369). In other words, Schulz means that inductive reasoning is basically making assumptions with using some evidence. She also believes that all people use inductive reasoning in everyday life. In her writing she states, “Believing things based on paltry evidence is the engine that drives the entire miraculous machinery of human cognition” (364). Here she is basically saying that inductive reasoning is the reason that all humans think the way they do. Another
…show more content…
point that Schulz makes is that inductive reasoning can also be a reason that humans are sometimes wrong. She states, “Believing something on the basis of messy, sparse, limited information really is how we err. But it is also how we think. What makes us right is what makes us wrong” (370). By stating this, she is trying to say that inductive reasoning, or making assumptions from little evidence, is a way of thinking that can sometimes make us right, but can also make us wrong. Schulz also explains to us that there are different ways of thinking that can come about from inductive reasoning. Some of these variations include the confident bulldozer style of thinking, and the self-subversive style of thinking. The confident bulldozer style of thinking refers to those individuals that are so overconfident in themselves that they do not ever take in consideration the opinions of others. The self-subversive style of thinking is the opposite of that. This means that a person would be very open to the opinions and thoughts of others, and would be willing to change their mind if they see sufficient evidence. In her writing, Schulz interprets inductive reasoning as being a way of thinking that is the basis for other kinds of thinking that can also be found in everyday life such as, self-subversive thinking, being a confident bulldozer, and making errors. Schulz explains in her essay that error is a common occurrence when it comes to inductive reasoning. She defines error, “as not believing something that isn’t true, but as believing something based on insufficient evidence” (363). Her definition of error means that people believe things that are probable, but simply not true. However, it also raises questions such as, what counts as sufficient evidence? Schulz uses an example in her writing that helps to further explain her version of error. She tells a story of a man that questions, “How can I be sure that all swans are white if I myself have seen only a tiny fraction of all the swans that have ever existed?” (367). This question helps explain to us what would count as sufficient evidence and how easily an error can occur. In this case, it would seem that only having seen a fraction of all of the swans in the world and all of them being white would be enough evidence for somebody to believe that all of the world’s swans are white because it is probable. However she also shows us how easily an error can occur when she states that a species of black swan has been discovered in Australia. This shows that it can be difficult at times to see what actually counts as sufficient evidence. It is because of this, that errors are so common in everyday life. From my own experiences in life, I find Schulz’s view on error to be true. One instance of error that I have seen in my own life is different people believing articles that they find on Facebook or other places on the internet. My girlfriend is a perfect example for this. For some reason she believes that a lot of the information she finds on Facebook is true. Occasionally she will find an article on Facebook that will say some nonsense like all of the puppies sold at this one pet store will die within 2 years. She read an article that said something like this and believed that it was true for the longest time. It wasn’t until my friend and I told her of several instances of these puppies living much longer lives that she stopped believing the article that she had previously read. This is an example of Schulz’s version of error because she believed something based on insufficient evidence, that insufficient evidence being the biased Facebook article. In Schulz’s writing, she uses the term, ‘the confident bulldozer of unmodified assertions.’ When she uses this term, she is referring to somebody that is hot headed or stubborn. For example, these types of people will believe something so strongly that if somebody were to bring forth evidence that suggests they are wrong, they would simply ignore it or find it irrelevant. One example of a confident bulldozer can be found in Schulz’s writing. She tells about a stubborn Scotsman that firmly believes no Scotsman puts sugar in his porridge. After being told that there is indeed a Scotsman that puts sugar in his porridge, the man replies and tells the other man that the Scotsman who puts sugar in his porridge is not a true Scotsman. This man is a confident bulldozer because he doesn’t even consider the other man’s evidence to be probable, he simply throws it away. I personally believe that there are real confident bulldozers out there.
I have seen this behavior in different people that I have met. One example of a confident bulldozer is my cousin Alex. A few years ago when Alex and my father were painting a car, Alex told my dad that he used to paint cars when he was a teenager and said that he was a good painter. So, my dad let Alex paint the car and it didn’t turn out very well. Once it was done, my dad and his friends were pointing out the imperfections to Alex and telling him that he wasn’t a very good painter after all. Alex insisted that he was still a good painter because all painters leave some imperfections in the paint, and no matter how hard my dad and his friends tried to convince him that good painters don’t actually leave paint like that, he still wouldn’t agree that he had made mistakes. This story shows that Schulz’s evidence of a confident bulldozer is applicable to real life and can be true in some …show more content…
instances. Another variation to inductive reasoning that Schulz explains is self-subversive thinking. Somebody who is a Self-subversive thinker is somebody that sees something from different viewpoints and is willing to change their mind if they were to see sufficient evidence. They are also the ones that will question their own beliefs and change their minds based on sufficient evidence. One example that Schulz writes about is the man that questions if all of the world’s swans are white. This man is a self-subversive thinker because he sees the conclusion that everybody makes and questions it because the evidence is not one hundred percent certain. I believe in this way of thinking because I have experienced it for myself. At times, even I can be what Schulz would call a self-subversive thinker. On many different occasions I have found myself reconsidering something that I had previously believed in. Also, when I am presented with new evidence, I am almost always willing to change my mind. Because of this, I find self-subversive thinking to be relatable to the real world. Of all of Schulz’s points she made in her writing about inductive reasoning, I find the concept of a self-subversive thinker to be the most important in everyday life.
Here in college, it is almost crucial to develop self-subversive thinking skills. Most professors want you to be a self-subversive thinker and question certain concepts to get a better understanding of them. Also, with the wide varieties of students that come from all over the world it is important to be open to their different opinions. Since college is full of deep thinking, different opinions, and different kinds of people, it is important to have the mindset of a self-subversive thinker so that you can get the most out of your college
years.
Now in the case of Schulz, she talks about the famous philosopher Descartes. He brings up the argument that “error does not arise from believing something that isn’t true, but believing in insufficient evidence” (362). Descartes wanted to be an ideal thinker and take in every bit of evidence he possibly could before drawing a conclusion.
Melnyk’s Hierarchy of Evidence is a system often use for assigning levels of evidence in nursing by integrates clinical expertise and patient choices with the best available research. It is represented by a pyramid that enumerates the levels of strength of the evidence from 1 to 7, of which level 1 is the higher level. The higher level on the pyramid, the more likelihood that the research is valid; therefore, answering a clinical or practice question. “The systematic review or meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials are at the top of the evidence pyramid and are typically assigned the highest level of evidence, due to the fact that the study design reduces the probability of bias” (Melnyk, 2011). The weakness of the system is that when
For instance, if a graduate was out in his or her field of –let’s say—biology and he or she are finding results are abnormal from what the originally hypothesis may have been. If one is not able to interpret and find out the reason of the abnormality, he or she would have spent unnecessary time even producing an experiment, for he or she did not use the critical thinking skills that an education can provide. Any major that is offered by a college should include critical thinking skills for the world is always changing and new discoveries are filled when it comes to the universe. Therefore, asking questions and being able to adjust is imperative to a student’s success in school and in the job market for his or her
From a very early age, perhaps the age of six or seven, I realized that I enjoyed disputing things. As I grew older, I attempted to curb this tendency, since I thought it might negatively impact people’s views of me, but I never intended to stamp it out, as it was too integral to my nature.
The multiple choices students have today in college have made the university a party environment, resulting in complacent students. Mark Edmundson raises important questions and makes valid points in this essay that are worth thinking about. If people don’t take a look at our present college system and start thinking outside the box, the college education system will continue on its downward spiral of consumerism. It is fun to graduate high school and go to college to party and to have a comedic professor, but there is so much more to college then having fun. People need to realize that by challenging student, students can then start to recognize their own potential end become better for it. Learning and utilizing the information that is being taught in college is essential. “Everyone is born with their own mind, all that is left to do is break out of the stereotypical college student mold, and use
Colombo also asks in his article “Thinking Critical, Challenging Cultural Myths” “What do instructors mean when they tell you to think critically?” (Colombo, p. 2). In this paragraph Colombo is wanted to let the student know that the college instructors are going to let the student use her own mind and think outside the box. That being “a critical thinker cultivates the ability to imagine and see the different value points of her own- Then strengthens, refines, enlarges, or reshapes her ideas in light of those other perspectives” (Colombo, p. 2). Colombo also states that being “a critical thinker is an active learner, someone with the ability to shape, not merely absorb, knowledge” (Colombo, p. 2).
Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing written by; Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle, Eighth Edition, published April, 2007 by Bedford/St. Martin’s, is a textbook about writing and critical thinking. In the first chapter of Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing, “Thinking Critically, Challenging Cultural Myths”, the Authors begin by setting a relatable scene of what it’s like for a college student. How a new found independence can be overwhelming, especially with regards to critical thinking, showing that what we have learned, needs to be re-evaluated and that an open mind in essential. "What Is Critical Thinking" In this section of the chapter the editors explain what it means to be a critical thinker. They explain that critical thinking is not just studying dates and facts, but rather taking those facts and examining them. The editors then proceed by explaining how having an open mind, and taking others' perspectives into account when formulating our own opinions on what the author is trying to say to us is important. A critical thinker takes all aspects into account and reflects on personal experience as well. The editors also point out that different cultural experiences bring different opinions. They suggest that we need to become active learners, continuously questioning the meaning behind everything, testing not only the theories of others but also our own experiences and analyzing the text rather than going for the obvious. They show that thinking outside the box is the epitome of critical thinking. Basically, we need to step outside our comfort zones and what we have always been taught. The editors also suggest that we need to re-evaluate our per...
Inductive reasoning is a process of applying logic in which conclusions are made from ideas, which are believed to be true most of the time. It is based on predictions and behavior.
Induction is a form of reasoning where humans use past experiences to make future predictions.
Bertrand Russell, one of the most influential philosophers of the modern age, argued extensively in his book, “The Problems of Philosophy”, that the belief in inductive reasoning is only rational on the grounds of its intrinsic evidence; it cannot be justified by an appeal to experience alone (Russell 1998). Inductive reasoning refers to a form of reasoning that constructs or assesses propositions that are generalizations of observations (Russell 1998). Inductive reasoning is thus, in simple terms, probabilistic. The premises of an inductive logical argument provide some degree of support for the conclusion, but that support is in no way definitive or conclusive (Browne, 2004). Yet even if one agrees with Russell and concludes that there are no rational justifications for the principle of induction in and of itself, one can still maintain that there is a pragmatic justification for maintaining a belief in the principle. Simply put, there are still perfectly sound reasons for behaving as if the principle of induction holds true, regardless of whether or not the principle itself is rationally justifiable (Browne, 2004). This type of justification can be used across many of the belief systems that we as human beings hold, even stretching to the playing field of religion. In this paper I will outline not only why it is pragmatically justifiable to believe in the principle of induction, but also why it is equally as justifiable to believe in an infinite God, regardless of whether or not deductive reasoning provides us with definitive support for such conclusions.
The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) has several characteristics, including truth seeking and open mindedness (Laird). The CCTDI says that “Open mindedness incorporates one’s tolerance of different viewpoints and sensitivity to one’s own biases” (Laird, 368). “Items on the CCTDI used to measure open-mindedness include ‘It concerns me that I might have biases of which I’m not aware’” (Laird, 368). In order to address and perhaps minimize biases, exposing students to a diverse educational setting has proven to hep develop critical thinking skills needed to reflect on current prejudices. Indeed, “involvement in diversity courses…may be a curricular mechanism for students to develop the habits of mind of a critical thinker” (Laird,
According to The Foundation for Critical Thinking (2007), "Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native egocentrism (Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2007).
Inductive reasoning is logical reasoning where people have a lot of the information and use that to reach a conclusion. It is viewing the available data and figuring out what will be the results. For instance, from an online article, it demonstrates, “Inductive reasoning is a logical process in which multiple premises, all believed true or found true most of the time, are combined to obtain a specific conclusion” (Rouse, 2013). It shows that there are a lot of ideas to analyze and calculate what the possible outcomes will be. It can also be done by looking at patterns. When looking at patterns, it is important to study it to see what is recurring. This makes it possible to predict what will happen based on the knowledge that has been collected. Inductive reasoning is using information or events that have happened in the past to see what is in store for the future.
My academic decisions can sometimes lead me to have a negative state of mind. The text states that critical thinking requires a willingness and passion to explore, probe, question, and search for answers and solutions. Staying positive and have a positive attitude can assist me in knowing how to approaching, and making decisions. The chapter also taught me that asking questions is a pa...
Firstly, the characteristic of teachers and students in school and at university has great differences. The school teachers dismantle to translate the textbooks word-by-word from limited information-based, and whether the students understand the lessons or not, they can passively copy down the information and refers to their notes later at home and memorizes them. However, the university students are no longer allowed to sit quietly and negatively throughout the class. They are being demanded to discuss academic matters or cooperate with other classmate to perform projects. They are require to find sources, gathering information and put them into order. As Marshall and Rowland (1993, 34) pointed out, ¡¥the ability to think critically is a generic skill that are expected to acquire in the undergraduate education and transfer to daily life, future or current work.¡¦ Therefore, the tutors at university who offer not only textbook instructions but also helps students to think critically and independently by encouragement. Besides, students can choose and adjust their own learning style independently from freely choices of materials provided at university.