Arguments arise when there is a conflict in opinion on the part of any one party or for that matter an individual. This is a natural phenomenon which simply cannot be dismissed of in any capacity whatsoever. Thus arguments form the basis of a number of dictums and maxims day in day out by people all around the globe. Even leaders and rulers are not allowed the liberty to have their writings and sayings go free and they are scrutinized heavily by people hailing from different background, literary settings and emotional quarters attached with the notion left, right and center.
Thus argumentative and critical thinking forms a part of what has been discussed here till now as it is an essential element of comprehension and hence a way of putting forward one’s point so that it is made clear to one and all, within a prescribed period of time and that too within certain limits either put down by the party that allows for the argument to take place or the person (or the party) that takes its time out to raise the argument in the first place.
Biasness and fallacies do arise from time to time in critical thinking regimes and this indeed is a sure sign of debate and related philosophy. People need to interact with each other, argue on a few pointers and make their voice heard so that there is consensus within the decisions that are reached upon in the end. (Halpern, 1996) Good argumentative thinking is in essence formed up with the amalgamation of a number of different elements including proper know how of facts and details, usage of evidence in the best manner possible, usage of appropriate language and that too in apposite and related context and more than everything else, being logical and rational at all times during doing the same.
Perceptions are also built all this while and this leads to a positive or negative change within the whole contexts. Arguments need to be raised that could go along well with the topic at hand and must support or deter what has been said or thought out. They should not act as something that just reinforces what has been mentioned or said about in the past as the basic essence of an argument then gets jaded away.
A lot of care and emphasis has to be given to the fact that thinking differences are rational enough to be made in the first place. It is better to avoid them rather than making and getting into trouble (for the individual or the party that makes the opposing claims). Evidence needs to be chalked out on the basis of its importance that whether or not it holds any ground for the people who will be presented the thinking philosophy or if they choose to just shrug off the claims made in the opposition of the already stated proposition.
As mentioned before, perceptions are created and shed away with the passage of time but the critical thinking measures linger on for a long period of time. Arguments must be solid enough, in terms of evidence and logic to draw the target’s attention and they need to rely on the said person’s level of intellect and understanding.
It should not force him to draw results himself as to whether the argument meant one thing or the other. They should be concise, lucid and clear enough for one to understand and gain insight from. (Meehan, 1988) Another element of critical thinking that forms one of the intrinsic ones is the usage of different elements in chalking up the decision making processes. Decision making in entirety is not an easy thing to do and it requires a great deal of expertise, knowledge and the ability to act right and that too in the heat of the moment.
Decision making requires tact, intellect and a sense of understanding related with the significant elements which play a huge role in the eventual decision that has been made as well as the stakeholders of this very decision. Words should be chosen that have a deep incisive meaning and not the ones that spark off controversies. From my personal experience, critical thinking regimes have proper rationales and methodologies within them which go hand in hand with what is stated there within the whole setting.
When it comes to my writing, I believe that the introductions need to be short, crisp and must give an insight as to what the reader might expect to read during the course of the whole argument essay or writing while in the conclusion, a recap or summary is basically provided that sums up what has been said above and what to expect next. At certain times, there can be a call for action, which asks the reader to carry out certain actions to his liking if the person wants to pursue with the meaning of the argument or at other times to completely shun what has been said there and negate with the meaning in totality.
I am of the view that logical rationales must be evidenced with the help of quotes and solid proofs that cannot be taken for granted and must be solid enough for the claims to be proven right in any court of law. Reasoning and logical conclusions in an argumentative essay ought to be correct, true to their meaning and proper by any contextual definition of the word and sentence as well as stated with exact pronunciations, dates, quotes, persons and the setting under which it was actually said.
From a personal standpoint, there needs to be a logical and smooth flow to what has been written in a good argumentative essay or writing. It should not be haphazard as it asks for the reader’s interest to fade away easily and not demand his attention at the level which the writer(s) want. The opening or introduction needs to be a bit easy but there must be an element of drama that asks for his or her attention so that he or she reads the complete argument that has been raised by the writer in negating the actual topic or at times proving a sarcastic meaning in harmony with the same.
The conclusion must put forward what has been said and what to expect next as well as to recommend the future course of action. This is what I believe about the whole subject of writing when it comes to doing so in a critical sense.
In any critical thinking exercise, the target needs to be assured that whatever is being said is for their understanding and to gain insight from the same is for their own good. They must not be insulted under any circumstance whatsoever and hence they should be given preference when a thinking ideology is discussed so that they feel in line with what is being said with reference to the context. (Muir, 1996) Insults thus need to be taken away from the agenda of the person who is raising the ideology and personal talks of even lowest of nature be cast off so that people feel that whatever is said is for their own understanding and more than that for their betterment and good.
Last but not the least, decision making is indeed a very quintessential element as it requires fallacies, bias, perceptions, attitudes and other elements of the thinking process to co-exist. Decision making thus looks to solve problems of varied nature since all these issues comes directly under the hold of the critical thinking measures.
All said and done, such steps insure that when a decision is reached upon, it has input from all the relevant quarters and there is a lesser amount of bias and error within the final consensus. References Meehan, Eugene J. (1988). The Thinking Game: A Guide to Effective Study. Chatham House Publishers Halpern, Diane F. (1996). Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Muir, Clive. (1996). Using Consulting Projects to Teach Critical-Thinking Skills in Business Communication. Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 59 Word Count: 1,308