长文慎入。
charpter 8 The basic problem: “Mine is better”
提到了一个自相矛盾的点：
People profess enthusiasm for personal growth and development and spend billions of dollars on self-help books, taps and seminars, yet they act as if their minds have no need of improvement.
为什么会这样？
每个人或多或少都会有“mine is better”的想法。
It is natural enough to like our own possessions better than other people’s.
many people realize that we all see ourselves in a special way, different from everything that is not ourselves, and that whatever we associate with ourselves becomes part of us in our minds.
some people think that “mine is better” is not an attitude that everyone has about his or her things, but a special higher truth about their particular situation. 心理学家将这一类人分为两种：个人中心主义者egocentric，种族中心主义者ethnocentric people。
Egocentric People【以自我为中心，个人主义者】
Egocentric means：centered or focuses on oneself and interested only in one’s own interests, needs and views.
太专注于自我，以致于对于这类人来说，成为一个合格的critical thinker是一件很困难的事情。
The perspective of egothink is very limited, egocentric people have difficulty seeing issues from a variety of viewpoints.
Ethnocentric People【种族中心主义者】
Ethnocentric means excessively centered or focused on one’s group.
What distinguishes ethnocentric individuals from those who feel a normal sense of identification with their group is that ethnocentric people believe that their group is not merely different from other groups but foundamentally and completely superior to them and that the motivations and intentions of other groups are suspect.
种族主义者大抵都带有种族歧视的毛病。
[种族中心主义者的这种偏见，会有一个额外的作用。对于社会中存在的各种真实或者想象的问题，他们找到了一个背锅的对象。]
It fills their need for an out-group to blame for real and imagined problems in society.
And they get a large target at which they can point their anger and fear and inadequacy and frustration.
Controlling “Mine is better” Thinking
上面提到的两种类型是“mine is better”的极端形式，但是每个人都会或多或少带着两者的影子，特别是前者egocentric。
“Mine is better” thinking is the most basic problem for critical thinkers because, left unchecked, it can distort perception and corrupt judgement. The more mired we are in subjectivity, the less effective will be our critical thinking.
这里有一点需要弄清楚，并不是一味的否认“mine is better”，而是说“mine is better”的这种思维模式会让人对所有其他的想法弃之不理，想当然的以为自己的就是最好的。但也有可能，TA的这个想法确实是最好的。
回到主题中，作者给到了两种controller的方法：
- keep in mind that, like other people, we too are prone to it and that its influence will be strongest when the subject is one we really care about.
- be alert for signals of its presence, those signals can be found both in feelings and thoughts:
- in feelings: very pleasant， favorable sensations; the desire to embrace a statement or argument immediately, without appraising it further. or very unpleasant, negative sensations, the desire to attack and denounce a statement or argument without delay.
- in thoughts: ideas such as “I’m glad that experts are taking such a position - I’v thought it all along and no use of wasting time analyzing this evidence – it must be conclusive”, or ideas such as “this view is outrageous because it challenges what i have always thought – I refuse to consider it”.
charpter 9 errors of perspective
开篇给了一个很好的类比：
当你戴着一副严重变形的眼镜去观察这个世界时，你将自己的发现与身边的人分享，你会惊讶你们看到的世界竟如此不同，困惑于他们没有能力像你那样可以看到如此清晰的世界，这时，你可能会采取如下的行为：停止与周围人的交流，坚信自己的所见，相信你们之间的分歧是他们的问题。然后，在某些偶然的机缘下，你突然发现问题不在他们，而是你佩戴的眼镜，你去找最近的配镜师，换上新的眼镜，发现此时你看到的世界才更清晰。
错误的观点就好像严重扭曲的镜头，只是他们不是架在我们的鼻梁上，而是居住在我们的思想中。
Errors of perspective are like seriously distorted lenses, except instead of being perched on our noses, they inhabit our minds.
They shape the attitudes and habits you bring to the evaluation of issues and create expectations that bias your thinking. Moreover, you may not even be aware of their existence unless you evaluate your patterns of thought.
those errors that create obstacles to critical thinking before we address any issue，具体都有哪些呢？这一章主要提到了7个：
- poverty of aspect
- unwarranted assumptions
- the either/or outlook
- mindless conformity
- absolutisim
- relativism
- bias for or against change
下面一一详细说明了每一项错误的定义，弊端及改进方法。
Poverty of aspect
Karl Duncker, coined the term poverty of aspect to refer to the limitation that comes from taking a narrow rather than a broad view on problems and issues.
这里作者提到上个世纪中，学术在历史进程中的倍增和每个学术领域的知识爆炸，是引起poverty of aspect的不可忽视的原因。
the multiplication of the academic disciplines over the course of history and the explosion of knowledge that has taken place in every discipline, especially during the previous century.
因为领域划分越来越细，专才越来越多，全才越来越少。
这种专注有利有弊：
利：This specialization deepened understanding and multiplied scholarly insights.
弊：It cut off many scholars from the insights of disciplines other than their own and aggravated the condition called poverty of aspect . This poverty creates significant problems in the analysis of complex issues.
策略：
recoginze the limitations of your experience and discipline your mind to broaden your outlook beyond the familiar, to examine all relevant points of view, and to understand before judging.
「可以这样理解，学术或者某个领域的广度和深度，深度视角虽然让人对某个专属领域理解更深，但是会带来poverty of aspect, 或者说tunnel vision，看不到问题的全貌。」
Unwarranted assumptions
这部分篇幅很长，但是内容很赞，提到的很多例子也很有实用。「感觉自己可以对号入座了」
assumption是什么？
Assumptions are ideas that are merely taken for granted rather than produced by conscious thought.
making assumptions是很自然的事情，很多假定不仅无害还有益，比如你早上起来去学校，你假定手表是正常的，校车是正常发出的，教授会按时出现在教室，过马路的时候，你假定汽车是遵守交通规则的，绿灯的时候，你便可以过马路。这些日常生活中的假定对于我们的正常生活是很有帮助的，类似规则或者大家都遵守的潜在契约。
那么什么时候假定是毫无依据的呢？
whenever you take too much for granted – that is, more than is justified by your experience or the particular circumstance.
那么最常见的unwanted assumptions有哪些？
- people’s senses are always trustworthy.[beliefs and desires can distort perception, causing people to see and hear selectively or inaccurately]
- If an idea is widely reported, it must be true.
- having reasons proves that we have reasoned logically.
- familiar ideas are more valid than unfamiliar ones.
- If one event follows another in time, it must have been caused by the other.
- Every event or phenomenon has a single cause.
- the majority view is the correct view.
- the way things are is the only way they should be.
- change is always for the better.
- Appearances are trustworthy.[外在是会误导人的]
- If an idea is in our mind it is our own idea and deserves to be defended.[ideas in our minds, in a large number, are uncritically absorbed from other people. 大部分的我们不过是他人思想的载体，传声器]
- The stronger our conviction about an idea, the more valid the idea.
- if we find an error in someone’s argument, we have disproved the argument.[an argument can contain minor flaws yet be sound]
策略：
Remember that assumptions are usually implied rather than expressed directly, much like the hidden premises in arguments. to identify them, develop the habit of reading(and listening) between the lines for ideas that are unexpressed but nevertheless clearly implied. once you have identified an assumption, evaluate it and decide whether it is warranted.
这里与第八章的argument呼应了，be alert to hidden premises.
The either/or outlook
either/or outlook 是什么？
the either/or outlook is the expectation that the only reasonable view of any issue is either total affirmation or total rejection.
[认为看待一个问题唯一合理的观点要么是完全肯定，要么是完全否定。]
what’s the problem with it?
it rejects the very real possibility that the most reasonable view may be both/and – in other words, a less extreme view.
策略：
whenever you are examining an issue and find yourself considering only two alternatives, ask yourself whether additional alternatives exist and, if they do, give them a fair hearing.
Mindless conformity
盲目遵守或从众。
conformity is behaving as others do.[别人做什么，你便做什么。]
One kind of conformity like looking both ways before crossing the street, make life easier and safer. The imitation of good role models is also a positive conformity. this kind of conformity helps us develop our capacities and become better individuals.
[有些从众是有益的，比如遵守交通规则，过马路前要看看两边，向好的榜样学习等]
但是，mindless conformity, 盲目的遵守，是毫无依据，甚至有时候是不合理的。
it consists of following others’ example because we are too lazy or fearful to think for ourselves.
广告主们最鼓励这种盲从了。
策略：
The secret to avoiding mindless conformity is to resist whatever pleading, teasing, and prodding others exert to make you think and speak and act as they do. Instead of succumbing, ask yourself what is reasonable and right and follow that path, regardless of whether that places you in the majority or the minority.
absolutisim
定义：
Absolutism is the belief that there must be rules but no exceptions.
弊端：
Absolutists tend to be impatient in their thinking and therefore susceptible to oversimplification and hasty conclusions. and once a rule is established, absolutists refuse to allow exceptions.
策略：
when you begin to examine any issue, even one that you have thought about before, commit yourself to accepting the truth as you find it rather than demanding that it be neat and simple.
relativism
定义：
relativism is the polar opposite of absolutism. the relativist believes that the existence of exceptions proves there can be no rules.
弊端：
The belief that truth is created rather than discovered.
Relativism also holds that morality is subjective rather than objective – in other words, that moral rules are binding only on those who accept them.
策略：
remind yourself from time to time that some ideas, and some standards of conduct, are better than others and that the challenge of critical thinking is to discover the best ones.
bias for or against change
the only reasonable attitude toward for or against change is “it depends on what the change is”.
Now bias for change is more common than it used to be ,no doubt because we live in an age of unprecedented change, especially in technology, because many changes are beneficial, we may make the mistake of believing that all are.
but bias against change is still more prevalent than bias for change.【相比拥抱变化，拒绝变化更为普遍】
Why?
the force of familiarity
Most of us prefer ideas that we know and feel comfort with.
our “mine is better” perspective
New ideas challenges our sense of security, so we tend to resist them.
这里举了好几个例子说明为什么很多人都遵守着传统的习惯，甚至都不曾质疑过，比较常见的一个例子是这样的，女孩的妈妈告诉她，不要把帽子放在桌上或者把外套放在床上，她便遵守了很多年，后来她长大了，成为了母亲，便教育她的孩子也要如此，小女儿便问为什么要怎样，这时她才意识到她从来没有好奇过，更没有问过原因，随后她问已经八十有余的老母亲，才知道原来在她母亲小的时候，一些邻居的小孩感染了虱子，所以她的妈妈才要求她不要把帽子放在桌上或者把外套放在床上。【这个例子有很多延伸的版本，我记得有一个切火腿的例子，基本是同一个套路】
策略：
monitor your reaction to new ideas.
don’t be surprised if you strongly favor or oppose an idea the first time you encounter it. However, refuse to endorse your first impression uncritically. Instead, suspend judgment until you have examined the idea carefully. If the idea proved insightful and well substantiated, accept it regardless of its oldness or newness, if it is flawed, reject it.
chapter 10 errors of procedure
chapter 9, examined errors of perspective, flawed outlooks that create significant obstacles to critical thinking even before we address any issue.
this chapter, examine the kinds of errors that occur in the process of addressing specific issues.
【个人感觉chapter 9中列出那些常犯的错误，基本发现在investigation之前。而这一章则举出那些在investigation之后，人们容易犯的错误】
以下，详细列出6种在下定论过程中易犯的错误。
Biased consideration of evidence
【对于evidence，做偏向性的处理。】
两种形式：
- seeking only evidence that confirms your bias[第一阶段investigation]
- when evidence is presented to you that challenges your bias and you choose an interpretation that favors your bias, even when other interpretations are more reasonable.[第二阶段interpretation]
弊端：
这里举了一个例子说明为什么偏向性的处理论据，会影响我们的judgement。例子是调查一个社会现象：为什么非裔美国人受到犯罪，高失业率，受教育程度低的困扰？调查者在调查中带有坚定的信念，认为贫穷和种族歧视是引发问题的原因。随后作者列出了诸多不一样的观点，包括贫穷与犯罪并没有直接的关系，黑人社区中对于教育以及心智发展的忽视等， 认为一个完全忽视这些异见的调查分析是不公正，且不负责任的。
The worst aspect of bias is that if often occurs innocently, without one’s awareness. And not just among students, even professional scholars can commit this error.
策略：
begin your investigation by seeking out individuals whose views oppose your bias and then go on to those that support it. Also, choose the most reasonable interpreatation, regardless of whether it flatters your bias.
[这个适用于所有的errors吧？]
double standard
【双向标准，对两种ideas采取不同的判定标准。】
double standard consists of using one standard of judgement for our ideas and ideas compatible with our own and an entirely different – much more demanding – standard for ideas that disagree with ours.
【宽以待人，严于利己，真的是太对了】
这个弊端太明显了。
策略：
decide in advance what judgement criteria you will use and apply those criteria consistently, even if the data in question do not support your view.
hasty conclusion
Hasty conclusion is a premature judgment — that is, a judgment made without sufficient evidence.
Many people are in the habit of accepting the first judgment that comes to mind, never bothering to inquire
Whether a different judgment might be as reasonable or perhaps even more so.【思考第一反应的合理性】
【草率定论】
这里回到了第一章提到的那个例子，认为智力是天生的，不可改变的，随后基于这个观点，做出了一系列不合理的举措。
策略：
identify all possible conclusions before you select any one. Then decide whether you have sufficient evidence to support any of those conclusions and, if so, which conclusion that is.
Remember that there is no shame in postponing judgment until you obtain additional evidence.
overgeneralization and stereotyping
【翻译下：以偏概全及坚持以偏概全不动摇，哈哈】
generalizing is the mental activity by which we draw broad conclusions from particular experiences.
【从特定的经验中提取出一般性的结论】
generalizing is not only natural but indispensable to learning. 【我们不可能看到一个事物的所有实例，比如并不需要看到这世上所有的狗才能了解狗，在有限的时空中，认识可见的实例即可，当样本量开始增大时，随时准备好修正原始的认知。】
generalizing挺好，但是over了就不好了。
It is easy to overgeneralize – that is, to ascribe to all the members of a group what fits only some members.
好比你认识一个邋遢的韩国人，然后就断定所有的韩国人都邋遢，这显然是不对的。
a stereotype is an overgeneralization that is especially resistant to change.【坚持以偏概全不动摇】
the most common types of stereotypes are ethnic and religious. 【最常见的模式化观念是种族和宗教】
弊端：
both overgeneralizations and stereotypes hinder critical thinking because they prevent us from seeing the differences among people within groups.
策略：
resist the urge to force individual people, places, or things into rigid categories. In forming generalizations, keep in mind that the more limited your experience, the more modest you should make your assertion.
oversimplification
simplification is not only useful but essential, particularly at a time like the present, when knowledge is expanding so rapidly.【大道至简】
oversimplification, on the other hand, goes beyond making complex ideas easier to grasp; it twists and distorts the ideas. Instead of informing people, oversimplification misleads them.【过于简单以至于都会误导他人】
Oversimplification often occurs in matters about which people have strong feelings.
策略：
Be alert for oversimplification in what you read and hear, and avoid it in your own thinking and expression.
post hoc fallacy
这个出自拉丁术语的缩写，意思是” after this, therefore beacuse of this.”,直白点就是说，B发生在A之后，那么A就是B发生的原因。这个在chapter 3的understand cause and effect中提到过。事情发生的先后跟因果可能没有任何关系。
The error in this thinking is the failure to realize that mere order and closeness in time does not prove a cause-and-effect relationship.
这种想法是大多数迷信的基础，认为事情的发生都有关联，比如镜子破了，今天有霉运了。
you should be careful to avoid the post hoc error ——withhold judgment until you have evaluated all possible explanations, including coincidence.
chapter 11 errors of expression
这里需要明白的一点是，在表达中出现的errors也是thinking errors的一种，因为他们源于你的思想。
they originate in the mind, more or less consciously.
具体有哪些？
- contradiction【自相矛盾】
- arguing in a circle
- meaningless statement
- mistaken authority
- false analogy
- irrational appeal【不合理的诉求】
来看看每种error的定义，弊端以及对应策略。
contradiction
The principle of contradiction is one of the fundamental principles of logic.
no statement can be both true and false at the same time in the same way.
the best way to see its correctness is to try to construct a statement that disproves it.
举了三个例子，这里提一下第一个：
argument：O. J. Simpson 谋杀了Nicole Brown Simpson
这里，O. J. Simpson要么谋杀了Nicole Brown Simpson ，要么就没有谋杀，二选一，但是如果O. J. Simpson雇佣别人去谋杀了Nicole Brown Simpson呢？这样的话，O. J. Simpson到底是不是谋杀了Nicole Brown Simpson？ 这时候，你就不可以说，他既谋杀了Nicole Brown Simpson又没有谋杀Nicole Brown Simpson。他不是真正的实施者，算是没有谋杀？但是他是推动者，要为Nicole Brown Simpson的死负责，算是谋杀？更合理的表达可以是：he would have murdered her in the sense of being responsible for the act but not in the sense of having carried it out.
在你的表达中，警惕出现自相矛盾。
如何避免？
monitor what you say and write.
The moment you detect any inconsistency, examine it carefully. Decide whether it is explainable or whether it constitutes a contradiction. If it proves to be a contradiction, reexamine the issue and take a view that is both consistent and reasonable.
arguing in a circle
用不同的方式去重复同一个论点，而不是给出对应的论据。
A person arguing in a circle attempts to prove a statement by repeating it in a different form.
如何避免？
To detect circularity in your writing or speaking, it is not enough to read and nod in agreement with yourself. You must check to be sure the evidence you offer in support of your view is not merely a restatement of the view in different words.
meaningless statement
meaningless statement更像是毫无意义的废话，严肃的学术论文中，自然应该避免，但是一般的文学作品中，meaningless statement还是很多的。
in the course of presenting ideas, people often find it useful or necessary to present the reasons that underlie their thoughts and actions. A meaningless explanation is one in which the reasons make no sense.
如何避免？
to detect meaningless statements in your writing, look at what you have said as critically as you look at what other people say. Ask, Am I really making sense?
mistaken authority
own authority to someone who does not possess it.
比如问一个扮演医生的演员，这个角色让他学到了什么是可以的，但是问他那一类需要专业性知识才能解答的问题，比如医患关系，就不合理的。
如何避免？
to avoid the error of mistaken authority, check to be sure that all the sources you cite as authorities possess expertise in the particular subject you are writing about.
false analogy
错误的类比。
an analogy is an attempt to explain something relatively unfamiliar by referring to something different but more familiar, saying in effect, “this is like that.”
好的类比，可以让人瞬间解惑，而不恰当的类比会误导他人。
An analogy is acceptable as long as the similarities claimed are real. 【不过，好的类比需要对两种事物都有很好的理解，正确地get到两者的相似处，还挺难的，可遇不可求】
比如典型的一个错误类比：Animals, which move, have limbs and muscles, the earth has no limbs and muscles, hence it doesn’t move.
如何避免？
Always test your analogies to be sure that the similarities they claim are real and reasonable and that no important dissimilariteies exist.
irrational appeal
不合理的诉求。
An irrational appeal encourages people to accept ideas for some reason rather than reasonableness.
Such an appeal says, in effect, “there’s no need to think critically about this idea or compare it with alternative ideas – just accept it.”
不合理的诉求中最常见的类型，有如下这六种：
irrational appeal to emotion
irrational appeal to emotion uses feelings as a substitute for thought。
用feelings来代替思考。比如一个律师为他的客户辩护，描述他的种种优良品质，对父母的爱，对动物的爱，以引起陪审团的同情，忘记那些指控他的证据，那他犯了什么罪？他谋害了他的父母，竟然还以他现在是个孤儿为由来请求法庭怜悯。【我擦嘞。】
更合理的方式：
A rational appeal to emotion not only stimulates feelings but also demonstrates their appropriateness to the ideas being presented.
irrational appeal to tradition
an irrational appeal to tradition urges maintaining the tradition merely because we’ve always done so. [因为传统一直如此，所以我们也应该这样。如果真的是这样，人类大概是不会进步了，因为要保持传统啊，哪一次革命性的进步不是对传统的革新呢？]
更合理的方式：
An appeal to trandition must not only tell people how old and revered the tradition is but also how that it still deserves our endorsement.
合理的诉求会告诉你为什么这样的传统依然值得我们认可。
irrational appeal to moderation
An irrational appeal to moderation is offered on the erroneous presumption that moderation is always preferable.
基于错误的假设，认为适度总是可取的。【过于看重适度了。】
书中举了奴隶制度为例，有些人提出可以适度的废止奴隶制，也就是允许一部分人有权决定是否拥有奴隶。他们忘了，奴隶也是同样的人，他们有权利决定是不是愿意被奴隶主所拥有。
适度不是通用的。
更合理的方式：
includes an explanation of why the more moderate idea or action is preferable to less moderate alternatives.
irrational appeal to authority
此处authority 可以是人，书，或者文档，机构。
An irrational appeal to authority says, “Here is what one or more authorities say — accept it unquestonly”。对于权威所说的，没有任何质疑，全盘接受，基于part1的洗脑，这种诉求明显不能接受。
更合理的方式：
Says “Here is what one or more authorities say,” and proceeds to show why that view should be accepted.
irrational appeal to common belief
这种诉求犯了unwarranted assumption，因为大多数人都相信，所以相信吧。
An irrational appeal to common belief says, “Believe this because most people believe it”.
更合理的方式：
says “Moset people believe this”, and goes on to show the reasonableness of the belief.
irrational appeal to tolerance
An irrational appeal to tolerance says, “Because tolerance is good in general, it is the right response to every situation, including this one.”
我觉得这里连前提都是有问题的，tolerance并不是回应所有情况的合理反应。
更合理的方式：
explans why tolerance is appropriate in the particular situation in question.
总而言之，判断一个诉求合理与否，看它是否给到了相应的解释。
the best way to distinguish between rational and irrational appeals is to ask whether the appeal is accompanied by an explanation of why you should accept it.
chapter 12 errors of reaction
so far, 7 errors of perspective, 6 errors of procedure, 6 errors of expression .
何时发生？
errors of reaction occur after we have expressed our ideas and others have criticizes or changenged them.
为什么会发生？
whatever does not flatter us or our point of view reflects our urge to save face and preserve our self-image.
each of us has a self-image, generally a favorable one.
some people manage to resist the tempation to save face, but most of us fall victim to it from time to time.
For still others, it is neither the particular aspect of the image nor the role involved that triggers the face-saving reaction. it is the people who are observing.
总的来说，主要是face-saving.
有哪些类型？
- automatic rejection
- changing the subject
- shifting the burden of proof
- Straw man [稻草人]
- attacking the critic
来逐个了解下。
automatic rejection
可以粗暴地类比成：非我族类，我不听，我不听，我不听。
开启自动反对模式。
automatic rejection is to reject criticism without giving it a fair hearing.
合理的做法应该是：evaluate the challenges and make an honest determination of its worth.
这里作者举了一个他朋友和他同事的例子，说明automatic rejection的诱惑不易抗拒。
如何避免？
A good way to lessen that temptation is to put some emotional distance between your ideas and your ego. Think of them as possessions that you can keep or discard rather than as extensions of yourself. This will make your less defensive about them.
changing the subject
转移话题。
Changing the subject consists of abruptly turning a discussion in a different direction.
转移话题并不总是会犯错。
changing the subject is an error only when the original issue is appropriate and the shift is used deceptively.
【我觉得如果是为了避免自己陷入窘困或者被质疑，感觉到自己的观点被挑战，故意避而不谈，转移话题，这种才算是errors】
如何避免？
Intentionally changing the subject frustrates the purpose of discussion. To avoid this error, face difficult questions head-on.
if you know the answer, state it. if the issue is too complex to permit a certain answer, state what you believe to be probable and explain your reasoning. if you lack sufficient knowledge to speak of probabilities, say so. No reasonable person will think less of you for candidly admitting ignorance.
shifting the burden of proof
The errors of shifting the burden of proof consists of demanding that others disprove our assertions.
当别人要求你提供论据时，你的反应是，你能给出反对我论点的论据？如果不能，就接受。这就是转移论据的责任。
如何避免？
you wll be less likely to shift the burden of proof if you learn to expect your ideas to be questioned and criticized and prepare to support them before you express them.
straw man
稻草人原意是指用稻草作出模型，穿着人类的衣服，放在田间吓走小鸟的那种。这里的straw man具体指：
put false words in someone else’s mouth and then expose their falsity, conveniently forgetting that the other person never said them.
【有些强加给他人错误的观点，然后指出他人的错误的味道，这戏有点多啊。】
如何避免？
be scrupulously accurate in quoting or paraphrasing other people’s words.
attacking the critic
这个其实老祖宗就说过，对事不对人。
别人一反对你的观点，你就开始攻击别人，太幼稚了。
Attracking the critic is the attempt to discredit an idea or argument by disparaging the person who expressed it.
如何避免？
understand that ideas and people are not synonymous. it is unreasonable to substitute speculations or judgments about people themselves for judgments of their ideas.
Chapter 13 The errors in combination
这一章是对前面几章所列出的errors的梳理，前面都是单独去介绍每一个error，但是现实中，往往是多个error同时出现。这一章先整理了前面列出来的那些坑，随后举了3个实例来学以致用，最后对比了几个容易混淆的概念。
Part 2 中提到的所有error及对应的处理方法：
The most fundamental critical thinking error is “Mine is better” thinking. in which we assume that our ideas must be superior to other people’s simple because they are our ideas. In reality, of course, our ideas are as likely to be mistaken as anyone else’s. To overcome “mine is better” thinking, we must be as critical of our own ideas as we are of other people’s.
| The error | how to recognize it and deal with it |
|---|---|
| Poverty of aspect | limiting one’s perspective on issues; having tunnel vision. poverty of aspect sometimes is attributable to intellectual sloth; other times it is a by-product of specialized education and training. to avoid poverty of aspect when evaluation issue, look beyond the familiar, examine all relevant points of view, and understand before judging. |
| Unwarranted assumptions | assumptions are ideas that are taken for granted rather than consciously reasoned out. When what is taken for granted is unjustified by one’s experience or by the situation, the assumption is unwarranted. Because assumptions seldom are expressed directly, the only way to identify them is to “read between the lines” for what is unstated but clearly implied. |
| Either/or outlook | The expectation that the only reasonable view of any issue will be total affirmation or total rejection. This error rules out the possibility that the most reasonable view might lie between the extremes. To avoid this error, consider all possible alternatives |
| Mindless conformity | Adopting others’ views unthinkingly because we are too lazy or fearful to form our own. To overcome this error, develop the habit of resisting the internal and external pressures and make up your own mind. |
| Absolutism | the belief that rules do not admit of exceptions. This belief causes us to demand that the truth be neat and simple, When in reality it is often messy and complex. To avoid this error, accept the truth as you find it rather than requiring that it fit your preconceptions. |
| Relativism | The belief that no view is better than any other, that any idea you choose to embrace is automatically correct. To avoid relativism, remind yourself that some ideas and some standards of conduct, are better than others and that the challenge of critical thinking is to discover the best ones. |
| Bias for or against change | Bias for change assumes that change is always for the best; bias against change assumes that change is always for the worst. To avoid both errors, give any proposal for change a fair hearing and decide, apart from your predisposition, whether the change is actually positive or negative. |
| biased consideration of evidence | One form of this error is seeking evidence that confirms your bias and ignoring evidence that challenges it. Another is interpreting evidence in a way that favors your bias. To avoid this error, begin your investigation by seeking out individuals whose views oppose your bias, then go on to those whose views support it. Also, choose the most reasonable interpretation of the evidence. |
| Double standard | Using one set of criteria for judging arguments we agree with and another standard for judging arguments we disagree with. To avoid this error, decide in advance what judgment criteria you will use and apply those criteria consistently, regardless of whether the data in question support your view. |
| Hasty conclusion | A premature judgment – that is, a judgment made without sufficient evidence. To avoid drawing a hasty conclusion, identify all possible conclusions before you select any one. Then decide whether you have sufficient evidence to support any of those conclusions and, if so, which conclusion that is. |
| Overgeneralization and stereotyping | Overgeneralization is ascribing to all the members of a group a quality that fits only some members. A stereotype is an overgeneralization that is rigidly maintained. To avoid thest errors, resist the urge to force individual people, places and things into hard categories. And keep in mind that the more limited your experience, the more modest your assertions should be. |
| Oversimplification | Oversimplification goes beyond making complex ideas easier to grasp - it twists and distorts the ideas. Instead of informing people, oversimplification misleads them. To avoid this error, refuse to adopt superficial views and make a special effort to understand issues in their complexity. |
| Post hoc fallacy | This error is rooted in the idea that when one thing occurs after another, it must be the result of the other, when in reality the sequence may be coincidental. To avoid the post hoc fallacy, withhold judgment of a cause-and-effect relationship until you have ruled out other possible causes, including coincidence. |
| Contradiction | To claim that a statement is both true and false at the same time in the same way. to avoid this error, monitor what you say and write. The moment you detect any inconsistency, examine it carefully. Decide whether it is explainable or whether it constitutes a contradiction. If it is a contradiction, revise your statement to make it consistent and reasonable. |
| Arguing in a circle | Attempting to prove a statement by repeating it in a different form. To avoid this error, check your arguments to be sure you are offering genuine evidence and not merely repeating your claim. |
| Meaningless statement | A statement in which the reasoning presented makes no sense. To avoid this error, check to be sure that the reasons you offer to explain your thoughts and actions really do explain them. |
| Mistaken authority | Ascribing authority to someone who does not possess it. To avoid this error, check to be sure that all the sources you cite as authorities possess expertise in the particular subject you are writing or speaking about. |
| False analogy | An analogy is an attempt to explain something relatively unfamiliar by referring to something different but more familiar, saying, in effect” This is like that”. A false analogy claims similarities that do not withstand scrutiny. To avoid this error, test your analogies to be sure that the similarities they claim are real and reasonable and that no important dissimilarities exist. |
| Irrational appeal | Appeals to emotion, tradition, moderation, authority, common belief and tolerance may be either rational or irrational. they are irrational, and therefore unacceptable, when they are unreasonable in the particular situation under discussion and / or when they discourage thought. To avoid this error, make sure your appeals complement thought rather than substitue for it. |
| Automatic rejection | The refusal to give criticism of your ideas or behaviors a fair hearing. To avoid this error, thinking of your ideas as possessions that you can keep or discard rather than as extension of your ego. This will make you less defensive about them. |
| Changing the subject | Abruptly and deceptively turning a discussion away from the issue under discussion. To avoid this error, face difficult questions head on rather than trying to avoid them. |
| Shifting the burden of proof | Demanding that others disprove our assertions. To avoid this error, understand that the burden of supporting any assertion rests with the person who makes it rather than the one who questions it. Accept the responsibility of supporitng your assertions. |
| Straw man | To commit the error of straw man is to put false words in someone else’s mouth and then expose their falsity, vonverniently forgetting that the other person never said them. To avoid this error, be scrupulously accurate in quoting or paraphrasing other people’s words. |
| Attacking the critic | Attempting to discredit an idea or argument by disparaging the person who expressed it. To avoid attacking the critic, focus your critical thinking on ideas rather than the people who express them. |
sample combinations of errors
这里举了3个样例，我们看看第二个：
Sam 13岁的时候，并不真的想抽烟，但是他的朋友怂恿他去做，然后他做的还不错，渐渐地，由偶尔抽烟到每天一包，抽烟的成本上升，他开始从父母那里偷钱买烟，对此他的解释是要么拿父母的钱然后抽烟，要么就不抽烟，但是他并不打算不抽烟，所以没有办法，只能从父母那里拿钱。现在Sam40岁，结婚有孩子，依然抽烟，他患上了哮喘，但是他自己将这归于过敏，每一个新的外科医生都会告诉他吸烟的危害，他反驳，“他们无法证明吸烟会导致任何疾病，所以应该由个人自己决定是否会受到伤害”。当烟草公司被指控加入尼古丁并禁止报道不利的检测结果时，Sam为他们辩护，这些人这么富有，他们没有理由伤害数以万计的同类。
这里，Sam踩了哪些坑？第一个就是mindless conformity，在朋友的怂恿下，不质疑地接受了抽烟，然后是either / or outlook， 认为只有两种方法去解决抽烟带来的成本问题，要么拿父母的钱继续抽，要么不抽烟，其实可以有第三种，Sam自己去做兼职赚钱抽烟，后面他自己换上哮喘，依然固执地将这个归于过敏，这是face-saving，他对外科医生有关吸烟有害的回应，犯了unwarranted assumption的错误，认为每个人都了解吸烟的方方面面，有权利去决定是否被伤害，而实际上很多人可能并不真的了解吸烟的危害。对于烟草公司的问题，他也是毫无根据地假定富有的人是不会做为了赚钱做坏事的。
A sensible view of terminology
三个容易混淆的errors。
| Oversimplification | Hasty conclusion | Assumption |
|---|---|---|
| is stated directly | is stated directly | is unstated but implied |
| occurs as a simple assertion or as the premise of an argument | occurs as the conclusion of an argument | Often is a hidden premise in an argument |
| distorts reality by misstatement or omission | fails to account for one or more significant items of evidence | may be either warranted or unwarranted. |
Knowing the right terminology is advantageous, but more important is recognizing where reasoning has gone wary and being able to explain the error in terms of the issue involved.