LS100 Eight SkillsProf. Jane McElligott

A key part of critical thinking is eliminating bias and prejudice from one’s thought process. “A Class Divided” at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/ illustrates how children and adults often think and act based on preconceived notions based on “ethnocentrism” and discriminate against others.

“Ethnocentrism is a specific form of stereotyping which holds one's own nationality, religion, or cultural traditions and customs as superior to others. This attitude emphasizes the differences between one's own group and others which are considered inferior.” http://infotrac.thomsonlearning.com/infowrite/critical.html.

Awesome YouTube video on ethnocentrism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSJFBeVFtak&feature=player_embedded#

“Critical thinking is the ability to think for yourself by weighing evidence and facts. The result is to come up with your own thoughts and opinions, without undue influence from anything or anyone else.” http://www.experienceproject.com/dictionary/definition-of/Critical-Thinking.

Critical thinking is “about proof, logic, evidence, and developing ideas and opinions based on hard-core facts or credible research. … Critical thinking is about making informed, enlightened, educated, open-minded decisions …” (Chapter 9 Cornerstone, pages 204 - 205). Critical reasoning is logical reasoning based on facts and evidence.

“You teach yourselves the law. I train your minds. You come in here with a skull full of mush, and if you survive, you'll leave thinking like a lawyer.” Prof. Kingsfield, The Paper Chase. http://www.thresholdconcepts2010.unsw.edu.au/Abstracts/JamesN.pdf.

Thinking like a lawyer”: Critical thinking in the law, engaging in formal legal reasoning: recognizing legal issues, locating and understanding the relevant legal rules, applying the rules to the facts of a problem, and reaching a justifiable conclusion.”

Consists of problem solving that involves listening to the client’s problem, researching for case law and statutory law on point, applying that law to the client’s legal problem, and coming up with a logical conclusion regarding how to best handle the client’s case and form the arguments to win or defend the case, depending on which side your client is on.

The picture below illustrates a professor of law from the old days who researched his law books and found a case on point for this young lawyer to cite in representing his client case.

Critical thinking goes back to Socrates, a very cool guy in Athens around 300 B.C.E. – he went around engaging in probing questioning of those who claimed to be great philosophers and who asserted that they “knew all.” The townspeople would watch as these philosophers were unable to “rationally justify their confident claims to knowledge. Confused meanings, inadequate evidence, or self-contradictory beliefs often lurked beneath smooth but largely empty rhetoric.”

Socrates demonstrated that some people may have power and esteemed positions, but not really know all that they pretend to know. “He established the importance of asking deep questions that probe profoundly into thinking before we accept ideas as worthy of belief.” http://www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/briefHistoryCT.cfm.

Socrates, through clever cross-examination, would lead supposedly brilliant philosophers and know-it-alls into a state of confusion. One of Socrates’ famous quotes is, “The unexamined life is not worth living,” meaning how important it is to question concepts and those in authority (and in these days, question the media as well).

Socrates was very humble and he said of the know-it-all philosophers: “The arrogant do not examine their views. They are not worth imitating.”

Socrates was often trailed by students who wanted to follow in his footsteps and just as he cross-examined the so-called experts, he “engaged in the questioning of his students in an unending search for truth.” http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospectives/lifeofthemind/socraticmethod.

Just as Socrates asked continuous, never-ending questions in a quest for truth, law professors today employing the Socratic method take this approach, asking students one question after another about a case or legal concept to make the students analyze the issues themselves and apply critical thinking to come up with the answer.

This is Prof. Kingsfield’s approach – rather than lecturing students on legal concepts, he made them learn the law themselves by discovering such concepts themselves through tenacious questioning.

Open-minded and objective Non-ethnocentric Honest with themselves and others Seek truth in all matters Use credible sources Question situations and assumptions Not judgmental Willing to change Make their own decisions Are creative Use a variety of research for evaluation Are skeptical

1. Restraining Emotions2. Looking at Things Differently3. Analyzing Information4. Asking Questions5. Solving Problems6. Determining Fact from Opinion

Emotions make us compassionate and ready to help others; it would be a cold world without emotions. But when it comes to thinking and analyzing, don’t let your emotions take over. If you quickly jump to conclusions on heated controversial issues, such as affirmative action, abortion, same-sex marriage, etc., based only on emotion, this is not critical thinking – you have to try your best to set emotions aside and stop them from clouding the issue.

Don’t make judgments based on your emotions or gut feelings or on what you’ve always heard and believed (preconceived notions) – wait until you have a chance to research the issue and consider it objectively. When emotions go wild, we don’t use logical reasoning and evidence.

Research and listen to both sides on an issue; if your heart is racing, your face is beat red, and your hands are sweaty, you know your emotions are getting the best of you.

An important aspect of critical thinking is the ability to look at an issue from different angles and “with different eyes” – consider all perspectives and be creative in thinking up solutions; employ creative thinking – think outside the box.

Take a look at this visual image – look at it for a while and you’ll soon see a whole new perspective:

1. SW and the 7 D2. I H a D by MLK3. 2 P’s in a P4. HDD (TMRUTC)5. 3 S to a T6. 100 P in a D7. T no PHL8. 4 Q in a G9. I a SWAA 10. 50 S in TU

1. SW and the 7 D: Snow White and the 7 Dwarfs2. I H a D by MLK: “I Had a Dream” by Martin Luther King3. 2 P’s in a P: Two Peas in a Pod4. HDD (TMRUTC): Hickory Dickory Dock, The Mouse Ran up

the Clock5. 3 S to a T: Three Sides to a Triangle6. 100 P in a D: 100 Pennies in a Dollar7. T no PHL: There is no Place Like Home8. 4 Q in a G: 4 Quarts in a Gallon9. I a SWAA: It’s a Small World After All 10. 50 S in TU: 50 States in the Union

Analyzing is dissecting a problem – breaking it up and engaging in step by step analysis.

Create a chart such as the one shown on page 210 of Chapter 9 of Cornerstone, asking the key question you’re analyzing and then putting your answers in Column A and the detailed reasons and supporting facts for these answers in Column B. Cite sources for the facts and statistics you put into Column B – remember to “Show me the Law!” and back up your answers.

Tort Reform is an issue we always hear about in the media – that the courts are filled with frivolous cases brought by lawyers out to make big bucks; but is it true? It’s important to do the research from a different perspective than the one the media likes to portray. The following articles and videos do an excellent job of shedding light on the other side of this debate and point out that the legal system already has in place key mechanisms to prevent or dismiss frivolous lawsuits and that tort reform is all about saving corporations with those others with “deep pockets” from having to pay when they cause harm to people and the environment.

“Mr. Fancy Pants” - powerful video about how corporations and the media put a slant on the news to create a public perception that most lawsuits are frivolous.

“Myth of the Frivolous Lawsuit” – Legal system already has 3 safeguards in place to prevent or correct frivolous lawsuits: 1) Contingent-fee agreements, 2) Summary judgments, and 3) Directed verdicts.

“The Actual Facts About the McDonald’s Coffee Case” “Punitive Damages v. Frivolous Lawsuits: The Infamous McDonald’s Scalding

Coffee Case”

Just as Socrates cross-examined the philosophers of his day and just like little kids ask “why” to everything, this is exactly what you want to do as a key part of critical thinking.

Question and ask follow-up questions to learn all you can about a topic and as Socrates did, see if someone’s argument or statements are valid by cross-examining them about their conclusions – can they support such conclusions with evidence or do they have nothing to back themselves up?

Solve problems by following these four steps:1. Indentify and narrow the problem – “Put your problem in writing.” (Chapter 9,

page 209). Write down the details of the problem, why it’s a problem, and how it is affecting you;

2. Research and develop alternatives - Brainstorm and think up alternatives to your problem – talk it out with someone else or with a brainstorming group;

3. Evaluate the alternatives - Analyze the alternatives you came up with in step 2 above and determine if they will realistically work to solve the problem – weed out the alternatives that won’t work and keep the ones that sound like possibilities;

4. Solve the problem – Take the alternatives you came up with in step 3 above and roll with them –see if indeed, one of these alternatives will be the solution to your problem.

See pages 212 – 214 for an example going through each of these steps.

Be sure to support your statements and arguments with facts, not opinions.

Fact: “Something that can be proven, something that can be objectively verified.” (Chapter 9, page 214). “A concept whose truth can be proved.” http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=fact&o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&h=000000.

Opinion: “A personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty.” http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=opinion.

In critical thinking, it is essential to base your thinking on facts, statements that can be verified by pointing to “credible, reliable sources.”

“Begin challenging your own assumptions. Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in awhile, or the light won't come in.” ~Alan Alda