gazi̇ university - Gazi Üniversitesi Açık Erişim Sistemi

GAZİ UNIVERSITYINSTITUTE OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE INSTRUCTIONENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING PROGRAM

THE IMPACT OF RAISING AWARENESS ABOUT REASONING FALLACIES ON THE DEVELOPMENT

OF CRITICAL READING

PHD DISSERTATION

BYMehmet BARDAKÇI

AnkaraMay, 2010

GAZİ UNIVERSITYINSTITUTE OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE INSTRUCTIONENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING PROGRAM

THE IMPACT OF RAISING AWARENESS ABOUT REASONING FALLACIES ON THE DEVELOPMENT

OF CRITICAL READING

PHD DISSERTATION

BYMehmet BARDAKÇI

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Abdulvahit ÇAKIR

AnkaraMay, 2010

i

Mehmet Bardakçı‘nın “The Impact of Raising Awareness about Reasoning Fallacies

on the Development of Critical Reading” başlıklı tezi 10 Mayıs 2010 tarihinde,

jürimiz tarafından İngilizce Öğretmenliği Ana Bilim Dalında Doktora Tezi olarak kabul

edilmiştir.

Adı Soyadı İmza

Üye (Tez Danışmanı):..................................................................... .............................

Üye : ............................................................................................... .............................

Üye : ............................................................................................... .............................

Üye : ............................................................................................... .............................

Üye : ............................................................................................... .............................

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to acknowledge with special thanks and appreciation a number of

individuals who provided assistance with this study as well as in my life as a graduate

student at Gazi University.

It has been my honour to work with my respectful committee members. I am

grateful to have been able to work with my advisor, Prof. Dr. Abdulvahit Çakır, who

has provided invaluable suggestions on my study. I would also like to thank to the other

members of my committee, Assist. Prof. Dr. Abdullah Ertaş, Assist. Prof. Dr. Nurdan

Özbek Gürbüz, Assist. Prof. Dr.Paşa Tevfik Cephe and Assist. Prof. Dr. Neslihan

Özkan. I am grateful for their challenging, professional and supportive encouragement

as well as their attention to details.

I am also indebted to Gonca Ekşi for her kindness in applying this study in her

classes.

I also wish to thank my colleague Egemen Aydoğdu without whose help the

analysis of this study would not have been possible.

I am blessed to have such wonderful friends; K. Dilek Akpınar, Selmin

Söylemez, M. Serkan Öztürk, Ceylan Yangın Ersanlı and Deren Yeşilel, whose support

always gave me strength.

My deepest love and gratitude go to my wife, Gül Senem Bardakçı, and children

for their patience and never-ending support during my study.

Finally, I would like to thank all of my participant students for their time and

effort in the collection of the data.

iii

ÖZET

MUHAKEME YANLIŞLARI HAKKINDA FARKINDALIK YARATMANIN

ELEŞTİREL OKUMA GELİŞİMİ ÜZERİNE ETKİSİ

BARDAKÇI, MehmetDoktora, İngilizce Öğretmenliği Bilim Dalı

Tez Danışmanı: Prof. Dr. Abdulvahit ÇAKIRMayıs-2010, 156 sayfa

Günümüzde hızla gelişen teknoloji sayesinde hayatımızın neredeyse her anında

argümanlarla kuşatılmış durumdayız. Reklam şirketleri, satış elemanları ve politikacılar

bazı argümanları sanki gerçekmiş gibi sunarak bizleri ikna etmeye çalışmaktadırlar.

Bizleri ikna edebilmek için sözcüklerle oynamayı ve duygulara hitap eden söylemleri

kullanmayı ve aynı zamanda muhakeme hatalarını da kullanmayı çok iyi bilmektedirler.

Hatiplerin ve yazarların gerçek niyetlerini ortaya çıkarabilmek için gözümüzü açık

tutmalı ve sorgulayıcı bir düşünce tarzı geliştirmeliyiz.

Bu çalışmanın amacı muhakeme yanlışları hakkında farkındalık yaratmanın Gazi

Eğitim Fakültesi, İngilizce Öğretmenliği Anabilim Dalı birinci sınıf öğrencilerinin

eleştirel okuma becerileri üzerine etkisini incelemektir. Bu etki, çalışmada kullanılan

her bir muhakeme yanlışı için 7 tane soru içeren, 56 soruluk muhakeme yanlışları testi

ile değerlendirilmiştir. Literatürde, 14 ile 191 arasında değişen birçok muhakeme yanlışı

olmasına rağmen bunların hepsi çalışmaya dahil edilmemiş, sadece testte geçen ve sık

karşılaşılanlar tercih edilmiştir. Bunların yanı sıra, literatür çalışması esnasında bazı sık

karşılaşılan muhakeme yanlışları da belirlenerek literatür taraması bölümüne dahil

edilmiştir. Bu çalışma, argümanları ve tartışma yazılarını sorgulama üzerine eğitim alan

öğrencilerle geleneksel okuma sınıflarında normal müfredatı takip eden öğrencilerin

muhakeme yanlışları hakkındaki farkındalıklarını karşılaştırmaktadır.

Veri toplama aracı olarak ön-test ve son-test kullanılan gerçek deneysel

araştırma deseni kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler bağımsız değişkenler t-testi,

Wilcoxon işaretli sıralar testi ve Mann-Whitney U-testi ile analiz edilmiştir. Deney

grubu 27, kontrol grubu ise 24 öğrenciden oluşmuştur. Gruplar, on şube arasından

rastgele yöntemle seçilmiştir.

iv

Analiz sonuçları, uygulama sonrasında deney ve kontrol grubu arasında anlamlı

bir fark olduğunu göstermiştir (p<0,01). Elde edilen sonuçlar doğrultusunda,

öğrencilerin, eleştirel okuma becerilerini muhakeme yanlışlarını öğrenerek

geliştirebilecekleri sonucuna varılmıştır. Çalışmayla ve çalışmanın sonuçlarıyla paralel

olarak bazı sınıf içi uygulamalar tartışılmış ve daha sonraki çalışmalar için önerilerde

bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar kelimeler: İngiliz Dili Eğitimi, Eleştirel Muhakeme, Muhakeme

Yanlışları, Muhakeme Yanlışları Öğretimi, Eleştirel Okuma

v

ABSTRACT

THE IMPACT OF RAISING AWARENESS ABOUT REASONING FALLACIES

ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF CRITICAL READING

BARDAKÇI, MehmetPhD Dissertation, English Language Teaching Program

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Abdulvahit ÇAKIRMay-2010, 156 pages

Today, with the fast growing technology, we are surrounded with arguments in

almost every moment of our lives. The advertising companies, salesmen, and politicians

etc. try to persuade us by exposing some arguments as facts. They know how to play

with semantics and how to use emotive language, and also they know how to use these

fallacies to persuade us. To unearth the real intention of the speakers or writers, we

should be alert and develop a questioning mind.

The aim of this study was to explore the impact of raising awareness about

reasoning fallacies on the development of critical reading skills of the first year students

in the ELT department, Gazi Faculty of Education. It was evaluated via a 56-question

reasoning fallacies test confining seven questions to each fallacy studied in this

research. Although there are numerous kinds of fallacies, between 14 and 191 to be

more precise, the common ones were chosen in accordance with the reasoning fallacies

test for practical reasons. In addition to this, during the literature review, some other

common fallacies were determined and included in this dissertation. This study

compared the students trained explicitly about questioning the arguments and

argumentative texts on the one side and the students in the ordinary reading classes

following the regular syllabus in terms of awareness about reasoning fallacies.

A true experimental design was used to collect data through pre- and post-tests.

The collected data were analyzed by using independent samples t-test, Wilcoxon

signed-ranks test and Mann-Whitney U-test. The experimental group consisted of 27

students and the control group consisted of 24 students. The groups were randomly

selected from among ten classes.

vi

The results of the analysis revealed that there was a statistically significant

difference between the experimental group and the control group after the treatment

(p<0, 01). According to the results, it can be concluded that students can improve their

critical reading skills through learning how to determine reasoning fallacies. In

accordance with the study and its results some implications were discussed and some

suggestions were made for further research.

Key words: English Language Teaching, Critical Reasoning, Reasoning

Fallacies, Teaching about Fallacies, Critical Reading

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................................. ii

ÖZET ............................................................................................................................... iii

ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................... v

TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................ vii

LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................... xi

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................xii

CHAPTER 1 ..................................................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background to the Study.................................................................................... 1

1.2 The Purpose of the Study ................................................................................... 2

1.3 Research Questions ............................................................................................ 4

1.4 Limitations of the Study..................................................................................... 4

1.5 Definition of Some Key Concepts ..................................................................... 5

CHAPTER 2 ..................................................................................................................... 7

REVIEW OF LITERATURE ........................................................................................... 7

2.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 7

2.1 Nature and Dynamics of Language........................................................................ 7

2.1.1 Forms and Functions of Language .................................................................. 9

2.1.2 The Construction of Meaning........................................................................ 10

2.1.2.1 Cognitive and Emotive Meaning ............................................................ 14

2.1.2.2 Ambiguity ............................................................................................... 15

2.1.2.2.1 Lexical Ambiguity ........................................................................... 16

2.1.2.2.2 Grammatical Ambiguity................................................................... 16

2.2 Critical Thinking .................................................................................................. 18

2.2.1 Cognitive Operations..................................................................................... 20

2.2.2 Dispositions ................................................................................................... 23

2.3 Reasoning and Arguments ................................................................................... 25

2.3.1 Deductive Reasoning..................................................................................... 26

2.3.2 Inductive Reasoning ...................................................................................... 27

2.3.3 Critical Reasoning ......................................................................................... 28

APPROVAL OF THE JURY ............................................................................................i

viii

2.3.4 Identifying Fact and Opinion ........................................................................ 29

2.3.5 Arguments ..................................................................................................... 31

2.3.5.1 Recognizing Arguments ......................................................................... 32

2.3.5.2 Evaluating Arguments ............................................................................ 34

2.4 Reasoning Fallacies.............................................................................................. 36

2.4.1 Taxonomy of Fallacies .................................................................................. 37

2.4.1.1 The Appeal to False Authority................................................................ 38

2.4.1.2 Either-Or Fallacy .................................................................................... 40

2.4.1.3 Hasty Generalization Fallacy.................................................................. 41

2.4.1.4 Self-Contradiction................................................................................... 42

2.4.1.5 Appeal to Common Practice ................................................................... 43

2.4.1.6 Part-Whole Fallacy ................................................................................. 44

2.4.1.7 Stereotyping Fallacy ............................................................................... 45

2.4.1.8 Sexism Fallacy........................................................................................ 46

2.4.1.9 The Appeal to Emotion........................................................................... 47

2.4.1.10 The Appeal to Pity (argument ad misericordiam) ................................ 48

2.4.1.11 The Appeal to Force ............................................................................. 49

2.4.1.12 The Argument against the Person (argument ad hominem) ................. 50

2.4.1.13 False Cause (argument non causa pro causa) ....................................... 51

2.4.1.14 Red herring Fallacy (changing the topic) ............................................. 51

2.4.1.15 Complex Question ................................................................................ 52

2.5 Critical Reading in Argumentative Texts ............................................................ 53

2.5.1 The Tools of Critical reading ........................................................................ 55

2.5.1.1 Analysis .................................................................................................. 55

2.5.1.2 Inference ................................................................................................. 57

CHAPTER III ................................................................................................................. 59

METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 59

3.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 59

3.1 Research Design................................................................................................... 59

3.2 Universe and Sampling ........................................................................................ 60

3.3 Instruments ........................................................................................................... 61

3.4 Procedure and Treatment ..................................................................................... 63

3.5 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 66

ix

CHAPTER IV................................................................................................................. 67

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA............................................. 67

4.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 67

4.1 Analysis of the Pre-test Scores............................................................................. 67

4.1.1 Independent samples t-test analysis of the pre-test scores ............................ 68

4.1.2 Independent samples t-test analysis of English-Turkish pre-test scores ....... 68

4.2 Comparisons of Pre and Post-test Scores............................................................. 69

4.2.1 Wilcoxon signed ranks test results of the control group ............................... 69

4.2.2 Wilcoxon signed rank test results of the experimental group ....................... 70

4.3 Comparison of the experimental and control groups’ post test scores................. 71

4.4 Comparison of Post-test Scores in terms of Genders........................................... 71

CHAPTER V .................................................................................................................. 75

CONCLUSION............................................................................................................... 75

5.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 75

5.1 Summary of the Study.......................................................................................... 75

5.2 Pedagogical implications ..................................................................................... 77

5.3 Implications for further research.......................................................................... 78

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 80

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ 90

Appendix I. English form of pre/post-tests ................................................................. 91

Appendix II. Turkish form of Pre-test....................................................................... 110

Appendix III. Translation Team and Editor.............................................................. 127

Appendix IV. Answer Sheet ..................................................................................... 128

Appendix V. Answers of The Reasoning Fallacies Test........................................... 129

Appendix VI. Task I.................................................................................................. 130

Appendix VII. Pre-Activities for Task 1................................................................... 131

Appendix VIII. Identifying F/O in a Paragraph ........................................................ 132

Appendix IX. Task 2 ................................................................................................. 133

Appendix X. Identifying Premises and Conclusions ................................................ 134

Appendix XI. Task 3 ................................................................................................. 137

Appendix XII. Identifying the Fallacies (Appeal to Authority and Either-or) ......... 138

Appendix XIII. Pre-Activity ..................................................................................... 139

Appendix XIV. Task 4 .............................................................................................. 140

x

Appendix XV. Task 5 ............................................................................................... 141

Appendix XVI. Task 6 .............................................................................................. 142

Appendix XVII. Wrap-up Activity ........................................................................... 143

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Stylistic variations in vocabulary ..................................................................... 15

Table 2: Consensus list of cognitive skills and sub-skills .............................................. 22

Table 3: A critical approach to reading .......................................................................... 54

Table 4: Narrative genres in the classroom .................................................................... 56

Table 5: Markers of subjectivity..................................................................................... 57

Table 6: Research design ................................................................................................ 60

Table 7: The results of the independent samples t-test in reasoning fallacies test. ........ 68

Table 8: The results of independent samples t-test analysis of the English and Turkish pre-test scores ................................................................................................................. 69

Table 9: Wilcoxon signed ranks test results of the control group .................................. 70

Table 10: Wilcoxon signed ranks test results of the experimental group....................... 70

Table 11: Mann-Whitney U-test results of the comparison between experimental and control group post-test scores ......................................................................................... 71

Table 12: Mann-Whitney U-test results of the gender comparison................................ 71

Table 13: The analysis of post-test scores in terms of fallacy types and genders .......... 74

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Varieties of meaning .................................................................................. 13

Figure 2: An ambiguous sentence................................................................................... 17

Figure 3: An ambiguous phrase ...................................................................................... 18

Figure 4: Cognitive skills ......................................................................................... 21

Figure 5: Critical thinking dispositions .......................................................................... 25

Figure 6: Criteria for a sound argument.......................................................................... 35

Figure 7: Mill’s classification of fallacies ...................................................................... 37

Figure 8: A cartoon on self-contradiction fallacy. .......................................................... 43

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

The world of today is more sophisticated and technological than ever. We are

surrounded by media in all aspects of our lives and we are bombarded with ideas, values

and advertisements. Crossley and Wilson (1979) point out language is a powerful tool,

but it can be misused. People will try to persuade you by means of all sorts of appeals –

by playing on your sympathies, your likes and dislikes, your fears, and so on. The key

point about all of them is that they are very frequently successful as persuasive

measures. But they do not succeed by logically connecting facts and drawing reasoned

conclusions from them; their effect depends on trickery, emotional appeals, or threats of

one sort or another. Such tricks and illogical moves are called fallacies. These fallacies

can be observed in advertisements, political texts, arguments, and even in scientific

articles.

Damer (2001) defines fallacy as a violation of one of the criteria of a good

argument. Any argument that fails to satisfy one or more of the four criteria is a

fallacious one. Fallacies, then, stem from the irrelevance of a premise, from the

unacceptability of a premise, from the insufficiency of the combined premises of an

argument to establish its conclusion, or from the failure of an argument to give an

effective rebuttal to the most serious challenges to its conclusion or to the argument

itself. Beginning with Aristotle, informal fallacies have generally been placed in one of

several categories, depending on the source of the fallacy. There are fallacies of

relevance, fallacies involving causal reasoning, and fallacies resulting from ambiguities.

There are few studies on fallacies in education carried out in the USA.

Sukchotrat (1980) investigated the ability of Thai university freshmen to detect common

fallacies in reasoning. She found that the students do not have sufficient knowledge and

2

experience in detecting fallacious language. In his study Laureano (1981) examined the

growth in the critical reading ability of Puerto Rican students in grades four, eight and

twelve. According to his study Puerto Rican public schools do not develop the skills

necessary to detect fallacious language at a very high level.

Callen (1984) examined similarities and differences between elementary and

secondary education majors in their ability to detect fallacies at The Florida State

University and found a significant difference in favor of secondary education majors.

According to the findings, she suggests that the specific fallacies in reasoning should be

taught as part of coursework in the teacher education programs for both the elementary

and secondary education majors.

Many other researchers such as Mosley (1978), Galotti et al. (1999), Turner

(2000), Chan and Elliot (2002), and Ricco (2007) investigated fallacies in different

aspects on various subjects. All these researchers found out that fallacies are neglected

in education and students should be trained not only in reading comprehension skills but

also in writing and speaking skills.

In addition to these studies on reasoning fallacies Callen (1984) refers to some

other researches such as Lyons who concludes that many teachers could not teach

because they lack the requisite skills to instruct competently. She also refers to Reutzel

and Swindle’s study which reported that those who choose teaching as a career often

have inadequate reading skills.

Critical reading has also been of interest in Turkey in the last two decades. Many

studies on students’ critical reading skills were done by such investigators as Akyüz

(1997), Çam (2006), Köse (2006), and Ünal (2006). However, no research has been

done about fallacies in reasoning in Turkey.

1.2 The Purpose of the Study

In foreign language teaching, four basic skills are stressed: listening, speaking,

reading and writing. However, reading is recognized as the most needed skill in the

national examination in Turkey. Grammar and vocabulary are also emphasized, though

the critical interpretation of the passage is often ignored. The study of texts is usually at

a literal level. Rarely do the teachers spend time on teaching how to read critically.

3

Reading has a social dimension; individuals have social dimensions, too. Mill (1886)

expresses that “The only complete safeguard against reasoning ill is the habit of

reasoning well; familiarity with the principles of correct reasoning, and practice in

applying those principles” (p. 482). Thus, training in critical reading and fallacies in

reasoning make students and teachers better thinkers, listeners, speakers and readers.

As will be discussed in 2.4.1 below, there are several types of fallacy. However,

for practical reasons we used 8 of them because the reasoning fallacies test chosen for

this study included the following 8 types of fallacy: Appeal to False Authority, Either-

or, Hasty Generalization, Self-contradiction, Appeal to Common Practice, Stereotyping,

Part-whole, and Sexism.

The purpose of this study is to find an answer to the question of “Can critical

reading skills be improved better by raising consciousness about common reasoning

fallacies?” The following hypotheses were formulated for this purpose:

1. The first year teacher trainees are not able to detect reasoning fallacies.

2. The language of the test does not have any effect on the students’ results.

3. This ability cannot be improved without training; training improves the ability to

detect reasoning fallacies.

4. There are significant differences between male and female students in their

ability to detect certain reasoning fallacies. Considering the related literature

we hypothesize that

a. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the appeal to false authority fallacy subtest.

b. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the either-or fallacy subtest.

c. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the hasty generalisation fallacy subtest.

d. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the self-contradiction fallacy subtest.

e. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the appeal to common practice fallacy subtest.

f. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the part-whole fallacy subtest.

4

g. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the stereotyping fallacy subtest.

h. there is a difference between the male and female students’ post-test

scores on the sexism fallacy subtest.

1.3 Research Questions

Specifically, the research was conducted in order to find answers to the

following questions:

1. Are the first year teacher trainees able to detect fallacies in reasoning?

2. If they are not able to detect them, what are the reasons? Is it because they do

not have the knowledge or is it because of the language?

3. Can this ability be improved without training or should it be fostered through

activities in reading courses?

4. Are there significant differences between male and female students in their

ability to detect certain reasoning fallacies?

1.4 Limitations of the Study

Since there are a great number of fallacies, this study covered eight of the most

common fallacies in daily life for practical reasons. As noted before, the aim of this

study is not to teach the names of all these fallacies but to make students develop the

habit of questioning and seeking answers while reading argumentative texts.

Although fallacies are related to all the four skills, this study is limited to the

reading skill. The reason why reading was chosen is the assumption that students are

better in reading than writing. Since people model their writing on the texts they read,

critical reading ability should be improved first to make our students better writers.

Since our courses cover both reading and writing, the students were also asked to write

two argumentative texts; however, this study is limited to reading only. Improving

writing skills could be the concern of another study.

5

This study is also limited to first year students at Gazi University because with

the new curriculum the reading skill is taught only in the first year course; “Advanced

Reading and Writing Skills”.

1.5 Definitions of Some Key Concepts

Critical Thinking: Critical Thinking is purposeful, self-regulatory judgment

which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as

explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual

considerations upon which that judgment is based. Critical Thinking is essential as a

tool of inquiry. As such, Critical Thinking is a liberating force in education and a

powerful resource in one's personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good

thinking, Critical Thinking is a pervasive and self-rectifying human phenomenon. The

ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-

minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in

making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters,

diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused

in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the

circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus, educating good critical thinkers means working

toward this ideal. It combines developing Critical Thinking skills with nurturing those

dispositions which consistently yield useful insights and which are the basis of a

rational and democratic society. (Facione, 1990, p. 2)

Critical Reasoning: is a process that facilitates our examining and evaluating

written and other types of communications so as to make knowledgeable judgments

about the arguments set forth therein (Boyd, 2003, p. 5)

Argument: A collection of propositions in which some propositions, the

premises, are given as reasons for accepting the truth of another proposition, the

conclusion. In other words, the conclusion of an argument is the proposition that is

affirmed on the basis of the other propositions in the argument. These other

propositions, which are affirmed (or assumed) as providing support or reasons for

accepting the conclusion as true, are the premises of that argument (Copi & Cohen,

2004, p. 3).

6

Fallacy: A fallacy is a defect in an argument that consists in something other

than merely false premises. Fallacies can be committed in many ways, but usually they

involve either a mistake in reasoning or the creation of some illusion that makes a bad

argument appear good (or both) (Hurley, 2000, p. 118).

Critical Reading: Critical reading is the opposite of naivety in reading. It is a

form of skepticism that does not take a text at face value, but involves an examination

of claims put forward in the text as well as implicit bias in the texts framing and

selection of the information presented. The ability to read critically is an ability

assumed to be present in scholars and to be learned in academic institutions (wikipedia).

7

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

“Language is not only the vehicle of

thought, it is a great and efficient

instrument in thinking.”

Humphrey Davy

2.0 Introduction

This chapter aims to give information about the foremost views about language

theories and how the language is used to persuade others. The Nature and Dynamics of

Language (2.1) section gives information about the how the language is formed and

how it is used by referring to meaning theories. The Critical Thinking (2.2) section

provides a brief overview about the critical thinking. The next section Reasoning and

Arguments (2.3) introduces the concept of reasoning and assessing the reasoning in

terms of arguments in a text. The section Reasoning Fallacies (2.4) explains the

taxonomy of fallacies and it also explains different types of fallacies by providing

examples. The last section Critical Reading in Argumentative Texts (2.5) tries to

explain the relation between the reasoning fallacies and critical reading.

2.1 Nature and Dynamics of Language

Language is a very complex phenomenon and it is defined by many linguists in

many different ways as in the following:

“Language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating

ideas, emotions and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols” (Sapir, 1949, p.

8

8). He also states that “language is primarily a system of phonetic symbols for the

expression of communicable thought and feeling” (Sapir, 1949, p. 17, 1951, p. 7).

“A language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which a social

group co-operates” (Bloch & Trager, as cited in Lyons, 1981, p. 4).

“A language is a set (finite or infinite) of sentences, each finite in length and

constructed out of a finite set of elements” (Chomsky, 1985, p. 13).

Chomsky (1986), in his work ‘Knowledge of Language’, mentions that

“Structural and descriptive linguistics, behavioral psychology, and other contemporary

approaches tended to view a language as a collection of actions, or utterances, or

linguistic forms (words, sentences) paired with meanings, or as system of linguistic

forms or events” (p. 19).

In line with the definitions above, Hughes (2000) summarizes the definitions of

language as follows:

The purpose of language, in a broader sense, is to communicate and express oneself. The number of different words in any language is finite, but these words can be used to generate an infinite number of different sentences with different meanings. Many of the ordinary things we say every day have never been said before by anyone” (p.33).

One of the most influential philosophers of the twentieth century, Ludwig

Wittgenstein (as cited in Copi & Cohen, 2005), claims that there are countless different

kinds of use of what we call ‘symbols’, ‘words’, ‘sentences.’ Giving orders, describing

an object or giving its measurements, reporting an event, speculating about an event,

forming and testing hypothesis, presenting the results of an experiment, making up a

story, play-acting, singing, guessing riddles, telling a joke, solving a problem in

arithmetic, translating from one language to another, asking, cursing, greeting, and

praying are some of the examples suggested by Wittgenstein (as cited in Copi & Cohen,

2005). Considering these views, form-function relation and the construction of meaning

is going to be handled in terms of cognition and emotion in this section.

9

2.1.1 Forms and Functions of Language

Without doubt we can say that when we talk about the forms of language we

refer to the types of sentences. Sentences –the units of language that express complete

thoughts- are commonly placed in one of four categories: declarative, interrogative,

imperative, and exclamatory (Copi & Cohen, 2005, p. 73). In general, linguists agree

that although form may indicate the function, there is no one to one correspondence

between form and function.

Rudinow and Barry (2004, p. 42) list three functions of language as (1)

informative function which is used to describe the world (whether rightly or wrongly)

and it claims itself as being true. For example: Ankara is the capital of Turkey. (2)

expressive function which is used to evoke or express feelings. Poems can be good

examples for this function. E.g. What a pity! (3) directive function which is used to

influence the behavior of others; this function is commonly found in commands and

requests and we cannot consider them as right or wrong. E.g. Pass the salt, please.

The famous Russian linguist Roman Jakobson (1990) states that any speech

event or any act of verbal communication is composed of six elements, or factors: (1) an

addresser (a sender; speaker or author), (2) a message (the verbal act, the signifier) (3)

an addressee (a receiver; the hearer or reader), (4) a context , (5) a code (fully or at least

partially common to the addresser and addressee ), and (6) a contact (a physical or

psychological connection between the addresser and the addressee). Plus, according to

him, each element is related to a different function of language and these functions are:

Referential Function: Referential, also called ‘denotative,’ ‘cognitive’ function is

an orientation toward the context. It defines the relations between the message and the

object to which it refers. E.g. Water boils at 100 degrees.

Emotive Function: Emotive or ‘expressive’ function is oriented toward the

addresser. It tends to produce an impression of a certain emotion, as in exclamations

such as Oh! and Oh my gosh!

Conative Function: Conative function is oriented toward the addressee, such as a

command. E.g. Drink!

10

Phatic Function: Phatic function is oriented toward contact and it serves to

establish, continue or discontinue communication or check whether the contact is there.

E.g. Hello. What’s up?

Metalingual Function: Metalingual function is used by the participants to check

up whether they use the same code. For example: I don’t follow you –what do you

mean?

Poetic Function: Poetic function puts focus on the message for its own sake.

On the other hand, in their book ‘Critical Thinking’, Hughes and Lavery (2004)

give nine functions as (1) descriptive (to describe –to convey factual information about-

something), (2) evaluative (to make a value judgment about something), (3) emotive (to

express emotions), (4) evocative (to evoke certain emotions in an audience), (5)

persuasive (to persuade people to accept something or to act in a certain way), (6)

interrogative (to elicit information), (7) directive (to tell others to do something), (8)

performative (to act with words), (9) recreational (to amuse ourselves or others like

telling jokes and stories).

To be a successful communicator we should know the functions of language and

it is important to know that language doesn’t serve just one function but generally

serves more than one function. We utter something to make others do something. For

example, if someone says “It is cold here.” s/he may give factual information and also

may want the hearer to close the window. The functions of language may change

according to the addresser’s intentions. As we shall see later, when we deal with the

arguments we should keep our mind on the intention of the addresser.

2.1.2 The Construction of Meaning

The study of meaning is an enduring concern of scholarship throughout the

history. Firth (1958, p. 191) states that the use of the word ‘meaning’ changes according

to the context and becomes a new word when it is uttered in a new context. But how do

meanings relate to speakers and to the world? We say that English word son means a

‘male descendant,’ but what is the connection between this word and ‘male descendant?

The devastating fact is that different languages use different words to express the same

11

meanings. Thus, it might be hypothesized that the word son means what it does because

speakers are conditioned to utter it when they talk about their male descendants, or

because it is associated in their minds with an idea of male descendant, or because they

have internalized conventions for using it in various sentential contexts to make

statements, promises, predictions, etc. about male descendants. Whether or not we can

accept these particular answers, they are nevertheless answers to an intelligible and

important question, a question that is only partially answered by a linguistic theory of

meaning, and which constrains the construction of one (Fodor, 1980, p. 12). Akmajian,

Demers, Farmer and Harnish (1997) explain different types of semantic theories as:

1. The denotational theory of meaning (also called reference theory of meaning)

which was first explained by Aristotle in the fourth century BC. According to

this view, the meaning of each expression is the actual object it refers to, its

denotation, in other words we use words to refer to the objects. The word tree

refers to all the trees in the world. However, this theory has serious problems

with the identification of meaning as denotation. For instance, what are the

actual objects denoted by expressions such as mind, where, was/were,

unfortunately, much, hello, love and after and so on. Hughes (2000) gives a

reasonable example for the limitation of this theory. He gives ‘the oldest man in

the world’ as example and states that we can understand the meaning even if we

don't know its reference, and he concludes “If the meaning is the reference, then

we shouldn't be able to understand what the phrase means unless we know who

the oldest man in the world is” (p. 37).

2. Mentalist theories of meaning (the idea theory of meaning) were developed by

John Locke in the seventeenth century. This theory considers the meaning of

each word as the idea (or ideas) or mental images associated with that word in

the minds of speakers. This theory also fails to explain meaning and according

to Akmajian et al. (1997):

The most serious problem can be put in the problem of dilemma: Either the notion of an idea is too vague to allow the theory to predict anything specific and thus the theory is not testable; or if the notion of an idea is made precise enough to test, the theory turns out to make false predictions (p. 219).

12

Similarly, Hughes (2000, p. 37) explains another difficulty with this

theory by asking how a person could know what he meant by the word dog and

how he could know what the others meant if the mental image was the meaning,

and he concludes that “We can never know what another person means by

certain words”. Mentalist theories of meaning try to overcome the problems with

three theories of meaning: (a) meaning as images: this theory suggests that

ideas are mental images and we construct the meaning by using those images.

This might be true for some words like Pegasus (flying horse) and conceivably

the Eiffel Tower; however, it is not clear how it could be applied to nouns such

as triangle, or verbs such as kick. For instance, the triangle could be isosceles or

equilateral but would not comprise all triangles. Parallel problems come up with

kick; the gender of the kicker, which leg was used or the kind of the object being

kicked. Supposing that appropriate images could be found for all the nouns and

verbs but what about the words like only, therefore, hi and not? (b) Meaning as

concepts: this theory accepts ideas as concepts, namely, as mentally represented

categories of things. This version of the idea theory is also problematic.

Akmajian et al. (1997) elucidate the problems of this theory as in the following:

There is psychological evidence that our system of cognitive classification is structured in terms of prototypes, in that some instances of a concept are more typical than others; robins are more typical birds than penguins, chairs are more typical furniture than ashtrays, and so on. Yet these are not features of the meaning of bird and furniture. Even if concepts work as meanings for some words, such as common nouns, adjectives, and maybe verbs, there are still many other kinds of words that do not have clear conceptual content, such as only, not, andhello. Furthermore, it is not clear what concept would be assigned to a sentence. In short, theories of meaning as entities, whether they be objects denoted, images in the mind, or concepts, all face various difficulties (pp. 220-221).

(c) Meaning as sense: The meaning of a sentence is its satisfaction condition, and

the meaning of a word or phrase is the contribution it makes to the satisfaction

condition (truth condition, compliance condition, answerhood condition) of

sentences it occurs in (Akmajian et al., 1997). According to them, this theory has

many advantages when compared to denotational and mentalist theories, because it

does not associate meaning with either denotations or ideas/concepts. It also

mentions the difference between the semantics of word

hand, and the semantics of sentences

3. The Use Theory of Meaning:

twentieth century by Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Austin. According to t

(as cited in Hughes, 2000, p.

not have any meaning. In other words, the community establishes the meaning

of an expression by how they use it in their community.

In addition to these theories, we can talk about the varieties of

following figure:

Figure 1: Varieties of meaning

In conclusion, all of the theories mentioned above try to explain how the

meaning is constructed. They may have some weak points, but if we deal with the

meaning of meaning we

of words in any language. Dictionaries cannot explain all the meanings and uses

words as they can give the linguistic meanings

Language meaning

Dialect meaning

Regional

mentions the difference between the semantics of words and phrases

, and the semantics of sentences on the other.

The Use Theory of Meaning: This approach to meaning was developed in

twentieth century by Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Austin. According to t

(as cited in Hughes, 2000, p. 38) unless they are used in a context, the words do


of an expression by how they use it in their community.

In addition to these theories, we can talk about the varieties of

Varieties of meaning (Akmajian et al.



meaning of meaning we need to know them. There may be a great many words and uses

uage. Dictionaries cannot explain all the meanings and uses

give the linguistic meanings only.

Meaning

Linguistic meaning

Language meaning

Dialect meaning

Social

Idiolect meaning

Speaker meaning

literal nonliteral

Irony Sarcasm

13

s and phrases on the one

This approach to meaning was developed in the

twentieth century by Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Austin. According to them

) unless they are used in a context, the words do


In addition to these theories, we can talk about the varieties of meaning as in the

Akmajian et al., 1997)



know them. There may be a great many words and uses

uage. Dictionaries cannot explain all the meanings and uses of

nonliteral

Sarcasm Metaphor

14

2.1.2.1 Cognitive and Emotive Meaning

A sentence or a word may both give information and express feelings. Carter

(2004) differentiates these types of meanings by saying “Words or sentences that

convey facts are said to have cognitive meaning; words or sentences that express or

evoke emotions are said to have emotive meaning” (p. 61). Copi and Cohen (2005, p.

82) assert that the literal meanings and the emotional meanings of a word or sentence

are mostly independent of one another. For instance, think about the word librarian. If

we take its cognitive meanings we can find only one literal meaning as (more or less) ‘a

person who works in a library’. Yet, this word may have an emotive meaning to a

person via personal association. S/he may fall in love with a librarian, and when s/he

hears the word librarian, s/he can remember that person. In contrast, as a student, a

person may have an unpleasant quarrel with a librarian and when s/he hears, s/he might

remember that time and get upset or even angry.

As Copi and Cohen (2005) note “There is nothing wrong with emotive language;

neither is there anything wrong with language that is noneemotive or neutral” (p. 83).

Fearnside and Holther (1959), on the other hand, warn that if the power of words is

abused to evoke a specific answer, a fallacy occurs. Similarly, Diestler (1998) states a

general rule for emotional use and reactions to the issues by suggesting that if one puts

excessive emotional reactions to an issue, the main issue is likely to be lost. As

mentioned in many books on critical thinking and reasoning (Patterson, 1993; Hughes,

2000; Gula, 2002; Swoyer, 2002; Thomson, 1996, 2002; Bowell & Kemp, 2002, 2005;

Eemeren & Grootendorst, 2004; Matthew, 2004), in our daily life we are bombarded

with emotive language and argumentation via written or spoken discourses in order to

be persuaded especially by advertising industries and politicians. We can protect

ourselves against these language tricks by being aware of the stylistic and emotive uses

of language. Goatly (2000, p. 105) exemplifies the stylistic variations in vocabulary to

activate the emotions in various ways (e.g. positive emotion, negative emotion and

formal style etc.) in Table 1.

15

Table 1: Stylistic variations in vocabulary

Core Positive Negative Formal Informal Dialectical

emotion emotion (technical)

house home hovel residence pad paddog cur canine pooch, doggy, pooch

bow-wow[motion, shit excrement, poo-negative] faeces

therefore thus and sothin slim, slender skinny ameciateddetermination perseverance obstinacy motivation will-power

stubbornnessbear tolerate stand, put up withhelp interfere aid, assist give a hand o

prostitute [comfort whore, slag slag slagwoman -negative]

We could also provide Turkish examples like ev (neutral), yuva (positive

emotion), konut, mesken (formal). As can be seen in the above table, although words

may have the same meanings, the linguistic choice affects our emotions. Thus, as

questioning people we should be aware of this fact and always be alert to incoming

messages.

2.1.2.2 Ambiguity

Ambiguous use of language is another factor that either directly or indirectly

affects our understanding, reasoning and arguments. Ambiguity can be simply defined

as having double meaning and it can stem from lexis and grammar. Halpern (2003)

makes the process of comprehension and cause of ambiguity precise as:

The thought in the mind of the ‘sender’ is the underlying or deep structure. The thought is private and known only to the sender. The problem in producing language is deriving surface structure from the underlying representation in the sender's mind, and the problem in comprehending language is getting from the surface structure back to the speaker's (or writer's) underlying representation… A

16

communication is ‘successful’ when the underlying representation constructed by the receiver matches the underlying representation of the sender… When language is ambiguous, the surface structure can have more than one meaning or underlying representation (pp. 89-90).

There are two types of ambiguity: Lexical ambiguity and grammatical

ambiguity, and these ambiguities will be handled briefly.

2.1.2.2.1 Lexical Ambiguity

This type of ambiguity is also called as ‘semantical ambiguity’. Newton-Smith

(2005, p. 7) defines semantical ambiguity as “Ambiguity that arises because a word in

the sentence has more than one meaning”. Hudson (2000) explains that lexical

ambiguity stems from homonyms in a sentence. There are two types of homonyms:

Homophones (e.g. to, too, and two) and homographs (e.g. tear) (p. 313). Moreover, the

reference of a word in a sentence may be unclear; in this case it is called as ‘referential

ambiguity’. For example: He drove the car over his brother’s bicycle, but it wasn't hurt.

In this sentence the reference of ‘it’ is ambiguous.

As Hughes and Lavery (2004) note “The referential ambiguities are usually easy

to spot on and, once recognized, are easily avoided. This is especially true in

conversation, since we can ask for clarification” (p. 65).

2.1.2.2.2 Grammatical Ambiguity

Structural ambiguity exists when a phrase or sentence has two or more meanings

because of structure, either of grouping or function (Hudson, 2000, p. 314). Because

this ambiguity results from the structure of a sentence, it is also called ‘structural

ambiguity’. For example: The boy made an impact on the girl with the guitar.

In the example, the case is ambiguous because of the grouping and the sentence

has two structures. It may be grouped as the boy made an impact on the girl with the

guitar or the boy made an impact on the girl with the guitar. In the first grouping, it is

inferred that the girl is carrying the guitar but in the latter it is understood that he played

17

the guitar and the girl was impressed. These meanings are represented in Figure 2

below:

a

b

Figure 2: An ambiguous sentence

Above, Figure 2a illustrates that ‘with the guitar’ is reduced defining relative

clause, whereas Figure 2b illustrates that the boy did the action with the guitar.

To further illustrate structural ambiguity, we can examine the example three

drawn by O’ Grady and Archibald (2001, p. 263) in Figure 3.

a

Figure 3: An ambiguous phrase

O’ Grady and Archibald (2001) explain the tree

indicates that both the men and the

indicates that only the men are wealthy.

ambiguities as grouping ambiguities and also notes that

although not so common as grouping ambigui

be boring. There are no

an important role to grasp the meaning.

(namely, professors who visit) or professors

2.2 Critical Thinking

The ability to think is the basic distinctive feature of human beings. Bowell and

Kemp (2005) state that much of the time in our daily life we are delimited by several

messages either explicitly or implicitly tell

believe or not to believe. They suggest t

of just ignoring these messages, obeying or rejecting them without thinking. Asking for

a reason means that we are asking for a j

the idea and the reason should be a good one. We can infer that critical thinking is

simply to be logical whereas reflective thinking focuses

what to do. Any type of questioning

and the roots of critical thinking date back to Socrates’ method of questioning. His

method was to ask probing questions that required a rational response.

b

An ambiguous phrase

O’ Grady and Archibald (2001) explain the tree as the structure on the left

indicates that both the men and the women are wealthy; the structure on the right

indicates that only the men are wealthy. Hudson (2000) identifies these kinds of

ambiguities as grouping ambiguities and also notes that there are function

although not so common as grouping ambiguities. For example, visiting professors can

be boring. There are no lexical or grouping ambiguities nevertheless functioning plays

an important role to grasp the meaning. Visiting can serve either as an adjective

(namely, professors who visit) or professors who get visited.



messages either explicitly or implicitly telling us what to do or not to do, what to

believe or not to believe. They suggest that we should ask the question ‘why?’


a reason means that we are asking for a justification for doing the action or accepting


whereas reflective thinking focuses on deciding what to believe or

type of questioning initiates a process that involves critical thinking

he roots of critical thinking date back to Socrates’ method of questioning. His

method was to ask probing questions that required a rational response.

18

as the structure on the left

women are wealthy; the structure on the right

Hudson (2000) identifies these kinds of

there are function ambiguities

isiting professors can

nevertheless functioning plays

can serve either as an adjective



ing us what to do or not to do, what to

hat we should ask the question ‘why?’ instead


ustification for doing the action or accepting


on deciding what to believe or

that involves critical thinking

he roots of critical thinking date back to Socrates’ method of questioning. His

method was to ask probing questions that required a rational response. Although it dates

19

back to Socrates, Dewey is accepted as the founder of the contemporary critical

thinking. Dewey (as cited in Kurfiss, 1988, p. 7) defines reflective thinking as:

Active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends that includes a conscious and voluntary effort to establish belief upon a firm basis of evidence and rationality.

Another early researcher who contributed to critical thinking is Ennis and his

early definition of critical thinking was “correct assessments of statements” and more

recently he has defined it as “Reflective and reasonable thinking that is focused on

deciding what to believe or do” (as cited in Kurfiss, 1998, p. 8).

Many attempts have been made to define critical thinking and there are various

definitions of critical thinking; however, the Delphi Project scientists tried to reach a

consensus for purposes of assessment and instruction in education put forth the

definition, known as the Delphi definition of the critical thinking is as follows:

We understand critical thinking to be purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. Critical Thinking is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such, Critical Thinking is a liberating force in education and a powerful resource in one's personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good thinking, Critical Thinking is a pervasive and self-rectifying human phenomenon. The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus, educating good critical thinkers means working toward this ideal. It combines developing Critical Thinking skills with nurturing those dispositions which consistently yield useful insights and which are the basis of a rational and democratic society. (Facione, 1990, p. 2)

Facione (2010) proposes six questions for effective thinking and problem-

solving in the form of an acronym as “IDEALS”. They are:

20

Identify the problem. —“What’s the real question we’re facing here?”Define the context. —“What are the facts and circumstances that frame this

problem?”Enumerate choices. —“What are our most plausible three or four options?”Analyze options. —“What is our best course of action, all things considered?”List reasons explicitly. —“Exactly why are we making this choice rather than

another?”Self-correct. — “Okay, let’s look at it again. What did we miss?”

Pirozzi (2003, p.197) describes critical thinking as “A very careful and

thoughtful way of dealing with events, issues, problems, decisions, or situations”. As

can be understood from the definition, critical thinking plays an important part in one’s

life since it makes a person more careful and a better decision maker. As mentioned

earlier, when a person becomes a critical thinker, s/he does not accept all the things

blindly but filters them by questioning.

Consequently, as Browne and Keeley (2007, p. 2) accentuate, critical thinking

refers to the talent to ask and answer hard hitting questions at the right time and the

enthusiasm to use these questions actively. In Delphi Report, experts suggested a list of

mental abilities and attitudes or habits including cognitive skills and dispositions. Next

sections will cover these skills and dispositions.

2.2.1 Cognitive Operations

The experts, who attended the Delphi Project, included crucial cognitive skills as

interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. To

further illustrate the cognitive skills, consider Figure 4 below (Facione, 2010).

21

Figure 4: Cognitive Skills

These skills and their sub-skills were defined by the experts; these skills are:

Interpretation is to comprehend and express the meaning or significance of a wide variety of experiences, situations, data, events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, rules, procedures or criteria. Analysisis to identify the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements, questions, concepts, descriptions or other forms of representation intended to express beliefs, judgments, experiences, reasons, information, or opinions. Evaluation is to assess the credibility of statements or other representations which are accounts or descriptions of a person's perception, experience, situation, judgment, belief, or opinion; and to assess the logical strength of the actual or intend inferential relationships among statements, descriptions, questions or other forms of representation. Inference is to identify and secure elements needed to draw reasonable conclusions; to form conjectures and hypotheses; to consider relevant information and to educe the consequences flowing from data, statements, principles, evidence, judgments, beliefs, opinions, concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms of representation. Explanation is to state the results of one's reasoning; to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological and contextual considerations upon which one's results were based; and to present one's reasoning in the form of cogent arguments. Self-regulation is “self-consciously to monitor one’s cognitive activities, the elements used in those activities, and the results educed, particularly by applying skills in analysis, and evaluation to one’s own inferential judgments

Purposeful Reflective Judgment

Analysis

Interpretation

Self-regulation

Inference

Explanation

Evaluation

22

with a view toward questioning, confirming, validating, or correcting either one’s reasoning or one’s results. (Facione, 1990, pp. 6-10)

They also defined the sub-skills of these cognitive skills, but they are not going

to be given in detail here. Although there are other sub-skills given by experts, they

included some relatively important ones. To see these sub-skills, please see the table 2

below:

Table 2: Consensus list of cognitive skills and sub-skills

Skill Sub-Skills

1. Interpretation CategorizationDecoding SignificanceClarifying Meaning

2. Analysis Examining IdeasIdentifying ArgumentsAnalyzing Arguments

3. Evaluation Assessing ClaimsAssessing Arguments

4. Inference Querying EvidenceConjecturing AlternativesDrawing Conclusions

5. Explanation Stating ResultsJustifying ProceduresPresenting Arguments

6. Self-Regulation Self-examinationSelf-correction

(Facione, 1990)

When discussing critical thinking, it would be unwise not to mention Bloom’s

taxonomy of educational objectives. Bloom’s taxonomy continues to be widely

accepted and taught. He was the Director of the Board of Examination at the University

of Chicago thought of a framework to facilitate exchange of test items among faculty

23

across several colleges. From 1949 to 1956, measurement specialists, including Bloom,

met every six months. Their objective was to create banks of tests items to measure

educational objectives across the colleges (Anderson & Krathwhol as cited in Özmen,

2006)

Benjamin Bloom and his colleagues developed a list of educational objectives

under three categories as cognitive (knowledge), psychomotor (skills), and affective

(attitude) and they published them in 1956. In his book, Taxonomy of Educational

Objectives –Handbook I, Bloom (1956) and his colleagues explained the levels of

cognitive domain as knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and

evaluation. Then Kratwohl, Bloom and Masia explained the affective domain in another

book, whose name is Taxonomy of Educational Objectives –Handbook II, published in

1964. Kratwohl, Bloom and Masia (1964) named the levels of affective domain as

receiving, responding, valuing, organization, and characterization by a value or value

complex.

2.2.2 Dispositions

Several pedagogical and assessment implications follow from the dispositional

dimension of Critical Thinking, implications which might not be apparent if educators

focused only on the skill dimension of Critical Thinking. The education of good critical

thinkers is more difficult than training students to execute a set of cognitive skills. For

example, in terms of pedagogy, modelling how to evaluate critically the information

which students would normally accept uncritically and encouraging them to do the same

can do wonders for developing their confidence in their Critical Thinking ability

(Facione, 1990, p. 14).

The expert consensus in Delphi Project (83%) recommended that good critical

thinkers can be characterized as exhibiting the following dispositions which are

explained under two categories as:

Approaches to life and living in general:

inquisitiveness with regard to a wide range of issues,

24

concern to become and remain generally well-informed,

alertness to opportunities to use Critical Thinking,

trust in the processes of reasoned inquiry,

self-confidence in one's own ability to reason,

open-mindedness regarding divergent world views,

flexibility in considering alternatives and opinions,

understanding of the opinions of other people,

fair-mindedness in appraising reasoning,

honesty in facing one's own biases, prejudices,

stereotypes, egocentric or sociocentric tendencies,

prudence in suspending, making or altering judgments,

willingness to reconsider and revise views where honest

reflection suggests that change is warranted.

Approaches to specific issues, questions or problems:

clarity in stating the question or concern,

orderliness in working with complexity,

diligence in seeking relevant information,

reasonableness in selecting and applying criteria,

care in focusing attention on the concern at hand,

persistence though difficulties are encountered,

precision to the degree permitted by the subject and the circumstance.

(Facione, 1990, p. 13)

To summarize Critical Thinking dispositions Facione (2010) provides a clear

illustration as follows:

25

Figure 5: Critical thinking dispositions

After this brief introduction of Critical Thinking briefly, we are now going to

deal with Critical Reasoning and Arguments in the subsequent parts.

2.3 Reasoning and Arguments

Reasoning is the indispensible part of critical thinking and in our life, we need

reasoning to solve problems. For the last few decades, there have been some

controversies regarding the differences between argumentation and reasoning. Walton

(1990) distinguishes them by defining reasoning as “A sequence of steps from some

points (premises) to other points (conclusions)” (p. 404). He, then, explains that the

premises generally stand for propositions, but they can also represent the components of

other speech acts, such as interrogative and imperative utterances, in some

circumstances. On the other hand, he defines argument as “A social and verbal means of

trying to resolve or at least to contend with, a conflict or difference that has arisen or

existed between two (or more) parties” (p. 441). According to him in an argument there

must be a claim put forward by one of the parties and the opposing party must question

that claim. Arguments may result from a disagreement, an unsolved problem, an

unverified hypothesis. Human beings use various ways to overcome these problematic

situations by using different types of arguments.

Cottrell (2005, p. 3) states that reasoning starts with ourselves and it includes:

having reasons for what we believe and do, and being aware of what these are;

Inquisitive

Judicious

Truthseeking

Confident in

Reasoning

open-minded

Analytical

Systematic

26

critically evaluating our own beliefs and actions;

being able to present to others the reasons for our beliefs and actions.

Similarly, Diestler (1998, p. 82) emphasizes that knowing common patterns of

reasoning will help us to be aware of the process in reasoning, to assess the arguments

we encounter, and to discover and inspect hypotheses underlying premises and

conclusions.

Traditionally logic proposed two basic means of reaching conclusion: induction

(or inductive reasoning) and deduction (or deductive reasoning). Induction (from Latin

in=into + ducere = to lead) means building from specifics to general conclusion.

Deduction (from Latin de = away from + ducere = to lead) is just the opposite process

(Goshgarian & Krueger, 1994, p. 77).

2.3.1 Deductive Reasoning

In their definition of deductive reasoning, Rasool, Banks and McCarthy (1993),

Kahane and Cavender (2006), and Walton (2006) explain that the conclusion of an

argument must be true when all the propositions are true, because although implicitly

stated in the propositions, the conclusion has already been stated by them, so it must

follow logically.

In traditional deductive logic, an argument is evaluated in a one-step process. A

deductive model, such as propositional calculus, is directly applied to the argument, and

tests out whether the argument is valid or not (Walton, 2008a, p. 145). Here are two

examples for deductive reasoning:

Argument 1

Premise 1:All leaders experience stress in their lives.

Premise 2: Atatürk was a leader.

Conclusion: Therefore, he must have experienced stress in his life.

Argument 2

Premise 1: If this wire is made of copper, then it will conduct electricity.

Premise 2: This wire is made of copper.

27

Conclusion: This wire will conduct electricity. (Kahane & Cavender,

2006, p. 9)

In both examples, the premises are commonly accepted as true, thus the

conclusion must be true according to deductive reasoning. However, as we shall

discuss in 2.3.5.2 deductive reasoning can be challenged in some ways and fail to

confirm the conclusion.

2.3.2 Inductive Reasoning

Unlike deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning is not strict and linear. Hughes

(2000) affirms this difference by saying “Inductive arguments are distinguished from

deductive arguments by the fact that they lack the ability to guarantee their conclusions”

(p. 211). The definition of this type of argument is that “If the premises are true, the

conclusion is probably true, but it could possibly be false” (Rasool et al., 1993; Hurley,

2000;Starkey, 2004; Walton, 2005, 2006).

As mentioned in the definition, when one reasons inductively, he begins with a

piece of evidence and adds it to another, then another, until he has gathered enough

support to arrive at a general conclusion. The following example can elucidate the

process of inductive argument.

Premise 1. Tiredness can cause illness.

Premise 2. John has been working too much nowadays.

Premise 3. John is ill.

Conclusion: Therefore, tiredness may be the cause of his illness.

As mentioned before, both deductive and inductive reasoning are classical way

of reasoning and are still used for general purposes; nonetheless, when it comes to

critical reasoning they may be challenged, and we will cover this in evaluating

arguments part.

28

2.3.3 Critical Reasoning

To begin with, Scull (1987) mentions that Greeks introduced the word ‘logic’

and it is still used to depict the reasoning process in the evaluation of any proposition.

Plato (c.428-348 B.C.) and Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) trained their students to think

evidently and critically about the premises given in arguments and to use valid

induction and deduction to accept conclusions (p. 245).

Cederbloom and Paulsen (2005) explain critical reasoning by distinguishing it

from mere disagreement:

When we engage in mere disagreement, we seek to maintain the same beliefs we held prior to considering a new position. When we engage in critical reasoning, we cultivate an attitude of relative detachment. If an arguer points out that reasons we ourselves would accept really support a specific conclusion and therefore would compel us to give up some conflicting view we hold, we see this as a gain, not a loss. (p. 5)

Critical reasoning is a skill, and like all the skills it can be improved by practice.

Critical reasoning can be practiced almost all the time in our lives; while reading,

listening and talking to other people, and observing the world around you. Boyd (2003,

p. 5) defines critical reasoning as a process that facilitates our examining and evaluating

written and other types of communications so as to make knowledgeable judgments

about the arguments set forth therein. Therefore, it can be said that the study of critical

reasoning improves all four skills; listening, reading, speaking and writing.

As noted before, critical reasoning and thinking requires asking questions to the

arguments that are presented to us. Asking questions can help us figure out the others’

reasoning and it can also help us determine the strong and weak points of the

arguments. Browne and Keeley (2007, p. 83) suggest the following questions to apply

in our reasoning:

1. What are the issue and the conclusion?

2. What are the reasons?

3. What words or phrases are ambiguous?

4. What are the value conflicts and assumptions?

29

5. What are the descriptive assumptions?

To be able to ask these questions and to find answers to them, we need to gain

and improve some necessary knowledge to help us. By improving critical thinking and

reasoning skills we can achieve success in everything we do since it will help us create

strong and logical arguments and also evaluate others’ arguments which leads us to

make good decisions.

2.3.4 Identifying Fact and Opinion

Identifying facts and opinions in a text is an essential step in critical thinking and

reasoning. As a reader or listener, one cannot criticize the facts but we should be aware

of the fact that people may try to convince or influence us by exposing their opinions as

facts. At this point distinguishing between fact and opinion undertakes an important

role.

To start with the definitions of facts and opinions will help us discriminate them.

Rasool et al. (1993) mention three definitions of ‘fact’ as:

1. A fact is something most of us agree is true.

2. A fact is something that is true.

3. A fact is something that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (pp. 68-

69).

Similarly, Fahnestock and Secor (1990), Swinburne and Warner (1992), Pirozzi

(2003) and Starkey (2004) define fact as something that can be verified, or confirmed in

an unbiased manner and when it is verified, we must accept it.

On the other hand, an opinion is subjective and they depend on the people’s

individual beliefs and thoughts. An opinion represents personal point of views. Pirozzi

(2003, p. 371) explains this notion as “Someone’s personal judgment about something

that has not been proved, verified, or confirmed in an unbiased manner.”

Essentially, the difference between fact and opinion is the difference between

believing and knowing. Opinions may be based on facts, but they are still what we

think, not what we know. Opinions are debatable; facts usually are not. A good test for

30

whether something is a fact or opinion is to ask yourself, “Can this statement be

debated? Is this known for certain to be true?” If you can answer yes to the first

question, you have an opinion; if you answer yes to the second, you have a fact. If

you’re not sure, then it’s best to assume that it’s an opinion until you can verify that it is

indeed a fact (Chesla, 2005, p. 28).

To see the difference clearly, consider the following examples:

1. World War I broke out in 1914.

2. Wellington is the capital of New Zealand.

3. I was born in 1978.

4. Our experts tell us that BMW is the best car today.

5. This is the most delicious food.

6. The summers in Aydın are really terrible because they are usually very hot.

7. İnönü, who was the second president of Turkish Republic, was a great

leader.

In the light of the given explanations, when we examine the above examples;

sentences 1, 2 and 3 are facts and they can be verified by referring to a variety of

resources. On the contrary, sentences 4 and 5 are just opinions; sentence 4 is an opinion

for two reasons; first, who are the experts and what area are they experts in? Next, what

makes it the best? In addition to these questions, both questions have superlative

adjectives that are relative and may change from person to person. Sentences 6 and 7

are combinations of opinion and facts because Aydın’s being hot and İnönü’s being the

second president can be verified; nevertheless being terrible and great is simply a matter

of opinion. A person might like very hot climate and it would be wonderful for him/her.

Similarly, some people would agree that İnönü was a great leader while the others

disagree. Besides, there are some words that signal the opinions and make it easy to

identify the opinions in a text or speech. These are:

Believe

Best/worst

Expect

Feel

In my opinion

Least/most

May/may not

Might/might not

My impression is…

My perspective is…

31

My point of view is...

My sense is…

Possibly

Probably

Should/should not

Think

Yorke (n.d., p. 1)

To sum up, we should bear in mind that the first step to critical thinking and

reasoning is to differentiate facts from opinions. When we detect the opinion we can ask

thought-provoking questions or we can object to them.

2.3.5 Arguments

The word argument is generally comprehended as debate and fight like in “I had

a great argument with my girlfriend”. We immediately think of disagreements, shouting

and heartbreaking. However, in critical thinking and reasoning, argument means stating

a claim, implicitly or explicitly, and supporting it with reasons and evidence.

Critical thinking involves the justification of beliefs, and argumentation is the

vehicle by which justification is offered. For many people, the term ‘argument’ suggests

violent disagreement, or at least a vigorous exchange of ideas. In the context of critical

thinking, an argument is a ‘train of reasoning’ in which claims and supporting reasons

are linked to establish a position. Arguments are also, however, ‘human interactions

through which such trains of reasoning are formulated, debated, and trashed out’

(Toulmin, Rieke, & Janik in Kurfiss, 1988, p. 13).

To make the concept of argument quite precise, we should consider the

following definitions:

“Argument is a set of statements in which one or more statements provide

support for another statement in that set” (Boyd, 2003, p. 27).

“An argument, as it occurs in logic, is a group of statements, one or more of

which (the premises) are claimed to provide support for, or reasons to believe, one of

the others (the conclusion)”. (Hurley, 2000, p. 1)

The broader definition of argument is given by Copi and Cohen (2004) as:

32

A collection of propositions in which some propositions, the premises, are given as reasons for accepting the truth of another proposition, the conclusion. In other words, the conclusion of an argument is the proposition that is affirmed on the basis of the other propositions in the argument. These other propositions, which are affirmed (or assumed) as providing support or reasons for accepting the conclusion as true, are the premises of that argument (p. 3).

As seen in the definitions above, an argument has two parts, one of which is a

premise or premises supporting the other part, namely conclusion. Wright (2001, p. 96)

represents argument schematically in the following way:

Reasons for thinking something (Supports, Premises)

ARGUMENT = ____________________________________________

The something (Conclusion)

To understand this reasoning clearly, consider the following:

Reason 1. All misdemeanors are violations of the law.

Reason 2. Pickpocketing is a misdemeanor.

ARGUMENT = ___________________________________________

Therefore, picpocketing is a violation of law.

Bowell and Kemp (2005) state that a person may have an argument about any

topic and that argument may have several premises but it will generally have only one

conclusion.

2.3.5.1 Recognizing Arguments

As previously mentioned we should be careful about arguments and approach

them critically and assess them. To be able to assess an argument, we should realize it

first. We do not always assess arguments but we also form arguments and Weston

(1992, p. 9) suggests that while stating an argument, the first step is to ask about the

thing we are trying to prove and our conclusion. Additionally, we should remember that

the conclusion is the statement for which we are giving reasons. The statements which

give our reasons are called ‘premises’. In a parallel way, Walton (2006) states that “The

ability to identify an argument by stating its premises and conclusions is a very valuable

skill of critical argumentation. Only when an argument has been thus identified can it be

33

critically examined in a clear and objective fashion” (p. 7). The order of the premises

and conclusion may change; in other words conclusion may be stated at the beginning

or at the end. There are some words that signal premises and conclusions and they are

called as premise and conclusion indicators in several references. A compilation of

these indicator words from different resources are listed below (Bowell & Kemp, 2002,

2005; Boyd, 2003; Copi & Cohen, 2004, 2005; Hurley, 2000; Jason, 2001; Walton,

2006):

Premise Indicators

as

as indicated by

as shown by

assuming that

because

due to

follows from

for

for the reason that

given that

in view of the fact that

inasmuch as

insofar as

may be deduced from

may be derived from

may be inferred from

my evidence for this

my reason is

on the assumption that

owing to

seeing that

since

the reason is that

this is so because

Conclusion Indicators

accordingly

as a result

bears out to the point that

consequently

entails that

for these reasons

for this reason

hence

I conclude that

in consequence

in summary

it is clear that

it follows that

leads me to believe that

proves that

proves that

so

suggests very strongly that

then

therefore

34

thus

we may infer

which allows us to infer that

which entails that

which implies that

which means that

which points to the conclusion that

which shows that

In the light of the given indicators we can consider these examples:

You should graduate from college because you will earn more money with a

college degree.

The need for the United States to send troops to Central America is indicated by

the buildup of armed rebels in countries neighboring those with civil wars.

Seeing that the current policy of supplying organ transplants is benefiting the

rich, a new program is needed.

Based on all of the reasons just stated, we can conclude that the flow of illegal

drugs must be stopped.

In summary, postal rates must be increased because we can no longer afford to

run the postal system with a deficit.

We have had very little rain this season. Consequently, water will have to be

rationed.

In the above examples underlined words show us the premises of arguments, on

the other hand italicized words show the conclusions. These indicator words can help us

to determine the parts of arguments; nonetheless, Jason (2001) warns us that these

indicator words do not always signal an argument (p. 37). For example: I have been

working here since 2005. Besides, there may be arguments without indicators or even

without premises or conclusions and they want us to deduce it. E.g. This shampoo

makes my hair feel so soft. In this example, there is an argument, that is, this shampoo

makes my hair soft and it will make your hair soft, too. Therefore you should use it.

2.3.5. 2 Evaluating Arguments

After identifying arguments, we should evaluate and be critical about them. As

Hurley (2000, p. 1) states that arguments can be classified into two basic groups. The

first group includes the arguments whose reasons actually support the conclusion and

the other includes the arguments whose reasons do not. The first group is called as good

35

(cogent) arguments, and the latter is called as bad (fallacious) arguments. Similarly,

Kahane and Cavender (2006) recommend that we think a little about what a good

(cogent) argument is, as opposed to bad (fallacious) in order to set aside the tricks

aiming to persuade us (p. 1). All arguments must be clear, relevant, and consistent; a

violation of any of these criteria results in a fallacy, and all fallacies are poor arguments

(Boyd, 2003, p. 53). Hughes (2000) gives seven rules for assessing arguments and

explains them one by one. These rules are:

1. Identify the main conclusion.

2. Identify the premises.

3. Identify the structure of the argument.

4. Check the acceptability of the premises.

5. Check the relevance of the premises.

6. Check the adequacy of the premises

7. Look for counter-arguments.

Diestler (1998) illustrates the evaluation of an argument in terms of soundness,

validity and truthfulness as in figure 6 below:

True False

Valid

Invalid

Figure 6: Criteria for a sound argument.

Examples:

P1: Rare things are valuable.

P2: A blind horse is also rare.

………………………………….

C: So, a blind horse is valuable.

P1: Tarkan is short.

Sound Argument:Correct FormTrue Premises

Unsound Argument:Correct FormUntrue Premises

Unsound Argument:Incorrect FormTrue Premises

Unsound Argument:Incorrect FormUntrue Premises

36

P2: İstanbul is the most crowded city.

…………………………………………

C: The economy will be OK in a short time.

The above examples are unsound arguments. The fist argument has true

premises but the conclusion does not follow. The second argument also has true

premises but incorrect form. The premises have no coherence or relations, so the

conclusions are something nonsense.

2.4 Reasoning Fallacies

Fallacies are poor arguments the premises of which fail to satisfy the support of

its conclusion. Although arguments have good forms, they are faulty in the reasoning.

Fallacies are typical errors in reasoning that we commonly come across and can see if

examine them critically. Tindale (2008) quoting Humblin gives the definition as “A

fallacious argument, as almost every account from Aristotle onwards tells you, is one

that seems to be valid but is not so” (p. 2). Similarly, Copi and Cohen (2004, p. 39)

define fallacy as “An error in reasoning, a kind of argument that may seem to be

correct, but that proves, on examination, not to be so”.

As mentioned in the definition, fallacies seem to be correct, and also they are

psychologically persuasive. In everyday life, we encounter such fallacious arguments a

lot; for instance, in political speeches, advertisements, newspapers, courtroom speeches

by lawyers etc. In order not to be persuaded by these kind of word tricks we, as critical

thinkers, should be aware of the fallacies. Walton (1995, pp. 237-238) presents six basic

characteristics of fallacies:

1. A failure, lapse, or error, subject to criticism, correction, or rebuttal.

2. A failure that occurs in what is supposed to be an argument (argument

requirement).

3. A failure associated with deception or illusion.

4. A violation of one or more of the maxims of reasonable dialogue or a departure

from acceptable procedures in that type of dialogue.

5. An instance of an underlying, systematic kind of wrongly applied technique of

reasonable argumentation (argumentation theme).

37

6. A serious violation, as opposed to an incidental blunder, error, or weakness of

execution.

It is impossible to list every fallacy that has been employed to change how

people think. The list would be too long to be useful, with only subtle differences

among several of the techniques. Accordingly, only the most common and

representative techniques are discussed. If we understand how fallacies work in general,

we will be better prepared to recognize and defend against them. Toulmin, Rieke, and

Janik (1984, p. 132) call the ability to recognize fallacies "a kind of sensitivity training"

because they train the reader to be sensitive to common tricks of persuasion.

2.4.1 Taxonomy of Fallacies

As Copi and Cohen (2004, p. 40) mention in their book Essentials of Logic there

are various kinds of classification of fallacies. First, Aristotle identified 13 types of

fallacies; other contemporary authors identified the fallacies in a range of 41 to 112

different types. Even in Dowden’s (2010) Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, there

are 191 fallacies. One of the most distinguished classifications was done by Mill in the

19th century. One of the outstanding philosophers, John Stuart Mill (1886, p. 487)

classified fallacies as follows:

of Simple Inspection ………………………………………1. Fallacies a priori

From evidence Inductive 2. Fallacies of observation distinctly Fallacies 3. Fallacies of generalization

FALLACIES conceivedDeductive

Fallacies 4. Fallacies of Ratiocination

From evidence Indistinctly ………… 5. Fallacies of confusion of Inference conceived

Figure 7: Mill’s classification of fallacies

Carter (2004) asserts that logicians have studied fallacies for ages, and most of

these fallacies have several names including Latin names. Many contemporary

38

philosophers try to put the fallacies into groups. Some of them categorize fallacies

under three groups, some others categorize them under four and they give different

names to these categories. Even Copi and Cohen have different categorization in their

books Essentials of Logic (2004) and Introduction to Logic (2005). In Essentials of

Logic they categorize as (1) Fallacies of relevance, (2) Fallacies of Presumption, and (3)

Fallacies of Ambiguity; on the other hand in Introduction to Logic they categorize as (1)

Fallacies of relevance, (2) Defective Induction, (3) Fallacies of Presumption, and (4)

Fallacies of Ambiguity. Toulmin et al. (1984) categorize as (1) Fallacies that result from

missing grounds, (2) Fallacies that result from irrelevant grounds (3) Fallacies that

result from defective grounds. (4) Fallacies that result from unwarranted grounds and

(5) Fallacies that result from ambiguities in our arguments. Boyd (2003) categorizes as

(1) Fallacies of Ambiguity, (2) Fallacies of Irrelevance, and Fallacy of Inconsistency.

Carter (2004) also categorizes them under four groups as (1) Fallacies of Irrelevant

Appeals, (2) Fallacies of False Emphasis, (3) Fallacies of Changing the Point, and

Miscellaneous Fallacies, and Pirie (2006) categorizes under five headings as (1) formal,

(2) informal (linguistic), (3) informal (relevance - omission), (4) informal (relevance -

intrusion), (5) informal (relevance - presumption).

For the reason that there are several and various taxonomies, no classification

will be given here. Only the most common will be discussed in this study.

2.4.1.1 The Appeal to False Authority

This fallacy is also known as ‘argumentum ad verecundiam’, appeal to

inappropriate authority, inadequate authority, misuse of authority, irrelevant authority,

or questionable authority. It was first named by John Locke (1690), in his famous work

An Essay Concerning Human Understanding Book IV -Knowledge and Opinion, he

explains ad verecundiam as:

…to bring forward the opinions of men whose skills, learning, eminence, power, or some other cause has made them famous and given them some kind of authority in peoples’ minds. ·This often succeeds, because· a man is thought to be unduly proud if he doesn’t readily yield to the judgment of approved authors, which is customarily received with respect and submission by others. . . . Someone who backs his position with such authorities thinks they ought to win the argument for

39

him, and if anyone stands out against them he will call such a person impudent. This, I think, may be called argumentum ad verecundiam [= ‘argument aimed at (producing) deference (in one’s opponent)’](chapter XVII, para. 19).

Copi and Cohen (2004, p. 43) usher this fallacy that occurs when an argument is

based on the opinion of someone who has no expertise in the field of the issue, and they

gave a good example for us to recognize it better. We can better understand this fallacy

by considering the subsequent arguments:

Mr. X is a Nobel Prize-winning medical researcher. He says that taking

Vitamin Y can reduce the severity of the common cold. So if you feel

yourself coming down with a cold, you should take Vitamin Y.

Mr. X is an amazingly famous actor. He says that taking Vitamin Y can

reduce the severity of the common cold. So if you feel yourself coming

down with a cold, you should take Vitamin Y.

The first argument can be acceptable because it contains a reasonable authority,

on the other hand, the second should not be accepted; it has the appeal to false authority

fallacy. This type of fallacy is generally used in advertorials and testimonials to lure us

via famous sportsmen, movie stars, singers and even professors of other fields (If you

do not believe me, look what he says). That’s why; Walton (2006) has warned us and

actually proposed six basic questions to expert opinion:

1. Expertise Question. How credible is E as an expert source?

2. Field Question. Is E an expert in the field that A is in?

3. Opinion Question. What did E assert that implies A?

4. Trustworthiness Question. Is E personally reliable as a source?

5. Consistency Question. Is A consistent with what other experts assert?

6. Backup Evidence Question. Is E’s assertion based on evidence?

To further illustrate the role of this questioning method in detecting appeal to

false authority, let us examine the next quotation:

Our family doctor said that the creation of muonic atoms of hydrogen and

tritium are the basics of producing a continuous nuclear fusion reaction at room

40

temperature. In view of his expertise as a physician, it points to the conclusion that this

is definitely true.

If we examine this argument by asking the questions, we can see that this

argument fails in question 2 and commits a fallacy. Furthermore, as Gula (2002) states

“His opinion should carry no more weight than that of anyone else… Few listeners,

however, are likely to notice the irrelevance. They may transfer their positive feelings

for the impressive person to what the person is saying” (p. 44).

2.4.1.2 Either-Or Fallacy

This fallacy is also sometimes called as the false dilemma, black-or-white

fallacy, false dichotomy or false bifurcation. This fallacy is committed when one

premise of an argument is an ‘‘either . . . or . . .’’ (disjunctive) statement that presents

two alternatives as if they were jointly exhaustive (as if no third alternative were

possible). One of these alternatives is usually preferred by the arguer (Hurley, 2000, p.

161). Generally, in recent textbooks, President Bush’s quotation “You are either with us

or against us” is given as an example for this fallacy. Here, Bush does not give any

room for neutrality. Another generally used sentence example is “Either love it or leave

it”. General pattern in this kind of fallacious reasoning is:

Premise 1. Either claim A is true or claim B is true (when both claims could be false)

Premise 2. Claim B is false

Conclusion: Thus, claim A is true

This can be made quite explicit by the following example:

Premise 1. Either 2X2 = 5 or 2X2 = 2

Premise 2. 2X2 is not 5

Conclusion: So, 2X2 = 2

Diestler (1998) claims that either-or-fallacy is easy to make for two reasons;

first, human beings like to think solutions should be clear-cut and plain; if it is clear cut

and plain, it saves our time and we do not have to make much effort in complicated

situations. Second reason is that language is polarized thinking by including few words

to describe a middle ground between extremes (p. 249). Of course, not all either-or

41

disjunctives are fallacies. There are absolute antonyms and in these cases arguments do

not commit any fallacies (e.g. A man can be either dead or alive. He is dead; hence he

cannot be alive).

2.4.1.3 Hasty Generalization Fallacy

This fallacy is also variously known as secundum quid, hasty conclusion,

irrelevant conclusion, improper data fallacy, leaping to a conclusion, or fallacy of

insufficient sample. Kahane and Cavender (2006) elucidate that this fallacy is

committed when a conclusion is construed from inadequate data or proofs. This may be

committed in many different ways and circumstances such as judging a politician

depending on a 30-second TV speech, or concluding that people from a place are bad

basing on two-or three people from the same hometown did something wrong on a

particular issue. Walton (2006) gives a very good example for this:

“I had a bad time with my former husband. From that experience I’ve learned

that all men are no good” (p. 262).

In this example, the argument reaches to a conclusion too hastily to a universal

generalization. We can give many examples from our daily lives for this type of

reasoning fallacy. Consider these examples:

Don’t buy this brand of chicken, once I bought, it was smelly and we

dropped it.

I met three men from Rochester last week and they were very friendly. I

think all men from Rochester must be polite.

It can be said that prejudice is usually stems from hasty generalizations. To

notice this, have a look at the following evidence:

“I had two friends from Düzce when I was at university. We were very close

friends. After we had graduated, they left without saying goodbye. Furthermore, they

haven’t called me since then. For that reason, people from Düzce are hollow-hearted.”

This argument can be challenged in two ways. First, s/he has only two sample

cases and s/he cannot generalize it to whole and anyone can show her/him three good

42

examples. On the other hand, we can make him/her ponder about her/his/ argument by

asking the question “Why haven’t you called them, then?”

2.4.1.4 Self-Contradiction

As discussed in evaluating arguments, a cogent reasoning must be consistent.

Self-contradiction, also called inconsistency, fallacy is committed when we try to

persuade people by an argument which has inconsistent statements or statements that

contradict each other (Kahane & Cavender, 2006). Pirie (2006, p. 36) gives the rule

clearly that one commits an inconsistency fallacy if the conclusion of the statement or

argument contradicts the reasons, at least one of them must be wrong. This means that

our conclusion is either false itself, or derived from false information. Boyd (2003)

gives a good sample paragraph representing inconsistency:

My Christmas vacation was the best vacation I have ever had! Joan, the girl I dated in high school, but had not seen for several years, was home to visit her parents. By accident, we ran into each other at the grocery store, and our relationship picked up just the way it was in high school. She is a great person, and her folks really like me. In fact, her mother called and told me that Joan was going to the store to buy some red peppers. I had dreamed of the time we would meet again. Someone once said anything worth having is worth planning and waiting for –they were right! (p. 60)

If we carefully examine this paragraph, there are some sequences of statements

and we can easily point the inconsistency. If one planned something, it cannot be by

chance. Another example can illustrate this issue further. Suppose someone said “Drunk

drivers are more careful than clear-headed drivers because they know that the

probability of having an accident is higher for them”. This sentence is inconsistent in

itself; if the possibility of having an accident is higher, why do they drive? Kahane and

Cavender (2006, p. 54) illustrate this by referring one of Tom Meyer’s cartoons given

below:

Figure 8: A cartoon on self

2.4.1.5 Appeal to Common Practice

This fallacy is also known as

(2008b) clarifies the use of

sentiments in order to win assent for the conclusion of an

good evidence” (pp. 107

this sort of strategy in an

words, we want to show that

want to be left out or left behind the accepted styles

Example 1

Siz hala annenizin margarinini mi kullanıyorsunuz? can be translated as “Do you

still use your mother’s margarine

We don’t need majority support from UN member nations.

We don’t need majority support from our own people.

Figure 8: A cartoon on self-contradiction fallacy

Appeal to Common Practice

This fallacy is also known as bandwagon, or jumping on the bandwagon.

use of this fallacy as “Appeal to mass enthusiasms or popular

to win assent for the conclusion of an argument not supported by

107-108). And also he warns us that we can easily

an argument. Most of us want to be known up

we want to show that our views are in line with popular trends, and

left out or left behind the accepted styles or leading opinions


margarine?”

We don’t need majority support from the security council.

We are promoting democratic values around the world whether anyone likes it or not

43

jumping on the bandwagon. Walton

ppeal to mass enthusiasms or popular

argument not supported by

easily be affected by

want to be known up-to-date; in other

trends, and we do not

or leading opinions.


We don’t need majority support from the security

are promoting democratic values around the world whether anyone likes

or not.

44

Example 2

A: Why did you pass that red light?

B: Come on! Everybody was doing, so I did it too.

Example 3

A: Hey! Don’t drop your garbage there?

B: Why? Everybody did. Look! There is a lot.

As seen in the above examples, this fallacy includes a false appeal to the

authority of ‘everyone’. The first example is from an advert slogan and it seems just like

an interrogative sentence. Actually, it states that the fashion has changed and everybody

has already started using our margarine, so it is time you changed your margarine too.

In examples two and three, the arguer wants to persuade us by showing everybody as

evidence. In both cases, it is wrong even if everybody does it. In fact, we have a

question to ask the person who commits this fallacy in our language: “Herkes camdan

atlarsa sen de atlayacak mısın?” literal translation of this question could be “If

everybody jumped off the window, would you do that, too?” Diestler (1998) states that

we learn committing this fallacy in our early childhood. And she goes on explaining

how we learned it as “We are told that a course of action should be taken or an idea

should be supported because ‘everyone’ is doing it or believes it” (p. 244). There are

some fallacies similar to this fallacy as appeal to common belief and appeal to tradition.

As their name implies, the former is committed by referring the beliefs of a specific

group and the latter is committed by referring to the traditions gained over time.

2.4.1.6 Part-Whole Fallacy

This fallacy is also called composition fallacy and it can simply be explained as

form each to all. Copi and Cohen (2004) define composition fallacy as “Reasoning

fallaciously from the attributes of the parts of a whole to the attributes of the whole

itself” (p. 67). And their outstanding example for this makes this fallacy

comprehensible:

Every part of this machine is light; therefore this machine as a whole must be

light.

45

Here, the mistake causing the fallacy is obvious. Although the premise is true,

the conclusion fails. If you add a lot of light parts together, the whole will be heavy or at

least not light. Take a PC or its monitor; its small parts (circuits) are very light indeed.

However, PC as whole is relatively heavy. Other good examples can be given from

football fanaticism and the subject of chemistry:

Example 1

All the players in Fenerbahçe are the best players in Turkey. For this reason,

Fenerbahçe is the best team.

Example 2

Oxygen and hydrogen are gases at room temperature. Therefore water (H20) is a

gas at room temperature.

In the first example, the team may have even the best players of the world but

having the best players does not necessarily make a team the best. They may not get on

well as a team member. In the second, anyone who knows what gas is can easily detect

the faulty in reasoning here that water is a substance. The opposite of this fallacy is

division fallacy in which arguer divides a whole to the part and attributes the features of

the whole to the each part. E.g. if five workers can do this work in two hours, then a

worker can do it in ten hours. But do the workers work in the same manner? Or there

may be some works which can be done by the help of others.

2.4.1.7 Stereotyping Fallacy

“Stereotyping occurs when, on the basis of some members of a class having a

characteristic or belonging to another class, other members are assumed to have that

characteristic or belong to that other class” (Goatly, 2000, p. 55). Using stereotypes as

if they are precise generalizations for the entire group is also a faulty in reasoning.

Stereotypes are our general beliefs about groups and categorize people, objects, and

events by these stereotypes in our minds; but these beliefs are hyperboles.

46

For example, consider the stereotype "She’s from İzmir, girls in İzmir said to be

beautiful, so she must be beautiful." This conveys a mistaken impression of all girls

from İzmir. Although this stereotyping is in a good sense, it is fallacious.

Another example can be given about Brazilians because of the news about

Carnival. In our stereotype, they can dance very well and we can ask our Brazilian

friend to dance by saying “Aren’t you from Brazil, you must dance well, show us how

you dance!” Dowden (2010) warns us about the danger in our reasoning by using

stereotypes as “Speakers or listeners will not realize that even the best stereotypes are

accurate only when taken probabilistically. As a consequence, the use of stereotypes can

breed racism, sexism and other form of bigotry”.

2.4.1.8 Sexism Fallacy

This fallacy is similar to stereotyping fallacy. The difference in this fallacy is

that we attribute a specific stereotype to only one gender. Engle (2001) states that it is

the most common fallacy, and it is one of the most difficult to discover. English

speaking people have historically used masculine pronouns when referring to groups

that can be either male or female. Consider the following statement:

Doctors should spend-more time with their wives and children.

This statement assumes that all doctors are male. However, for the last few

decades scientists have been studying on sexism in languages, written texts and also text

books. But still a common insight about this fallacy, even among logicians, has not been

established yet. As I was reviewing the literature on doing research on the internet I

came across a debate on website the Radical Academy (2002), which is about

philosophy. A reader was accusing the philosophers of using sexist language, which

means committing sexism fallacy. Her sentence was:

Argument 1. “Dear radical philosophers; if your website is radical, why does it

condone sexist language?”

47

Argument 2. I was reading an article about fallacies, and found that the author

continually assumed that all philosophers are men. They are not. I am living proof of

that.

We have been surrounded by the sexism fallacy in our daily life throughout the

history; even we have some sayings or idioms about genders, such as “This is men’s

work.”; “Elinin hamuruyla erkek işine karışma!” and “Kadının yeri mutfak, işi de

doğurmaktır.” “Women’s place is the kitchen.” and so on.

2.4.1.9 The Appeal to Emotion

To start with, Carter (2004) gives the definition of the appeal to emotion fallacy,

as “In an appeal to emotion the idea is to win over either your opponent or the audience

by invoking some kind of emotion. Patriotism, sympathy, hate, sexual desire, religious

fervor, and fear can all be effective in this way” (p. 84).

The speeches of politicians are generally full of this type. Copi and Cohen

(2004) give the speeches of Adolf Hitler to effect his German listeners by using

patriotism and love of country. Similarly, we can see some politicians or leaders using

this fallacy by referring to our religions and beliefs; even they use this fallacy in an

exaggerated way by crying in front of the media.

Here, a lot of examples could be presented about our current political events for

this type of fallacy; yet there are enough reasons not to do so. That’s why an example

from advertising sector will be examined:

Example: An advertisement showing happy people who own a specific bank’s

credit card and shopping tries to invoke the emotions by establishing a connection with

card and the state of being happy. Consequently, it suggests that if the customers have

that card, they will be happy like the ones in the advertisement. This is simply the

fallacy of appeal to emotion as if you were not the one who would pay for it;

nonetheless, when you think about the due date for payment you can recover your

consciousness.

Walton (2008b) asserts that both the argumentum ad misericordiam that is

appeal to pity (in 2.4.1.10), and argumentum ad populum (in 2.4.1.5) generally appeal

48

to the emotions, passions or popular feelings of a group of addressees. We could also

consider appeal to force (in 2.4.1.11) as a sub category of appeal to emotion. And if

they are used to make others accept a conclusion without providing good reasons to

support the conclusion, they commit a faulty reasoning. (p. 19)

2.4.1.10 The Appeal to Pity (argument ad misericordiam)

As noted earlier, this fallacy appeals to just emotions without any reasonable

premises. Walton (1997) wrote a book which includes only this type of fallacy. In this

book he discusses the appeal to pity in a detailed way. He gives the definition by

quoting Crossley and Wilson (1979) as “The speaker's use of ‘highly emotive

terminology’ to ‘play upon the hearer's feelings’ to gain acceptance of his conclusion

and warns the reader to try to avoid irrelevant considerations and illegitimate appeals”

(p. 2). However, in the introduction part of the book, he explains that there are some

cases where the argument ad misericordiam could be used in a nonfallacious way, such

as request for funding for medical research to aid or relieve the distress of afflicted

children (p. xiii). He goes on explaining when and how this appeal to pity is treated as

fallacy:

There is no shortage of everyday case study materials on this type of argument. In fact, it would be difficult not to encounter familiar cases that appear everywhere in modern life that illustrate very graphically how powerful the ad misericordiam is as a tool of persuasion. Especially in the 1990s, people accept appeals to pity in all kinds of cases in trials, immigration hearings, parole cases, charitable appeals for aid, public relation campaigns on behalf of causes like animal rights, and all sorts of other causes and act to comply with the requests made on the basis of these appeals. As a professor for twenty-five years, I have been told many tearful tales of pitiable circumstances in pleas to grant extensions for assignment deadlines. In one of the more dramatic pleas of this kind, the student claimed that he would be deported and shot if he did not get a passing grade (pp. xiii-xiv).

This situation must be very familiar to academicians and teachers. They must

have witnessed this case a lot in their teaching career. For instance, a student comes and

says “If I can’t pass this term, my family won’t let me continue my education” or “If I

can’t get a passing grade, my scholarship will be cut down” and these kind of excuses

appealing to our mercy.

49

Continuing the explanation of argument ad misericordiam, Copi and Cohen

(2004) claim that “There are many ways to pull heartstrings, and virtually all are tried”

(p. 49). In addition, they assert that aid agencies, foundations and advertisers generally

know that fallacious appeals to pity is often much more psychologically effective than

reasonable arguments.

Nowadays, there are a lot of programs appealing to pity on TV, especially in the

morning programs. They use it in order to increase their ratings. If you critically watch

these programs you can figure out the fallacies easily. Even in an entertainment quiz

show, like Deal or Not Deal, there is always a person who may appeal to our pity

somehow.

2.4.1.11 The Appeal to Force

This fallacy also appeals to people’s emotions, specifically fear, and it is also

called as the argument ad baculum. Walton (2007) describes this fallacy in terms of

logical tradition as having been treated under the category of the argumentum ad

baculum, which includes the use of threats and force in argumentation, as well as fear

appeals (p. 134). Boyd (2003) clarifies the appeal to force by explaining:

The fallacy of appealing to force occurs when the persuasive power of the argument lies not in its reasoning and presentation of facts, but in intimidation. In other words, persuasion occurs not through reason, but through fear. The appeal to force may consist of physical violence or may take the form of nonphysical pressure (p. 55).

As mentioned in Boyd’s definition one can commit this fallacy not only

physically but also psychologically. One may have a higher status and power and use

this power, or two parties may have good relations, one of them may use it to persuade

others. To further demonstrate this, consider the examples:

1. If you don’t vote for me in the elections of student representatives, I and my

friends will break your head!

2. Teacher to student: “You had better do this work for me or you won’t get a

good mark in my class”.

3. Friend to friend: “If you don’t accompany me, I won’t talk to you again”.

50

In each of these examples, there are no premises at all; besides, they just threaten

the receiver. On the other hand, like the appeal to emotion and appeal to pity fallacies,

this fallacy also have high influence on the listener.

2.4.1.12 The Argument against the Person (argument ad hominem)

Arguing that a person’s point of view should be doubted because the person has

bad traits of character or because the person has something to gain by being believed

(Cederbloom & Paulsen, 2005, p. 186). In other words, instead of criticizing the

argument of your rival, you attack directly his/her personality. As Hurley (2000) noted

this fallacy has three forms: the ad hominem abusive, the ad hominem circumstantial,

and tu quoque (p. 125). Chesla (2005) explains this fallacy as attacking by using

person’s personality or actions, attacking via person’s beliefs or affiliations, or attacking

through person’s nationality, ethnicity, appearance, occupation or any other

categorization. Though, ad hominem abusive and tu quoque (you too) are commonly

used ones.

Example 1

Mrs. X has written an article, and argued that using beautiful girls on TV shows

is not fair. Nevertheless, she is an ugly person, so you shouldn’t listen to her.

Example 2

Father: You shouldn’t smoke because it gives harm to your health and smoking

is very expensive. You could buy a lot of things for that money.

Son: I know that you used to smoke when you were young, that’s why I won’t

accept your argument.

The first example demonstrates an ad hominem abusive fallacy because instead

of discussing her premises, the arguer just attacks her appearance and implies that she is

not beautiful; thus, she says it. If she were beautiful, she wouldn’t say this. But in the

second example son does not think on the reasons and he knows that the reasons are

good and he cannot challenge them, and directly he says you did it too; hence he

commits tu quoque fallacy.

51

Carter (2004) emphasizes that when this fallacy is used adroitly, it is guaranteed

to entertain any audience and will probably win every argument (p. 92). Diestler (1998,

p. 232) warns us that we should ask ourselves “Is this aspect of the person an important

part of the issue?” when someone attacks to the person directly.

2.4.1.13 False Cause (argument non causa pro causa)

False cause fallacy is also known as argument non causa pro causa or post hoc

ergo procter hoc, and it means after this, therefore because of this. Like other fallacies,

this is also committed frequently in reasoning about personal, social and political issues.

The fallacy of false cause occurs when there is no real relation between two

events and no evidence that one caused the other; they just, maybe coincidently

happened one after another (Diestler, 1998, p. 229). Similarly, Scull (1987) affirms that

“Chance or coincidence is sometimes mistaken for true cause and effect” (p. 252).

Generally, superstitions stem from this kind of reasoning fallacy. To see this clearly,

examine the following examples:

Every time I wear this t-shirt something bad happens.

The reason I lost this tennis match is I wasn’t playing with my lucky

racket.

You came, and then I lost. You brought me bad luck.

I failed the class because the teacher didn’t like me.

The water was off, so I couldn’t do my homework.

In all of the examples above, the reasons are not the real causes of the result. In

the first and second example they are simply coincidence; the next two are something

like trying to find a scapegoat; the last one is a very poor premise for not doing the

homework. Water’s being off cannot affect your studies.

2.4.1.14 Red herring Fallacy (changing the topic)

The argumentation tactic characteristic of this particular fallacy is the

encouraging of a ‘shift of focus’ away from a line of argument that is needed, or would

be appropriate, to prove a conclusion at issue (Walton, 2004, p. 230). Diestler (1998)

52

explains the origin of the name of this fallacy that “It gets its name from the old practice

of drawing a herring –a smoked fish– across a trail to distract hunting dogs from

following the trail” (p. 242). Tindale (2007, p. 28) affirms that this fallacy is different

from other fallacies in the way that it does not contain any falsification or challenge for

an opponent’s position; it is the introduction of another unrelated issue altogether to

change the direction of the debate. As Diestler (1998) mentions especially children are

very good at this against their parents. I can give a lot of examples from my

conversations with my son. Here is one of them:

I: Hüseyin, it is time to brush your teeth and go to bed.

My son: Daddy, I want to ask a question? You said something (may be a word or

phrase that day) this afternoon when we were in the market. What does it mean?

I: (sometimes getting out of the track, I start to explain)

On the other hand, politicians use this fallacy adroitly when they want to cover

up their own mistakes. Remember the debate about the water brought from the

Kızılırmak as potable water and the ratio of arsenic in it. The metropolitan mayor of

Ankara claimed that it was more in the potable water of İzmir and wanted them to check

it. Media asked it to the metropolitan mayor of İzmir and they took some water to

analyze. According to the results, it was really higher than Ankara. Thus, media and

people started to talk about İzmir and forgot Ankara. The mayor managed to change the

topic. However, in fact, having higher ratio of İzmir’s water does not end the bad

situation in Ankara.

2.4.1.15 Complex Question

The last fallacy we will consider in this study is the fallacy of complex question.

Carter (2004) explicates that “When someone asks a single question that is really a

combination of several questions and accepts the answer of one question as an answer

to all, that person commits a fallacy” (p. 94). Copi and Cohen (2004, p. 56) describe this

fallacy as “Asking a question in such a way as to presuppose the truth of some

proposition buried within it is to commit the fallacy of complex question”.

For example: So, have you stopped beating your wife?

53

This question is simply a yes/no question, but there is a presupposition that the

person was beating his wife. By answering “yes” the person accepts the situation of

having beaten his wife; by answering “no” the person accepts the situation and also

admits still doing it. The fallacy of complex question is used especially by police to use

the answers for further investigations.

Jason (2001) divides the questions into two categories as fallacies of question

framing and fallacies of answer formulation. The former is asking questions by

presupposing something like the example given above. This presupposition can be false

or debatable. The latter is related to the responder and when a person does not give a

reasonable answer, it is said that the person is ignoring the issue. As can be understood

from Jason’s explanation, fallacies of question framing are directly related to the

questioner, in other words, it is committed by the question framer while fallacies of

answer formulation are related to the responder. Jason (2001, p. 32) demonstrates both

of these categories by giving a very good example:

Fred: Have you stopped abusing drugs yet?

Ted: Maybe you should ask your mom that question!

In the above example, Fred asks a loaded (complex) question and commits a

fallacy. On the other hand, instead of correcting the question and providing an answer,

Ted ignores the question; therefore, he also commits a fallacy.

We should sum up our issue up to this point, so that we can bear it in mind as we

proceed with the issue of critical reading. In a broader sense, a fallacy is faulty in

reasoning, and can be found in arguments. To be able to detect fallacies we should first

know the difference between a fact and an opinion. Then we should learn how to realize

arguments in written or spoken discourse. Finally, we should develop a questioning

mind to challenge the arguments and figure out the fallacies.

2.5 Critical Reading in Argumentative Texts

Nielsen (1989), quoting Bateson, gives the definition of comprehension and

learning as a research for ‘patterns that connect’, and following his definition Nielsen

defines the meaning of ‘to comprehend’ as connecting what is read, or making sense in

54

terms of known patterns. This comprehension occurs when the readers find some

parallelism between what they read, in other words the voice of the author, and what

they already know. The lack in comprehension arises from not being able to find

associations between what is read and real life. To learn is to create new connections; so

while learning or creating new connections we should acquire a critical eye.

Reading is not simply a matter of absorbing individual words; rather, it is a

progressive effort to construct a model of the meaning of the text (Armbruster, as cited

in Kurfiss, 1988, p. 32). The expression ‘reading between the lines’ has been developed

for this reason. As Kahane and Cavender (2006) explain that this phrase has several

meanings one of which captures the idea of understanding the intentions which are not

clearly expressed. The other meaning is getting more information from less, and

noticing the rhetorical devices (p. 13). Wallace and Poulson (2004, p. 7) illustrates the

critical approach to reading as follows:

Table 3: A critical approach to reading

As a critical reader you:

consider the authors’ purpose in writing the account examine the structure of the account to help you understand how the authors

develop their argument seek to identify the main claims the authors make in putting forward their argument adopt a skeptical stance towards the authors’ claims, checking whether they support

convincingly what they assert question whether the authors have sufficient backing for the generalizations they

make check what the authors mean by key terms in the account and whether they use

these terms consistently consider whether and how any values guiding the authors’ work may affect what

they claim distinguish between respecting the authors as people and being skeptical about what

they write keep an open mind, retaining a conditional willingness to be conceived check that everything the authors have written is relevant to their purpose in writing

the account and the argument they develop expect to be given the information that is needed for you to be in a position to

check any other literature sources to which the authors refer

55

Thorndike (as cited in Nielsen, 1989, p. 2) claims that critical reading is a form

or instance of critical thinking which is consistent with the more general assumption

that reading is thinking. Since thinking is an active process, it can be said that reading is

also active; actually, reading must be active not to be deceived. Critical reading begins

with one simple thing: curiosity. That's the first step to move toward learning how to

read with a critical eye. Critical reading is a mode of reading that will allow people to

take a deeper look at any written text. It's an acquired skill and it can be developed

through knowledge and practice (Wall & Wall, 2005, p. 4).

2.5.1 The Tools of Critical reading

Reading in schools is sometimes a relatively superficial activity, a prelude to a

recitation of what others have said. Though not optimal, such approaches may be

sufficient when teachers are most concerned with the ‘right’ answer and lower-level

skills. At other times, reading can be thoughtful, creative activity, on that challenges

students to extend and elaborate upon what others have said or written (Nielsen, 1989,

p. viii). As Nielsen noted, students must develop higher-level skills to be active which

is a must in critical reading. A critical reader knows what to look for, which means

analyzing the text, and knows how to comprehend the text, that is, inference.

2.5.1.1 Analysis

As Cottrell (2005) states that after working to locate the place of the information

in a broad-spectrum, one should apply the critical thinking and reasoning methods so as

to identify the arguments. Critical readers should also identify the writer’s position:

what does the written material want you to do, think, accept or believe, and identify the

premises presented in the text. Then, she suggests that after locating the argument the

text should be read more slowly and carefully to apply advanced critical reasoning

strategies. In the same way, Wall and Wall (2005) suggest a series of questions when

reading critically:

Why? Why did the author need to tell this story? Why did the author need to reveal this particular argument? Why did the author choose this particular way of expressing himself or herself? After you've exhausted why, move on to who. Who is this author? Is this the voice of a storyteller? A journalist? A dreamer? A poet? A political activist? Is the author trying to be funny? Is he or

56

she trying to teach me something? Now, move on to how. How did the author put together this piece of writing? (p. 4).

Critical readers are able and willing to critique not just micro features of specific

texts but attend to wider implications which relate to the circulation of dominant

discourses within texts and so ultimately to the power bases of society (Wallace, 2003,

p. 27). To be able to criticize and answer the above questions, first, readers should know

the genres in written texts. As Nieslen (1989) mentions when someone starts his/her

speech “once upon a time…” we understand that s/he is going to tell us a story, or when

s/he starts “I have some hesitations about this issue” we understand that s/he is going to

present some arguments to persuade us. Goatly (2000, p. 30) referring the New South

Wales gives a table about the genres and purposes of language used in the classroom

teaching:

Table 4: Narrative genres in the classroom

Genre Purpose of language use

Narrative To tell a story as a means of making sense of events and happenings in the world. It can be both entertaining and informing.

Recount To construct past experience by retelling events and incidents in the order in which they occurred.

Information report To represent factual information about a class of things usually by first classifying them and then describing their characteristics.

Discussion To represent information and opinions about more than one side of an issue: it may end with a recommendation based on the evidence presented.

Explanation To explain why the things are as they are or how things work.

Exposition To advance or justify an argument or put forward a particular point of view.

Procedure To show how something can be accomplished through a series or steps of actions to be taken.

57

Once students recognize genres, they should also know how authors use

subjective and objective language. Again Goatly (2000, p. 92) gives a list for markers of

subjectivity in table 5:

Table 5: Markers of subjectivity

Certainty Expression (personal) Expression (impersonal)

High I believe/I think/ it’s obvious that/obviously the plant is In my opinion/ deadto my mind it’s clear that/clearly she is tired

it’s evident that/evidently the food was badit’s apparent that /apparently she is tired

Low I presume it seems that the plant is deadI suspect it looks deadI expect she sounds tired

The plant feels deadThe plant smelled bad

2.5.1.2 Inference

Finch (2000) in his Linguistic Terms and Concepts, defines inference as “The

process of deduction which listeners characteristically employ in interpreting

utterances” (p. 168). Besides, he gives the reason why it is vital in interpreting is that a

great amount of meaning is implied rather than being explicitly stated. Yule (2006, p.

116) states that a successful communication takes place when the sender and the

receiver share the same knowledge, that is, when they agree on the references and their

inferences. For example, if you tell your classmate “I won’t attend Mrs. Sanders,” your

classmate surely infers that you will not attend the course whose teacher is Mrs.

Sanders.

As in the example, to be able to infer the meanings, there must be common

knowledge. This knowledge is created in the course of experiences. Shank and Abelson

(as cited in Goatly, 2000) define the process of inference as “The background

information or assumptions which we bring to text in order to draw inferences are

generally organized in our long-term memory in structures known as schemas. These

are the facilities for storing stereotypical knowledge” (p. 136).

58

While reading, we should be careful about schemas and infer the meaning

accordingly. Otherwise, as Goatly (2000) accentuates, there can be miscommunications

when the reader induces a different schema from the author’s intention.

To sum up, when reading, readers as critical readers, should know how to

analyze a piece of writing, its genres, aim and addressees, then they should try to

understand the underlying meanings of texts. They should apply the following strategies

presented by Ramage and Bean (1999):

1. Read as a believer: While reading as a believer, we practice empathic listening

which requires us to see the world through the author’s eyes, to adopt

temporarily the author’s beliefs and values.

2. Read as a doubter: when we read as a doubter we should raise objections, ask

questions, express skepticism, and withholding assent. In the margins we add a

new layer of notations demanding more proof, doubting evidence, challenging

the author’s assumptions and values, and so forth.

3. Seek out alternative views and analyze sources of disagreement to clarify why

participants in the conversation disagree with each other: In analyzing

disagreements among various points of view, we’ll find they typically fall into

two categories: (1) disagreement about the facts or truth of the case, and (2)

disagreement about underlying beliefs, values, or assumptions.

4. Evaluate the various positions: In examining the arguments we can ask “Which

lines of reasoning seem strong? Which seem weak? What facts are disputed?

Where do people disagree about values? What additional research do you need

to pursue?

59

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This chapter gives information about the stages of the study. The section 3.1

explains the research design followed in the present study. The Universe and Sampling

(3.2) section provides information about the participants and how they were selected.

The following section (3.3) describes the data collection tool and presents the

procedures followed in the applications of the instruments and the Procedure and

Treatment (3.4) section covers the activities and techniques followed during the study in

detail. The Data Analysis (3.5) is the final section which explains how the calculations

and data analyses were performed.

3.1 Research Design

The present study was conducted using a quantitative methodology. Scanlon

(2000) briefly lists the most common types of quantitative research as, “Surveys, tests,

structured interviews, laboratory experiments, and non-participant observation. One of

the important features of quantitative research is that it is highly structured and produces

data which are amenable to statistical analysis” (p. 7). Similarly, Wilkinson (2000)

points out that “Quantitative data are those types of data that can usually be reduced to

numerical form. The analysis of these data types involves manipulating them in some

way and/or applying some form of statistical test” (p. 81).

Among these quantitative data collection methods, “True experimental design is

regarded as the most accurate form of experimental research, in that it tries to prove or

disprove a hypothesis mathematically, with statistical analysis” Shuttleworth (2008,

para. 1). Furthermore, in his opinion, for a design to be classified as true experimental,

it should meet the following criteria:

60

The sample groups must be assigned randomly.

There must be a viable control group.

Only one variable can be manipulated and tested. It is possible to test

more than one, but such experiments and their statistical analysis tend to

be cumbersome and difficult.

The tested subjects must be randomly assigned to either control or

experimental groups (Shuttleworth, 2008, para. 3).

This study meets all the above criteria so it is a true experimental research

design with a pre-test –post-test control group. The experimental design is represented

in Table 6. The study was designed to investigate the impact of raising awareness about

reasoning fallacies on the development of critical reading ability. The research for this

study was conducted in the ELT Department, Gazi Faculty of Education, Gazi

University, during the spring term of 2008-2009 academic year. Assuming that the

students have already been assigned to classes randomly, two classes from the first year

ELT students were randomly selected from among the five classes and one of them was

assigned as the experimental group, the other as the control group.

Table 6: Research design

Group Class Assignment n Pre-test Treatment Post-test

(En-Turk) (English)

Class 1 R 27 O O

Class 2 R 24 O X O

R = Random assignment; n = Number of the participants; O = The Reasoning Fallacies

Test; X= Experimental treatment; Class 1 made up the control group and class 2 made

up the experimental group.

3.2 Universe and Sampling

The research for this study was conducted in the ELT Department, Gazi Faculty

of Education, Gazi University. Convenience sampling method was chosen to select the

participants for the study. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2005) mentions that

61

convenience sampling is sometimes called, accidental or opportunity sampling and they

explain that “convenience sampling method involves choosing the nearest individuals to

serve as respondents and continuing that process until the required sample size has been

obtained. Captive audiences such as students or student teachers often serve as

respondents based on convenience sampling” (p.102). Since the ELT department of

Gazi University has the largest population among the universities in Turkey, it was

intentionally selected as the universe of this research.

The sample of the study consisted of 52 pre-service teachers in the ELT

department. All the participants in this study were attending ‘Advanced Reading and

Writing Skills’ course during the spring semester of 2008-2009 academic year. As this

course is taken in the first year of the programme, all of the participants were first grade

students. The participants included 44 female and 8 male students, who were 19 or 20

years old.

The experimental group comprised 27 students while the control group

comprised 24 students. 23 students were female and 4 were male in the experimental

group. In the control group, there were 20 female students and 4 male students. At the

very beginning of the study, there were 29 students in the experimental group. After the

administration of the pre-tests, it was understood that two of the students were repeating

the course. Supposing that they might have improved their language skills because of

the other courses they had taken, their data were not included in the study.

3.3 Instruments

The Reasoning Fallacies Test (see Appendix I) was used as a quantitative data

collection tool for this study. The instrument was taken from the study by Holihan

(1980). In her study, ‘The Relationship between the Ability to Detect Written Fallacies

in Reasoning and Realistic Levels of Career Aspiration of Students in Grade Twelve,’

she acknowledges that the test was originally developed by Gall (1973), and extended

by Johnson (1974), Hurst (1977) and Mosley (1978). The test is comprised of 56

multiple choice questions, seven for each of the eight fallacies given below:

1. Appeal to False Authority (Questions 1, 9, 17, 25, 33, 41, 49)

2. Either-or (Questions 2, 10, 18, 26, 34, 42, 50)

62

3. Hasty Generalization (Questions 3, 11, 19, 27, 35, 43, 51)

4. Self-contradiction (Questions 4, 12, 20, 28, 36, 44, 52)

5. Appeal to Common Practice (Questions 5, 13, 21, 29, 37, 45, 53)

6. Part-whole (Questions 6, 14, 22, 30, 38, 46, 54)

7. Stereotyping (Questions 7, 15, 23, 31, 39, 47, 55)

8. Sexism (Questions 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56)

The process in preparing a translated version of an assessment tool has always

been problematic in any research. There are various approaches to translation and

adaptation of assessment tools. The technical minutiae about these processes are not

going to be dwelled upon here. Brislin (as cited in Douglas & Craig, 2007) states that

“A procedure that is commonly used to test the accuracy of translation in multicountry

research is back translation”. However, as Brislin et al., 1973; Hambleton, 2001;

Perneger, Leplege, and Etter, 1999; Van de Vijver and Tanzer, 1997 (as cited in van

Widenfelt, Treffers, de Beurs, Siebelink & Koudijs, 2005, p. 136.) stated that a simple

single forward and back-translation procedure would be an insufficient method of

making and checking the quality of a translation and if it is going to be used as the only

method, it can result in a poor translation. Van Widenfelt et al. (2005) also states that if

the standardized instruments are translated into other languages with the goal of having

a back-translation, it may result in inadequate consideration of the applicability of

concepts in the new culture. Consequently, Douglas and Craig (2007) emphasize that

when there is a need for literal or direct translation is required, back-translation method

can be said to be the most useful, but it is not when there is a need for the translation of

the idioms or when the equivalence of a term or construct in another language is

needed. Van Widenfelt et al. (2005) propose creating a translation team for the task. In

the same way, Douglas and Craig (2007) propose an alternative approach to back

translation and name it as ‘Collaborative and Iterative Translation’. Similar steps, which

are explained for creating a translation team in these studies, are followed in this

research.

The translation team was set up of three experts, who were both fluent in English

and had expertise in the field (See Appendix III). After the individual translations were

made, the team members met and discussed the differences in the translated version of

the test (see Appendix II). These differences were negotiated and the final version

63

agreed upon was also proofread and edited by a professor of English (see Appendix III).

Since there were examples of spoonerisms in some of the items in the original version

of the test where literal translation would not work, free translations were used to

maintain the desired effect.

E.g. The original sentence: Glenda said she turned red after she announced, ''I

am going to describe how to cake the prize-winning bake.''

The Turkish version: Glenda “Sak üstünde damdağan kaz beline vurmayı”

deyince utancından kıpkırmızı oldu.

The answer sheet also included two demographic questions about age and

gender in order to investigate whether there are significant differences between test

results and these variables (see Appendix IV).

3.4 Procedure and Treatment

It is the aim of this research to find out whether it is necessary to teach explicitly

how to detect reasoning fallacies in order to improve critical reading abilities or it is

enough to continue teaching classes in the traditional way with no special emphasis on

fallacies to attain the same results. Salinger (2003) mentions that “Students in upper

primary grades need systematic, explicit instruction as much as students in earlier

grades, and often they simply do not receive the instruction they need” (p. 81).

This research was completed in 10 weeks, studying three class hours per week.

Our ten-week study also included the administration of the pre-tests (both in English

and Turkish) and post-tests. Training was carried out by the same lecturer in the same

classrooms so as to maintain the students’ usual learning atmosphere and to eliminate

the “teacher effect”. The lecturer was trained in advance and provided with the

necessary activities for the implementation process.

After the approval of the proposal of the study by the advisory committee, the

researcher designed the activities depending on the reviewed literature. Then the

researcher and the lecturer of the groups met and she was informed about the purpose of

the study. They agreed to meet twice a week, before the lesson and after the lesson.

64

Every week the lecturer was provided with the activities along with the necessary

explanations.

Before the instructional experiment, the English version of the pre-test was

applied to both the experimental and the control groups in order to test their knowledge

about the topic. The test results revealed that neither groups had a sufficient knowledge

about the reasoning fallacies. The mean score was around 28. The pre-test scores were

analyzed by using independent samples t-test. The results also showed that there were

no statistically significant differences between the experimental and control group

(p>0.05). In order to make sure whether the students did not really know much about

the fallacies or whether their poor performance was due to their limited English

knowledge, the Turkish version of pre-test was applied to the same participants two

weeks later. Then, both Turkish and English pre-test scores were analyzed by using

Mann Whitney U test and Pearson Correlation. The results revealed that the language of

the test had no effect on the scores (p>0.05). The reasoning fallacies were taught

explicitly in the experimental group while in the control group students were instructed

in the same as before. The students were presented with fallacies by naming them and

explaining how to apply them to arguments; the instructor modelled the fallacies on

some arguments; the students were provided with opportunities to practice finding the

reasoning fallacies in a variety of activities. It was aimed to enhance their ability to

assess an argument and detect reasoning fallacies. The treatment will be explained in

the following paragraphs.

In the first week of the treatment, since the study topic was fallacies and fallacies

could be seen only in arguments or argumentative texts, students were taught the first

requirement to search for arguments. As is explained in the literature review, the initial

requirement to find arguments in a text is to know the difference between fact and

opinion (see Appendix VI). They were shown three sets of five sentences via

PowerPoint slides and asked to find the odd one in the sentence sets (see Appendix

VII). Then the definitions of these concepts were introduced and the signal words used

in fact and opinion sentences were given as in 2.2.1.1. They were given some

statements to be identified as facts or opinions. One of the useful ways to learn the

difference between the two is to turn them into each other, so students were given some

facts and asked to put them into opinions. It was explained that a paragraph might

65

contain both facts and opinions. As a post activity they were given a paragraph and

asked to underline the facts and highlight the opinions with a colour-pen (see Appendix

VIII).

In the second week, the students were asked to define ‘argument’ (see Appendix

IX). As expected, most of them defined it in its first sense as ‘a situation in which two

or more people disagree, often angrily’. The term argument and its elements, which are

premises and conclusion, were introduced through the lecture mode. A sufficient

number of examples were provided to make these concepts clear in their mind. Then

they were given samples of effective and poor arguments to show the flaws of reasoning

in arguments. They were also given a fairly difficult task and asked of finding the

premises and the conclusions in the paragraphs (see Appendix X).

After they had passed through these basic stages in critical reading, they were

ready to be introduced to reasoning fallacies (see Appendix XI) in the third week of the

study. The things learnt in the previous lesson were reviewed with the class. After the

revision, the lecturer gave the definition of a fallacy and explained that philosophers

classified fallacies in different ways and there were a great number of fallacies.

Therefore, they were told that they were going to be taught the fallacies most likely to

be encountered in daily life. Two of the fallacies, namely ‘appeal to false authority’ and

‘either-or’, were introduced through lectures and examples. Then the students were

given a task and encouraged to find out the premises and conclusions, and identify the

fallacies (see Appendix XII).

In the fourth week, at the beginning of the lesson, the students were given three

dialogues to remember the things covered in the previous lesson (see appendix XIII).

The next two fallacies, namely Hasty Generalization and Appeal to Common Practice,

were introduced explicitly through lecturing and giving examples (see Appendix XIV).

Then they were given some tasks like those in the previous weeks.

In the fifth week of the treatment, the lesson started with a brainstorming activity

about the things learnt up to that week. They were asked about the fallacies and the

ways to challenge an argument. Later, they were given some fallacious statements and

were asked to determine the fallacies in the statements. They did the task, and explained

the underlying reasons for these fallacies but, of course, could not name them. The

66

scientific terms and definitions of these fallacies, which are Part-whole Fallacy and Self

Contradictory Fallacy, are given via lecturing (See Appendix XV). Students got

accustomed to the lecturing style and the order of the presentation of the lesson, so as in

the previous weeks, they were given some tasks to complete.

In the last week of the treatment, students were given some proverbs and sayings

in their native language, and were asked to examine them in terms of reasoning

fallacies. E.g. “Elinin hamuruyla erkek işine karışma” (it is said in situations when men

do not want women to involve in a work). Slang word, “Karı gibi ağlamak” (whine like

a woman). “Erkek adam ağlamaz” (men never cry). Since these sentences are

commonly used in daily life and has been repeated through the ages, the task was

difficult; however, as they had gained an insight into reasoning and fallacies in

reasoning, they easily discovered the fallacies and they almost correctly named the

fallacy as ‘appeal to gender’. Then they were introduced the last two fallacies for the

treatment, which are Sexism and Stereotyping Fallacies (see Appendix XVI). They were

provided with a number of examples and they were given tasks to identify these

fallacies. Because it was the last lesson of the treatment, the students were presented

with examples for each of the fallacies in a mixed way and were asked to identify the

kinds of these fallacies by giving reasons (see Appendix XVII).

A week after the treatment, the post-test was administered to both the

experimental group and the control group. The data were analyzed by using the SPSS

15 software and were put into statistical tables. The data analysis is explained in details

in the following section.

3.5 Data Analysis

Calculations and data analyses were performed by using the SPSS 15.0

statistical software program. Statistical significances were determined by independent

samples t-tests, Wilcoxon signed ranks tests, and Mann Whitney U-tests. Differences

are considered to be statistically significant if p<0.05. The results of the analysis are

discussed in detail in the following chapter.

67

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA

4.0 Introduction

Analyses and findings with regard to the impact of raising awareness about

reasoning fallacies on critical reading are presented in this chapter. Various statistical

techniques were used to analyze the collected data, including Parametric Statistics and

Nonparametric Statistics. Nonparametric statistics were preferred because there were

fewer subjects than 30, which is the limit to employ parametric tests. The following

sections contain the analyses of the pre/post-test results aiming at answering the

research questions directed in the Introduction Chapter:

1. Are the first year teacher trainees able to detect fallacies in reasoning?

2. If they are not able to detect them, what are the reasons? Is it because they do

not have the necessary knowledge or is it because of the language?

3. Can this ability be improved without training or should it be fostered through

activities in reading courses?

4. Is there a significant difference between male and female students in their ability

to detect fallacies?

4.1 Analysis of the Pre-test Scores

At the beginning of the study, it was hypothesized that students did not know

how to detect the reasoning fallacies. In order to verify this hypothesis a pre-test was

applied both in English and Turkish to the groups. All of the participants were enrolled

first year students in the ELT department, Gazi University, and they were all Turkish

students. The analyses of both the English and the Turkish pre-test scores are presented

below. This section attempts to present the found answers to the first two research

68

questions: 1. Are the first year teacher trainees able to detect fallacies in reasoning? 2. If

they are not able to detect them, what are the reasons? Is it because they do not have the

necessary knowledge or is it because of the language?

4.1.1 Independent samples t-test analysis of the pre-test scores

Presented in Table 7 are the statistics of the pre-test scores of both experimental

and control groups. An independent samples t-test was used to determine whether the

first year teacher trainees had any knowledge of fallacies. This test also helped us

compare the reasoning fallacies pre-test to determine if there was a significant

difference between experimental and control groups before the treatment.

Table 7: The results of the independent samples t-test in reasoning fallacies test.

Group n mean S df t p

Experimental 27 27.52 5.77 49 1.46 0.150

Control 24 29.71 4.80 48.81

Total 51

As can be seen from the above table, no significant difference was found

between the mean scores of the experimental and control groups (p>0.05). The mean

score in the experimental group was 27.52 (standard deviation 5.77) and in the control

group the mean score was 29.71 (standard deviation 4.80). For this reason, it could be

said that the knowledge level of both groups was almost the same. The answer to first

research question was no, that is, they were not able to detect reasoning fallacies in

reading texts.

4.1.2 Independent samples t-test analysis of English-Turkish pre-test scores

Since the students could not detect reasoning fallacies, the second question had

to be answered. Fifteen days after the application of the English pre-test, the Turkish

form of pre-test was applied so as to prevent any transfer. In order to find out the

69

answer to the second question, the independent samples t-test was employed. The

following table illustrates the results:

Table 8: The results of independent samples t-test analysis of the English and Turkish pre-test scores

Test language n mean S df t p

Turkish 51 28.59 7.23 100 .031 .975

English 51 28.55 5.40

As presented in the above table, no significant difference between the English

and Turkish forms of the test was found (p>0.05), which showed that the students had

not had the knowledge even in their native language. The cause of the low scores was

not the language; thus it could be said that the language did not affect the results. The

mean scores for both tests are almost equal (Turkish mean score=28.59; English mean

score=28.55 ).

4.2 Comparisons of Pre and Post-test Scores

This section will present the analyses and results of the pre and post-tests scores.

As noted earlier, since there were fewer than 30 subjects, the analyses were conducted

by using nonparametric Wilcoxon signed ranks test.

4.2.1 Wilcoxon signed ranks test results of the control group

In order to find an answer to the question “Can this ability be improved without

training or should it be fostered through activities in reading courses?” the results of

the control group were analyzed.

Table 9 below illustrates that there was no statistically significant difference

between pre-test scores and post-test scores of the control group (p>0.05). It can be

concluded that following the ordinary reading syllabus, which deals with finding

answers to the questions based the text, does not improve students’ ability to detect

reasoning fallacies.

70

Table 9: Wilcoxon signed ranks test results of the control group

Pre-test/post-test n Mean Sum of z pRank Ranks

Negative Ranks 14(a) 12.32 172.50 -1.051 .293

Positive Ranks 9 (b) 11.50 103.50

Ties 1(c)

Total 24

a post < pre

b post > pre

c post = pre

4.2.2 Wilcoxon signed rank test results of the experimental group

In order to answer the same question, the same procedure was applied to analyze

the pre- and post-test scores for the effects of instruction on the ability to detect certain

fallacies.

Table 10: Wilcoxon signed ranks test results of the experimental group

Pre-test/post-test n Mean Sum of z p

Rank Ranks

Negative Ranks 0 (a) .00 .00 -4.545 .000

Positive Ranks 27 (b) 14.00 378.00

Ties 0(c)

Total 27

a post < preb post > prec post = pre

As is seen in table 10, there is a statistically significant difference between the

pre and post-test results of the experimental group (p <0.01) after the treatment.

Furthermore, it was found to signify a strong effect (r = .87) in the post-test. The

empirical evidence indicated that, the ability to detect reasoning fallacies can be

improved with training.

71

4.3 Comparison of the experimental and control groups’ post test scores

Mann-Whitney U-test was used so as to be able to answer the fourth question of

the present study and to analyze the difference between groups and the effects of the

treatment. Table 11 below shows the difference between the post-test scores of the

groups. It shows that there is a statistically significant difference between the

experimental group and the control group in terms of the post-test scores (p < 0.01).

This figure allows us to infer that the treatment affected the post-test scores in a positive

way.

Table 11: Mann-Whitney U-test results of the comparison between experimental and control group post-test scores

Group n Mean Sum of U p

Rank Ranks

Experimental 27 37.57 1014.50 11.500 .000

Control 24 12.98 311.50

Total 51

4.4 Comparison of Post-test Scores in terms of Genders

As in most studies, which deal with social studies, gender differences are also

assessed in this study. So our next question to be answered is whether there is a

difference between boys and girls in their ability to detect reasoning fallacies.

Table 12: Mann-Whitney U-test results of the gender comparison

Gender n Mean Sum of U p

Rank Ranks

Male 4 13.38 53.50 43.500 .863

Female 23 14.11 324.50

Total 27

As table 12 shows, no statistically significant difference concerning gender was

found in this study (p>0.05). It allows us to come to the conclusion that both male and

72

female students can detect the fallacies at the same level if trained. However, we

developed other sub-hypotheses related to gender differences since there were

differences in some specific fallacies in the literature, and in order to test these sub-

hypotheses, nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test was performed. These sub-hypotheses

and their findings are given below:

Sub-hypothesis 1: There is a statistically significant difference between the male

and female students’ post-test scores on the appeal to false authority fallacy subtest.

The mean score acquired from the appeal to false authority fallacy subtest by

male students was 9.88; the female students’ mean score was 14.72 (see table 13). The

analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference between males and

females on false authority fallacy subtest, so our first sub-hypothesis was rejected.


and female students’ post-test scores on the either-or fallacy subtest.

The mean score obtained from the either-or fallacy subtest by male students was

15.75; the female students’ mean score was 13.70 (see table 13). The analysis revealed

that there was no statistically significant difference between males and females on

either-or fallacy subtest, so our second sub-hypothesis was rejected.


and female students’ post-test scores on the hasty generalisation fallacy subtest.

The mean score gained from the hasty generalisation fallacy subtest by male

students was 18.25; the female students’ mean score was 13.26. The analysis illustrated

that there was no statistically significant difference between males and females on hasty

generalisation fallacy subtest, so our third sub-hypothesis was also rejected.


and female students’ post-test scores on the self-contradiction fallacy subtest.

The mean score acquired from the self-contradiction fallacy subtest by male

students was 8.63; the female students’ mean score was 14.93 (see table 13). The


73

females on self-contradiction fallacy subtest, so our fourth sub-hypothesis was rejected

as well.


and female students’ post-test scores on the appeal to common practice fallacy subtest.

The mean score obtained from the appeal to common practice fallacy subtest by

male students was 10.88; the female students’ mean score was 14.54 (see table 13). The


females on appeal to common practice fallacy subtest, so our fifth sub-hypothesis was

rejected too.


and female students’ post-test scores on the part-whole fallacy subtest.

The mean score acquired from the part-whole fallacy subtest by male students

was 16.13; the female students’ mean score was 13.63 (see table 13). The analysis

showed that there was no statistically significant difference between males and females

on part-whole fallacy subtest, so our sixth sub-hypothesis was rejected.


and female students’ post-test scores on the stereotyping fallacy subtest.

The mean score acquired from the stereotyping fallacy subtest by male students

was 16.25; the female students’ mean score was 13.61 (see table 13). In contrast to

Sukchotrat’s (1980) study, the analysis showed that there was no statistically significant

difference between males and females on stereotyping fallacy subtest, so our seventh

sub-hypothesis was rejected.


and female students’ post-test scores on the sexism fallacy subtest.

The mean score acquired from the sexism fallacy subtest by male students was

13.63; the female students’ mean score was 14.07 (see table 13). The analysis revealed

that there was no statistically significant difference between males and females on

sexism fallacy subtest, so our last sub-hypothesis was rejected as well.

74

Table 13: The analysis of post-test scores in terms of fallacy types and genders

Dependent Gender N Mean Sum of pVariable Rank Ranks

Appeal to false male 4 9.88 39.50 .237authority female 23 14.72 338.50

Either-or male 4 15.75 63.00 .618female 23 13.70 315.00

Hasty male 4 18.25 73.00 .221Generalisation female 23 13.26 305.00

Self-contradiction male 4 8.63 34.50 .135female 23 14.93 343.50

appeal to common male 4 10.88 43.50 .370practice female 23 14.54 334.50

part-whole male 4 16.13 64.50 .537female 23 13.63 313.50

stereotyping male 4 16.25 65.00 .516female 23 13.61 313.00

sexism male 4 13.63 54.50 .912female 23 14.07 323.50

75

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

5.0 Introduction

This chapter discusses the results of the study. Section 5.1 interprets the findings

of the present study referring to the research questions and explains to what extent each

one of the hypothesis was verified. Section 5.2 suggests some implications for EFL

classes. Finally, 5.3 mentions the possibility of researching other facets of fallacy.

5.1 Summary of the Study

This study explored the hypothesis that learning fallacies helps students to gain a

critical eye as readers and therefore fallacies should somehow be incorporated in

reading classes. Data were collected from an experimental group in a pre- and post-test

design with a control group. The scores of the pre and post tests were analyzed to see

the differences between the experimental and the control groups.

The first research question for the study investigated whether or not the first year

students in the ELT department were able to detect the reasoning fallacies in reading

texts, and our first hypothesis was the first year students in ELT department were not

able to detect reasoning fallacies. To measure this, a pre-test was applied to both the

experimental group and the control group. The results revealed that neither group had

this ability and both groups had almost the same mean scores on the English version of

the pre-test; the mean score for the experimental group was 27.52 and the mean score

for the control group was 29.71. Since the analysis of variance revealed that they could

not do well in the English version of the test, our first hypothesis was accepted.

After finding out that the students performed poorly on the English version of

the test, the researcher wanted to make sure whether these poor results stemmed from

the students’ level of English or not. Our second hypothesis was “The language of the

76

test does not have any effect on the students’ results”. In order to test this hypothesis

the Turkish version of the test was given to the students 15 days later. The results

showed that their poor performance did not result from a language barrier. They failed

to detect reasoning fallacies on the tests both in English and in Turkish. Thus, our

second hypothesis about the language barrier was verified.

As regards the findings of the pre-tests, it was hypothesized that the students

could improve this skill via explicit instruction. It was hypothesized that fallacies should

be taught explicitly by giving examples from the real life and modelling how to ask

hard-hitting questions. The necessary activities were provided for the lecturer and she

was trained before the lessons. Corresponding to the literature, the training steps were

explained below:

1. Students should learn to differentiate facts and opinions, because almost all the

arguments appear in opinion paragraphs and facts generally cannot be

questioned.

2. Second step should be recognizing arguments and parts of an argument;

premises and conclusion. They should know the indicators to recognize the

arguments easily. They are also explained that some arguments might have

implicit premises.

3. The final step should be evaluating arguments by questioning.

After the treatment, both groups were given the post-tests and the scores were

analyzed by using SPSS 15 software program. The answer to the third question was

sought via these scores. The results of the analysis evidenced that the ability to question

the arguments and find reasoning mistakes, namely fallacies, could not be improved

through ordinary reading courses where the students were only responsible to find

answers to questions about the texts and to fill some tables according to the texts. In

addition to this, the comparison of the post-test results of the groups showed that there

was a statistically significant difference between the experimental group and the control

group. Since the analysis of variance revealed that there was a statistically significant

difference between the groups, our third hypothesis was accepted.

Because Sukchotrat (1980) found statistically significant differences between

genders on some fallacies such as fact and opinion fallacy, false-cause fallacy and

77

stereotyping fallacy, our last research question aimed to find out whether there was a

difference between genders in terms of detecting reasoning fallacies. Accordingly, we

formulated our last main hypothesis as “There are statistically significant differences

between males and females in certain fallacies”. The data gathered was analyzed to test

this hypothesis. The Mann-Whitney U-test used for this purpose revealed that there

existed no difference between genders in the reasoning fallacies as a whole (see table

12).

This last hypothesis included eight sub-hypotheses related to gender in terms of

each type of the fallacies, so we hypothesized that there were differences between male

and female students on the appeal to false authority, either-or, hasty generalisation, self-

contradiction, appeal to common practice, part-whole, stereotyping and sexism fallacies

sub-tests. In contrast to Sukchotrat’s (1980) study, the analysis of variance revealed that

all our sub-hypotheses were rejected. It can, thus, easily be concluded that with some

training both male and female students can improve their ability to detect reasoning

fallacies to a great extent (see table 13).

In conclusion, consistent with the research findings, it can be argued that

teachers should know how to unearth senders’ intentions and fallacies, which are

committed particularly to persuade others, and try to model their students develop an

understanding of critical reading and listening.

5.2 Pedagogical implications

Critical thinking is a higher order thinking skill which is required in the solution

of many problems encountered in life. Detecting reasoning fallacies obviously

contribute to the improvement of this skill. Therefore any language course involving

exchange of information offered at the university level should include some training to

raise awareness about reasoning fallacies. When the students internalize this ability,

they can easily adopt this skill in their lives when reading, listening, writing or speaking

in all the languages they know. As previously mentioned, meaning is created

subjectively and it changes according to the context in which it occurs, we need to be

careful while reading or listening; in addition to this if there is an argument we should

understand the reasons or causes of that argument by using logic and critical reasoning.

78

Such an approach to reading and listening will certainly increase the students’

comprehension of the oral as well as written texts.

Knowing the names of 15 fallacies introduced in this study or all of the fallacies

is not that important, the important point here is to develop an attitude of questioning

what we hear or read and try to find mistakes or tricks that are intentionally or

unintentionally done to persuade us. We come across fallacies in everyday life and

teachers can find a lot of authentic examples for their students. For classroom

discussions teachers may ask students to find authentic texts and ask them:

1. to find the facts and opinions (while-reading activity).

2. to identify words, phrases or sentences that appeal to our emotions (while-

reading activity).

3. to find out the ambiguous sentences or sentences which lack well-organized

arguments and need clarification (while-reading activity).

4. to figure out the arguments and then underline or highlight the parts of the

arguments (while-reading activity).

5. to question and find out the fallacies that take place in those texts (while-reading

activity).

6. also teachers may ask them to note the fallacies that are committed by the guests

on TV discussion programs or even committed by politicians in their public

speeches (pre-reading activity).

7. to correct the fallacies in the text by rephrasing them (post-reading activity).

Since this study was carried out as part of a PhD dissertation, the fallacy types

introduced and the time spared to teach them may be too much for the special purpose

of the reading course. However, teachers can adjust their time and syllabus in a way as

to include as many types of reasoning fallacies as they find suitable for their students.

5.3 Implications for further research

In the last decade, there have been growing interest in critical thinking and

reading in Turkey, actually it has come to be called critical literacy recently. However,

there have been a few studies related to teaching critical literacy as part of a curriculum

or at least part of a syllabus of some courses. Furthermore, no studies were found

79

related to the teaching of fallacies in ELT classes or even in reading classes in the native

language.

Interdisciplinary research has been recognized and encouraged by the

institutions; so more studies can be done via joint projects between ELT departments

and philosophy departments. And other topics of logic, such as entailment and

tautology, can be applied to ELT in order to improve prospective teachers’ views and

high order thinking skills.

For the treatment part of the present study, we choose a reading course for

practical purposes. However, reasoning fallacies are at least important in other skills

like writing, listening and speaking. For this reason, this topic may also be made use of

improving students’ other skills, specifically argumentative writing skills.

This study was limited to first year students enrolled in the ELT Department at

Gazi University; another study may be carried out to find an answer to the first research

question of this study with more participants, including more students from other

classes as well. A large survey across different universities can be carried out in order to

determine the level of awareness concerning reasoning fallacies.

Similar research can be done with different age groups to find out how critically

students read or listen Turkish texts.

Finally, in public and private sectors related to communication and public

relations, the strategic use of reasoning fallacies could also be incorporated. For

example, critical discourse analysts could study the language used in advertisements

and newspaper articles from this perspective.

80

REFERENCES

Akmajian, A., Demers, R.A., Farmer, A.K. & Harnish R. M. (1997). Linguistics: An

Introduction to Language and Communication. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Akyüz, B. (1997). Analysis of factors that promote critical reading by EFL students in

Turkish educational setting. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Bilkent Üniversitesi

Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.

Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of

Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. London: Longmans, Green,

and Co Ltd.

Bowell, T., & Kemp, G. (2002). Critical Thinking: A Concise Guide. London:

Routledge

Bowell, T., & Kemp, G. (2005). Critical Thinking: A Concise Guide (2nd ed.). London:

Routledge

Boyd, R. (2003). Critical Reasoning and Logic. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall

Education, Inc.

Browne, M.N., & Keeley, S.M. (2007). Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical

Thinking (8th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall Education, Inc.

Callen, D. G. (1984). A Study to Determine Similarities and Differences Between

Elementary and Secondary Education Majors in Their Ability to Detect Fallacies

in Reasoning. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The Florida State University,

Florida.

Carter, K.C. (2004). A First Course in Logic. New York: Pearson Longman Education.

Cederbloom, J. & Paulsen, D. (2005). Critical Reasoning (6th ed.). Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth Publishing.

Chan, K. & Elliott, R.G. (2002). Exploratory Study of Hong Kong Teacher Education

Students’ Epistemological Beliefs: Cultural Perspectives and Implications on

Beliefs Research. Contemporary Educational Psychology 27, pp. 392–414.

81

Chesla, E.L. (2005). Reasoning Skills Success in 20 Minutes a Day (2nd ed.). New York:

Learning Express, LLC.

Chomsky, N. (1985). Syntactic Structures. Paris: Mouton Publishers.

Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York:

Praeger.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research Methods in Education (5th ed).

New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Copi, I.M., & Cohen, C. (2004). Essentials of Logic. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall

Education, Inc.

Copi, I.M., & Cohen, C. (2005). Introduction to Logic (12th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson

Prentice Hall Education, Inc.

Cottrell, S. (2005). Critical Thinking Skills: Developing Effective Analysis and

Argument. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

Crossley, D. J., & Wilson, P.A. (1979). How to Argue: An Introduction to Logical

Thinking. New York: Random House Inc.

Çam, B. (2006). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Görsel Okuma Düzeyleri ile Okuduğunu

Anlama, Eleştirel Okuma ve Türkçe Dersi Akademik Başarıları Arasındaki

İlişki. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal

Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.

Damer, T.E. (2001). Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free

Arguments (4th Ed). Canada: Wadsworth Thomson Learning Inc.

Diestler, S. (1998). Becoming a critical Thinker: A User-Friendly Manual. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Douglas, S.P., & Craig, C.S. (2007). Collaborative and Iterative Translation: An

Alternative Approach to Back Translation. Journal of International Marketing,

American Marketing Association Vol. 15, No. 1, 2007, 30–43. doi: 1547-7215

82

Dowden, B. (2010). Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy: A Peer-reviewed Academic

Resource. Sacramento: California State University. Retrieved [February 15,

2010] from http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#Stereotyping

Eemeren, van F.H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation:

The Pragma-dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Engle, A. (2001). Errors in Reasoning: Avoiding Logical Fallacies and Detecting

Smokescreens. Retrieved [April 18, 2009] from http://hawaii.hawaii.edu/

wwwreading/Fallacies/fallacydefinitions.htm

Facione, P.A. (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement 0f Expert Consensus for Purposes

of Educational Assessment and Instruction: Research Findings and

Recommendations: “The Delphi Report”. (Executive Summary). Millbrae, CA:

The California Academic Press. Retrieved [December 24, 2009] from

http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/DEXadobe.PDF

Facione, P.A. (2010). Critical Thinking: What It is and why It Counts (updated version).

Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. Retrieved [February 20, 2010]

from http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/what&why2007.pdf

Fahnestock, J., & Secor, M. (1990). A Rhetoric of Argument (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-

Hill.

Fearnside, W.W., & Holther, W.B. (1959). Fallacy: The Counterfeit of Argument.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Finch, G. (2000). Linguistic Terms and Concepts. Hampshire: Macmillan Press Ltd.

Firth, J. R. (1958). Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press.

Fodor, J.D. (1980). Semantics: Theories of Meaning in Generative Grammar.

Cambridge: Harvard University Pres.

Galotti, K.M. et al. (1999). A New Way of Assessing Ways of Knowing: The Attitudes

Toward Thinking and Learning Survey (ATTLS). Sex Roles, Vol. 40, pp. 745-

766.

83

Goatly, A. (2000). Critical Reading and Writing: An Introductory Coursebook. London:

Routledge.

Goshgarian, G., & Krueger K. (1994). Crossfire: An Argument Rhetoric and Reader.

New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.

Gula, R.J. (2002). Nonsense: A Handbook of Logical Fallacies. Mount Jackson, VA:

Axios Press.

Halpern, D. F. (2003). Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking

(4th ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.

Holihan, D.D. (1980). The Relationship Between the Ability to Detect Written Fallacies

in Reasoning and Realistic Levels of Career Aspiration of Students in Grade

Twelve. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The Florida State University,

Florida.

Hudson, G. (2000). Essential Introductory Linguistics. Massachusetts: Blackwell

Publishers Ltd.

Hughes, W. (2000). Critical Thinking: An Introduction to the Basic Skills. (3rd ed.).

Ontario: Broadview Press Ltd

Hughes, W., & Lavery, J. (2004). Critical Thinking: An Introduction to the Basic Skills

(4th ed). Ontario: Broadview Press Ltd.

Hurley, P.J. (2000). A Concise Introduction to Logic (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

Pub. Co.

Jakobson, R. (1990). The Speech Event and the Functions of Language. In L.R. Waugh

& M. Monville-Burston (Eds), On Language (p. 69-79). Cambridge: Harvard

University Press.

Jason, G. (2001). Critical Thinking: Developing an Effective Worldview. Belmont CA:

Wadsworth Thomson Learning, Inc.

Kahane, H., & Cavender, N. (2006). Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of

Reason in Everyday Life (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

84

Köse, N. (2006). Effects of portfolio implementation and assessment on critical reading

and learner autonomy of Elt students. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.

Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B.S., & Masia, B.B. (1964). Taxonomy of Educational

Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook II: Affective

Domain. London: Longmans, Green, and Co Ltd.

Kurfiss, J. G. (1988). Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice, and Possibilities.

ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.2. Washington, D.C.: Association for

the Study of Higher Education.

Laureano, A. (1981). An Investigation of Growth in the Critical Reading Ability of

Puerto Rican Students in Grades Four, Eight, and Twelve. Unpublished Doctoral

Dissertation. The Florida State University, Florida.

Locke, J. (1690). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding Book IV -- Knowledge

and Opinion. Retrieved [January 11, 2010] from http://www.class.uidaho.edu/

mickelsen/texts/Locke Essay/Locke Essay IV,XVII.txt.

Lyons, J. (1981). Language and Linguistics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Matthew, A. (2004). Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing.

(2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mill, J.S. (1886). System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive: Being a connected view

of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation.

London: Longmans, Green, and Co.

Mosley, M. Y. (1978). Differences Between Disadvantaged and Nondisadvantaged

Sixth Grade Students in the Ability to Detect Certain Types of Reasoning

Fallacies. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The Florida State University,

Florida.

85

Newton-Smith, R.K. (2005). Logic: An introductory Course (Revised and Corrected

Edition). London: Taylor & Francis e-Library. ISBN 0-203-21734-9 (Adobe e-

Reader Format)

Nielsen, A. R. (1989). Critical Thinking and Reading: Empowering Learners to Think

and Act. Bloomington, Indiana: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and

Communication Skills.

O’Grady, W., & Archibald, J. (2001). Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction (4th

ed.). Boston: Bedford/St. Martins.

Özmen, S. (2006). A Case Study on Critical Thinking Abilities of Teacher Trainees at

Gazi University English Language Teaching Department. Unpublished master’s

thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.

Patterson, A. (1993). Reading Between the Lines. London: Routledge.

Pirie, M. (2006). How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic. London:

Continuum International Publishing Group.

Pirozzi, R. (2003). Critical reading, Critical Thinking: A Contemporary Issues

Approach (2nd ed.). New York: Longman Addison-Wesley Educational

Publishers, Inc.

Ramage, J. D., & Bean, J. C. (1999). Writing Arguments. Boston: Allyn and Bacon

Rasool, J., Banks, C., & McCarthy, M.J. (1993). Critical Thinking: Reading and

Writing in a Diverse World. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Ricco, R. B. (2007). Individual Differences in the Analysis of Informal Reasoning

Fallacies. Contemporary Educational Psychology 32, pp.459–484.

Rudinow, J., & Barry, V. E. (2004). Invitation to Critical Thinking. California:

Wadsworth/Thomson Learning Inc.

Salinger, T. (2003). Helping Older, Struggling Readers. Preventing School Failure, v47

n2 p79-85. Retrieved [January 22, 2009] from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/

86

pdf?vid=3&hid=4&sid=87eb5328-2435-4ab3-9422-0cba717bf54f%40sessionm

gr14

Sapir, E. (1949). Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York:

Harcourt, Brace and Company, Inc.

Sapir, E. (1951). Language. In David G. Mandelbaum (Ed.) Selected Writings of

Edward Sapir in Language, Culture and Personality. Los Angeles: University of

California Press.

Scanlon, M. (2000). Issues in Research. In D. Wilkinson (Ed.), The Researchers’

Toolkit: The Complete Guide to Practitioner Research (pp. 1-13). London:

RoutledgeFalmer.

Scull, S. (1987). Critical Reading and Writing for Advanced ESL Students. Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Shuttleworth, M. (2008). True Experimental Design. Retrieved [February 26, 2010]

from Experiment Resources: http://www.experiment-resources.com/true-

experimental-design.html

Starkey, L. (2004). Critical Thinking Skills Success in 20 Minutes a Day. New York:

Learning Express LLC.

Sukchotrat, T. (1980). An Investigation of the Ability of Thai University Freshmen to

Detect Common Fallacies In Reasoning. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.

The Florida State University, Florida.

Swinburne, L., & Warner, J.F. (1992). Reading Skills for Adults/ Red Book (Updated

ed.). Austin, Texas: Steck-Vaughn Company.

Swoyer, C. (2002). Critical Reasoning: A User’s Manual. University of Oklahoma,

Oklahoma. Retrieved [December 15, 2008] from http://www.ou.edu/ouphil/

faculty/chris/crmscreen.pdf

The Radical Academy. (2002). The Radical Academy has been accused of "sexist"

language! Retrieved [May 10, 2009] from http://www.radicalacademy.com/

askacademy16.htm

87

Thomson, A. (1996) Critical Reasoning: A practical Introduction. London: Routledge.

Thomson, A. (2002). Critical Reasoning: A practical Introduction (2nd ed.). London:

Routledge.

Tindale, C.W. (2007). Fallacies and Argument Appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An Introduction to Reasoning (2nd ed.). New

York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.

Turner, D. R. (2000). Fallacies and the Concept of an Argument. Unpublished Doctoral

Dissertation. University of California Riverside, California.

Ünal, E. (2006). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Eleştirel Okuma Becerileri ile Okuduğunu

Anlama ve Okumaya İlişkin Tutumları Arasındaki İlişki. Unpublished Master’s

Thesis. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.

Wall, A., & Wall, R. (2005). The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Critical Reading. New

York: Penguin Group.

Wallace, C. (2003). Critical Reading in Language Education. Hampshire: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Wallace, M., & Poulson, L. (2004). Critical Reading for Self-critical Writing. In A.

Goodwyn, & A. Stables (Eds.), Learning to Read Critically in Language and

Literacy (pp. 3-38). London: Sage Publications.

Walton, D. (1990). What is Reasoning? What Is an Argument?. The Journal of

Philosophy, Vol. 87, No. 8, (Aug., 1990), pp. 399-419. Retrieved [July 22, 2008]

from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2026735

Walton, D. (1995). A Pragmatic Theory of Fallacy Studies in Rhetoric and

Communication. Alabama: University of Alabama Press.

Walton, D. (1997). Appeal to Pity: Argumentum Ad Misericordiam. Albany: State

University of New York Press.

88

Walton, D. (2004). Relevance in Argumentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Inc.

Walton, D. (2005). Argumentation Methods for Artificial Intelligence in Law.

Heidelberg: Springer Berlin.

Walton, D. (2006). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Walton, D. (2007). Media Argumentation: Dialectic, Persuasion, and Rhetoric.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Walton, D. (2008a). Witness Testimony Evidence: Argumentation, Artificial Intelligence

and Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Walton, D. (2008b). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach (2nd ed.). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Weston, A. (1992). A Rulebook for Arguments (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett

Publishing Company.

Widenfelt van, B.M., Treffers, P.D.A., de Beurs, A., Siebelink, B.M., & Koudijs, E.

(June 2005). Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Assessment

Instruments Used in Psychological Research with Children and Families.

Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, Vol. 8, No. 2, 135-

147.doi:10.1007/s10567-005-4752-1.

Wikipedia. (2009). The Free Encyclopaedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Retrieved

[December 21, 2009] from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_reading

Wilkinson, D. (2000). Analysing Data. In Wilkinson (Ed.), The Researchers’ Toolkit:

The Complete Guide to Practitioner Research (pp. 1-13). London:

RoutledgeFalmer.

Wright, L. (2001). Critical Thinking: An Introduction to Analytical Reading and

Reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press.

89

Yorke, C. (n.d.). FCAT Reading Skill: Distinguishing Facts and Opinions. Retrieved

[December 20, 2008] from http://www.palmbeach.k12.fl.us/Multicultural/

MulticulturalNew/FCATSkill/FCAT%20DistinguishingFactOpinion.pdf.

Yule, G. (2006). The Study of Language (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

90

APPENDICES

91

Appendix I. English form of pre/post-tests

REASONING FALLACIES TEST

Directions; Read each set of four statements below. One of the four statements shows a

mistake in thinking. The other three do not. On your answer sheet mark the letter of the

statement which shows a mistake in thinking. Please do not put any marks on this

question booklet.

Thank you for your collaboration!

Res. Assistant Mehmet BARDAKÇI

Example;

a) In some ways every person is different from every other person. But every person is

like other people in that s/he is alive.

b) In one class, two students came from the south, three from the north, with the

remainder from the central and northeastern provinces. The teacher noticed

that both of the southern students made good book reports, and all of the

northern students made poor book reports. The teacher, therefore, concluded

that southern students must be brighter than northern students.

c) A young man asked a girl’s father if he could marry her. The father then looked up

the man's family background and its income which was high. He then said "No."

d) Approximately 20% of the college students drop out. Many of those who drop out

are so poorly prepared that they should not have entered college.

1.

a) A lawyer told of a bloodhound dog who had tracked two men from the

place of a crime to a woods five miles away. He said the hound could

determine if the men had committed the crime

b) Glenda said she turned red after she announced, "I am going to describe

how to cake the prize-winning bake."

92

c) Socrates recommended that people should learn to know themselves.

This advice seems as good today as it was many centuries ago.

d) Both the American Medical Association and the American Dental

Association support the use of certain chemicals in drinking water. They

do so because it has been found that these chemicals help to prevent tooth

decay.

2.

a) Small business owners will find that when they work sixty hours a week,

they will be too tired to enjoy life; but when they work only twenty hours

a week, they will not earn enough on which to live.

b) Birds can fly, but cats and dogs can't. This makes birds hard to cats and

dogs to catch.

c) If there are only two answers to a problem, then one of the answers must

be right and the other answer must be wrong.

d) When you tell people they are thinking well, they often like you; but,

when you really make them think about something, they may dislike you.

3.

a) Since women live longer than men do, the average married woman will

be a widow, but the average married man will not be a widower.

b) Women are more concerned with what they eat than are men, and that is

the reason that they live longer than men.

c) When reading a book for a course you need to read carefully.

d) When you skim a book, you look only at those parts of the material that

are most likely to contain the ideas and facts for which you are looking.

So skimming is faster, but not always better than careful reading.

4.

a) An eighty-year old woman said that she really had only one birthday.

b) "Fine food takes time. Rapid service is our motto," stated the sign in the

restaurant.

93

c) It takes a lot of fertilizer to grow good vegetables, but what is a lot for

some is too little for others.

d) You can't believe everything that you read, even though the writer may be

telling the truth as he or she knows it.

5.

a) Some years ago a doctor wrote a book titled Your Heart Deserves a

Break. She said smoking was harder on the heart than love.

b) Someone is always trying to "upset the apple cart" and change the way of

life we love. This type of person has no place in public office.

c) An advertisement states that the coats for sale are of the highest quality

and that they can be purchased at low prices right at the factory.

d) A large sum of money was raised for the hospital by the doctor's rich

friends and fellow doctors in order to help poor people.

6.

a) Four lines do not necessarily form a square, nor do three "S's" always

represent "555."

b) Jim's team was the best team in the country, so we know that Jim's team

had the best players in the country.

c) In every city there are people who live in run¬ down houses. In many

cases such people do not earn enough money to buy or rent better

housing.

d) When Dick and I picked the apples, Tom said, "We put the good ones on

the top of the basket, and those with spots we put on the bottom of the

basket."

7.

a) Women are the weaker sex and should be protected by the law from

working more than forty hours a week.

b) The favorite food of many of the people who live in Boston is baked

beans. Boston baked beans are also a favorite food of New Yorkers.

c) Jimmy Carter came from Plains, Georgia. His family tries to act like plain

people and not as though they are better than other people.

94

d) One of the children asked for our help, but we told her that we were also

confused.

8.

a) On the first day of class, the teacher said "I want only the boys up front,

where I can see them. This class is just for work, it is not for goofing off."

b) The dictionary defines a "virago" as a bold, quarrelsome woman.

c) Title IX law states that females and males are to be in co-educational

physical education classes.

d) The most influential factor in the emancipation of women, aside from

education/ has been their entry into the world of work.

9.

a) A minister said that, in his opinion, God made man in his own image and

that evolution is a false belief.

b) Some advertisers appear to believe that it is proper to use almost any

means possible to sell a product.

c) Bob Brown, the famous singer, endorses Happy Cigarettes, so they must

be good for the voice since Bob Brown has a great voice and he smokes

two packs of cigarettes a day.

d) A baby can crawl before it can walk, so you probably crawled before you

walked.

10.

a) If there are three proposed answers to a problem, then, two must always

be wrong and one must always be right.

b) Amy is a scholar. She is also an athlete. Amy said that many athletes are

good students, and that included football players.

c) The law of the land changes as the opinion of the Supreme Court

becomes the law of the land.

95

d) Either you wear a coat or carry it; but you can't wear and carry the same

coat at the same time.

11.

a) Many millions of animals are born, grow, and produce their young in the

sea. However, many millions also die and never grow to be adults.

b) Only one creature out of every ten million escapes a violent death. The

remaining 9,999,999 are eaten by other animals who eat them to live.

c) Fertilizer is necessary for the growth of good oranges, so when you see a

poor crop of oranges you know the farmer did not fertilize them.

d) Mars is a small planet, for it is a little more than one-tenth the size of

Earth; but it looks larger than do larger planets.

12.

a) Education should be free, but parents should pay for the needed paper and

pencils.

b) A ten-year-old boy asked a nine-year-old girl to come to his birthday

party.

c) Young dogs can learn new tricks and old dogs can learn new tricks.

d) Some fish can swim and fly, but some fish cannot fly.

13.

a) An advertisement stated that its product was approved by the American

Medical Association when used as directed. However, the A.M.A. did not

write the directions.

b) Why eat Camps soups? Because working people have been doing so for

over 100 years and that must tell you something.

c) Many women's hands are rough, red, and dry from doing dishes. Few

things can be more harmful to your hands than harsh soaps, so women

should try not to use them.

d) There is nothing like a hot shower to help you sleep at night and a cold

one to wake you up in the morning.

96

14.

a) A word is a word- If it takes ten minutes to learn ten words, then it will

take fifty minutes to learn fifty words.

b) Some of the greatest generals were those whose armies ended up in

defeat. However, it has been the winning generals who were elected to

the presidency.

c) The sea has all the water the world could ever need. Unfortunately, the

sea is salty and the world needs fresh water. Fortunately, however, salty

water also offers advantages.

d) Many people will not eat oysters in months that do not have an "r" in their

names. Some of these people are probably superstitious and do not even

realize it.

15.

a) In some ways every person is different from every other person. But

every person is like every other person in that he or she is alive.

b) Southerners speak with a drawl and sound different than people from

other parts of the United States.

c) Both of the rich students have good book reports, and both of the poor

students have poor book reports. This shows that rich students are better

students than are poor students.

d) Almost half of the people who enter college do not complete it. Many of

those who drop out are so poorly prepared that they should not go to

college.

16.

a) In a discussion panel on the roles of modern woman, one speaker said,

"Women are no longer considered an inferior group."

b) Students should be provided with activities in school that prepare them

for the reality of their future lives.

c) There is a high correlation between educational achievement and

marriage success.

97

d) Women who are involved in work outside the home only think in terms

of the time when they can return home where they belong.

17.

a) Reasoning is one of the forms of thinking; so when people are reasoning,

they are thinking, and when they are thinking, they are reasoning.

b) The professor said that since soldiers kill and murderers kill, soldiers and

murderers are both killers, even though the circumstances are different.

c) Education is a ladder to be climbed one step at a time until the top is

reached.

d) A great writer told a local school board that the time spent teaching

reading in the early grades should be doubled. The school board did so,

for a great writer knows a lot about reading.

18.

a) Justice is a strange thing. Some people are highly paid for cutting people,

while others are put in jail for doing so. Is that justice to you?

b) Some wealthy women like to take mud baths. Some pigs like to lie in the

mud. So in that respect, some wealthy women and some pigs are the

same.

c) Either you are alive or you are dead, for a person cannot be both alive and

dead at the same time.

d) Television programs can teach or entertain, but they cannot teach and

entertain at the same time.

19.

a) If it is true that people put their money where their values are, then

Russia, which spends a greater part of its income on education than we

do, may value education more than we do.

b) A person who has a sharp rise or fall in body temperature may be sick-

However, a person could have an above average or a below average

temperature and not be ill.

98

c) Two men rode on the back of some sharks. The sharks did not hurt them;

and, later, the sharks swam peacefully away. This proves that sharks can

be tamed.

d) History does not repeat itself, for no two periods in history are the same.

This is due, in part, to change.

20.

a) All living things need water. Therefore, to continue to live, living things

need water.

b) Women live longer than men, so women who are married are likely to

live longer than their husbands.

c) Most people know that you get what you pay for, but the best things in

life are free.

d) Snakes and snails crawl, so they are a lot like babies, who also crawl.

21.

a) Coca Cola adds life to everything you do. So drink coke and you'll have a

full life.

b) The politician stated, "Down to earth men are needed in government

service, and it's amazing that so few plain folks are in government jobs."

c) A lawyer said, "The defendant should be found guilty of the crime since

two witnesses said they saw him commit the crime."

d) A politician told the audience that under state law, an ex-convict could

not run for public office.

22.

a) Naming is said to be knowing. However, you can know something and

not know its name. So naming may not always be the same as knowing.

b) Sometimes, it is right to turn right; and other times, it's right to turn left.

So, sometimes left is right.

c) Two parts may make up a whole; and a whole may become a part, while a

part becomes a whole.

99

d) To make a fine dress, use the cloth that is in the best dresses that you

have seen. You should also use the same buttons and the best zippers.

This will assure you of having the finest dress.

23.

a) It is easy to tell the difference between Germans and Italians because

Germans are all tall and blond, while Italians are all short and dark.

b) Nonsense means that something does not make good sense or is foolish.

What you said is nonsense to me for it does not make sense.

c) The policeman talked about the meanings of the street signs to our class.

He said that everyone should know what they mean, even though none of

us could drive a car yet.

d) Up is the opposite of down. Since up is a direction and down is a

direction, they are opposite directions.

24.

a) Studies show that women who are seriously committed to intellectual

pursuits, or to a profession, have better self-images.

b) The Civil Rights Act of 1964 guaranteed equal pay for equal work,

regardless of race, creed, or sex.

c) The General said in his speech, "There is no place for women in the

Marines, we are only looking for a few good men."

d) In the past, banks, savings and loan associations, and numerous other

credit institutions have discriminated against women in making loans and

issuing credit cards.

25.

a) Many people are for or against something because they respect a great

man who has made his views known. Such persons may be letting

someone else do their thinking for them.

b) George Washington warned us about getting involved with foreign

countries. Our present leaders should take his advice, for he knew what

he was talking about.

100

c) A mile is longer than several football fields. So, if you can run a mile,

you can run the length of several football fields.

d) Making people dislike an older product can cause an increase in sales for

another product. However, that is often not the case.

26.

a) There are two kinds of students in school. There are those who are good

students and those who are poor students.

b) If you never use the words, "all," "only," and "always," you will be

helping yourself to avoid seeming to be a "know-it-all,"

c) A man said he had to give up tobacco because his doctor told him that if

he kept on smoking three packs of cigarettes a day, he would have a

severe breathing problem.

d) Boys who get straight "A's" in school subjects might not have much spare

time for playing football, basketball, or most other sports.

27.

a) More people get sick from tetanus shots than get sick from tetanus itself.

It is foolish to take shots that make you sick.

b) Some tomatoes are yellow and some are red. Some string beans are

purple, while some corn is red. So you can't be sure of a vegetable by its

color.

c) If a company makes things at a low cost and is able to sell them at a low

cost and makes a profit, it might still have a poor salesman.

d) Someone can be both partly right and partly wrong. It is unusual to find

someone who is almost always right or almost always wrong.

28.

a) People should be free to read what they wish to read, but some books

must be kept out of public libraries.

b) It has been said that, "Early to bed and early to rise, makes a man healthy,

wealthy, and wise."

c) Bright men and bright women are likely to have bright children.

101

d) Two hands may be faster than one; but four hands may be slower than

two.

29.

a) Everyone knows that the right people wear Brown's Shoes. They're the

right style for people in style.

b) Although, might may be right, the mighty are not always right; and the

right do not always have might.

c) The Supreme Court banned prayers from the public schools because it

believed that they violate the Bill of Rights.

d) One of the aims of advertisers is to make people dissatisfied with what

they have and to want what the advertisers have to sell.

30.

a) Most of the governors of North Carolina had long beards. It is possible

that those long beards helped them to be elected.

b) An automobile built from sections of the top ten cars will be at least the

equal of one of the top ten cars.

c) It takes very bright persons to make things that can destroy the earth. It

will take highly educated persons to prevent the use of such things.

d) Either "and" or "may" can be used as conjunctions and prepositions, so

either word can be either a conjunction or preposition.

31.

a) Tom said he would not go to the party if Brenda went. Tom did not go to

the party because Brenda and Mary Jo went to the party. Tom liked to be

with each of them, but not at the same place at the same time.

b) Southerners tend to speak with a drawl. So, when you hear a person

speak, you can tell if the person is a southerner or not.

c) Mahalia gave a talk, but nobody listened to her, so she was the only one

to hear her talk. Mahalia likes to hear herself talk.

102

d) Annette told her little brother, "Tomorrow is the day after today, and

yesterday is the day before today." Then she said, "We can't do anything

yesterday, but we can get ready for tomorrow."

32.

a) Women have sometimes been protected from work which requires heavy

lifting.

b) The professor of medicine believed that women were not smart enough

nor strong enough to become medical doctors.

c) A topic of debate for legislators is whether or not women should be made

subject to the military draft under the Equal Rights Amendment.

d) The Civil Rights Act of 1964 provided for equal opportunity for job

training, promotions and fringe benefits.

33.

a) Terri asked her teacher if she could get a drink of water. She said that she

needed to take some medicine.

b) Terri asked her teacher if she could get a drink of water. She said she

needed it because her best friend, Helen, didn't drink enough water.

c) Terri asked her teacher if she could get a drink of water. She said that she

needed to clear her throat.

d) Terri asked her teacher if she could get a drink of water. She said that she

was thirsty.

34.

a) Mother said I could either stay in or get out of the water. I told her I

would either swim or sun, but I would not do both.

b) Some flowers are either green or pink. Some flowers are either blue or

pink. My blue flower is turning pink.

c) A man is either dead or alive. So, if you are not alive, you cannot read

this.

d) An answer is either right or wrong; and my answer is right, so yours is

wrong.

103

35.

a) More cars are on the road on holidays. This is one reason why there are

usually many more accidents on holidays.

b) Smoking may cause sickness. If you do not smoke, you have a better

chance of not being sick.

c) The oldest man in our town has always run ten miles a day. If you do this,

you will live as long as he has lived.

d) There are more leaves on the ground after a windstorm. I think that the

wind must cause the leaves to fall from the trees.

36.

a) You may be going left, but still be right.

b) All people should have the same rights, but the better people should have

more rights than others.

c) When the sky becomes dark you can expect rain, so a dark sky means that

it is going to rain.

d) Most cars are slower than airplanes, so most cars are relatively slow.

37.

a) My mother said to me, "When I was growing up, my mother told me to

be home by nine o'clock at night."

b) Dorothy Jean said, "While I'm on my vacation I'll be sure to write you a

letter or send you a postcard, or I might even give you a call."

c) Matt ate well, he went to the doctor when he was ill, he exercised, and he

did not smoke or drink. Matt lived a long time.

d) We need to get those egg heads out of government and get some real

plain folks who know the score into power.

38.

a) The first apple in the bag had a worm in it, so Dan threw the whole bag of

apples away.

b) Bob sawed the board in half. The two pieces would be the wides of his

dog's, Dewey's, new house.

104

c) Pat made many cookies. She and her family kept some and she took the

rest to a friend who was sick with the flu.

d) Ray cleared a place in the woods to build his new house. Winter would

soon set in, and his family needed a warm home.

39.

a) At each railroad crossing the bus driver stopped the bus. Then she opened

the door and closed it again before starting the bus.

b) Ann gets the gas for her car free-of-charge. Her father operates a service

station, and she does not pay him, so the gas is free to her.

c) An old dog cannot learn new tricks, so old people cannot learn either

because they are like old dogs.

d) Jeff was angry because Jimmy had broken his airplane and had not said

he was sorry.

40.

a) Little girls are made of sugar and spice and everything nice.

b) Much of what the military does in the way of use of personnel can be

done as well by women.

c) Women usually have a longer life-span than men.

d) Smoking cigarettes may be harmful to one's health.

41.

a) An old saying is, "An apple a day keeps the doctor away." If everyone ate

an apple a day, no one would be sick.

b) The policeman talked about the new traffic sign to our class yesterday.

He said that everybody who walks to school should know what it means.

c) The mailman said he would not be carrying the mail on Thanksgiving

Day, but that he would be eating turkey with his family.

d) The young man said he wanted to be a doctor. His grandfather was the

only doctor in their small town. The young man hoped to someday take

his grandfather's place.

105

42.

a) Mary Jo wanted to go to the movies, but she did not have enough money.

So Mary Jo could not go to the movies.

b) New born babies are not able to feed themselves, dress themselves, or

walk. They must have help.

c) Someone cannot be both right and wrong. He or she is either all right or

all wrong.

d) After finishing his soup, Josh asked for another bowl; and, then, he asked

for still another.

43.

a) All crows are black. So, to be called a crow, a bird must be black.

b) Most boys like to play football. So Paul, a boy, should like to play

football.

c) If you do not see well, glasses may help you. They will not help if you do

not hear well.

d) People are thirstier in hot weather, so more soft drinks are sold on hot

days than on cold days.

44.

a) Laws are made to protect our rights, so even the laws that do not protect

our rights should be obeyed.

b) Most people are fair, but some people are more fair than others.

c) Many girls knit and dance, but some girls don't knit and some girls don't

dance.

d) Dick has large hands and he can hold more peas than Tom, who has small

hands; but Jim, who also has small hands, can hold more peas than Dick.

45.

a) Lynne is a generous person who shares what she has with everyone. That

is why we think she is generous.

b) Everyone should agree with the president. If a person does not agree with

the president, he or she is not a good American.

106

c) It is sad but true that Christmas is not a happy time of the year for

everyone. Some people are sad at Christmas.

d) Since the sun warms the earth, the earth would freeze if the sun stopped

shining.

46.

a) Since sharks have been known to eat people, it is not wise to swim where

sharks are.

b) If you want to train your dog, you must remember to be gentle and kind.

c) If it takes one minute to learn a new word, then in one hundred minutes,

100 new words can be learned.

d) Even though you cannot see the wind, you can see what the wind does.

47.

a) My brother, Paul, drives around in an old bucket of bolts. This means my

brother's car is a very old model.

b) Germany is a rich country because all Germans are very hard workers and

have very scientific minds.

c) Mr. Ward's secretary said that he was tied up at that moment. It is likely

that Mr. Ward had told his secretary that.

d) John said that it was raining cats and dogs last night. It also poured all

day.

48.

a) In Sweden, homemaking and motherhood are viewed as vocations of

social importance, and are granted the same social status as other

vocations.

b) Self-esteem in the male is closely related to occupational success and

work accomplishment.

c) Most of today's business world is dominated by males.

d) The host of a television cooking show announced that the recipe was so

simple that even a man could follow it.

107

49.

a) Tim drank "Best Milk" because a famous baseball player said that "Best

Milk" was the milk to drink if boys wanted to grow into men.

b) The children enjoyed eating the large birthday cake, but many of them

woke up the next morning feling sick.

c) An airplane goes faster than a bus. If you wish to go across country in a

hurry, you should take an airplane.

d) All animals must have water in order to live. If there were no water, then

they would die.

50.

a) Some things are black. Some things are white. Some other things are

black and white.

b) People are either good or bad. Good people have no bad in them, and bad

people have no good in them.

c) Winter is the time when many Eskimos make things, because it is too

dark for them to hunt or fish.

d) The honey bee has a stinger, and it uses the stinger to protect itself from

other animals. When it does use its stinger, it dies.

51.

a) Diane told her sister, "I'm taking three classes. I have a total of thirteen

hours." Her sister said, "Are you taking two classes for four hours?"

Diane said, "I'm taking two classes for four hours and one class for five

hours."

b) Brian was glad he had gone to the zoo. The animals were fun to see.

Besides, there was candy and ice cream to eat at the zoo.

c) Sam's friend said, "Sam could not have robbed the store. She was at my

house when the store was being robbed."

d) The man played with a large snake and it did not bite him. This shows

that snakes can be trained not to bite.

108

52.

a) First and last are opposites, but first can become last and last can become

first.

b) "A" is the first letter of the alphabet, but it can be the last letter in a word

or sentence.

c) Little can be big and big can be little, so something can be both big and

little.

d) People who like to be alone should be alone together

53.

a) If you blow hard at the flame on a candle, the flame may go out or

become brighter.

b) The ground was still wet, although it had rained the night before and the

sun was out.

c) Some clothes that are ten years old are still in style, yet some clothes that

are only one year old are out of style.

d) If you are really with it, you will buy Pepsi, since everyone wants to be

part of the Pepsi- generation.

54.

a) If plants do not have water, they will die. If animals do not have water,

they will die. So people must have water or they will die.

b) Pour all of the milk from a small glass into a large one. Then you will

have less milk in the larger glass.

c) Fred's mother said, "You better leave now or you will be late for school

today. You left late yesterday and were late for school."

d) If camp fires are not carefully put out, forest fires could result.

55.

a) Boys who wear their hair very long and not combed are not good boys,

and you should stay away from them.

b) The mailman brings the mail every day except Sundays and some

holidays.

109

c) Most people with dark hair have just as much fun as people with light

hair.

d) People should visit a dentist twice a year to insure that they maintain

healthy teeth and gums.

56.

a) In most cultures, women in history have been predominantly excluded

from all but subservient or domestic activities.

b) The German housewife is called a "hausfrau."

c) The International Reading Association will not publish anything that uses

the words "man," "men," or "he."

d) The husband said to his wife, "You will not work because a woman's

place is in the home."

110

Appendix II. Turkish form of Pre-test

ELEŞTİREL MUHAKEME TESTİ

Yönerge; Lütfen aşağıdaki dört yargıyı okuyunuz. Bu dört yargıdan bir tanesi

düşünmede hata içermektedir. Diğer üç tanesinde bu hata bulunmamaktadır. Cevap

anahtarınıza, düşünmede hata içeren seçeneği işaretleyiniz. Lütfen soru kitapçığı

üzerine işaret koymayınız.

Örnek;

a) Bazı yönlerden her birey diğer bireylerden farklıdır. Fakat herkes hayatta

olması bakımından diğer kişilere benzer.

b) * Bir sınıfta iki öğrenci güneyden, üç tanesi kuzeyden ve geri kalanları

ise orta ve kuzey doğu şehirlerinden gelmişti. Öğretmen her iki güneyli

öğrencinin çok iyi kitap özetleri hazırlarken tüm kuzeyli öğrencilerin ise

zayıf kitap özetleri hazırladıklarını fark etti. Dolayısı ile öğretmen güneyli

öğrencilerin kuzeyli öğrencilere göre daha zeki oldukları çıkarımını yaptı.

c) Genç bir adam bir kızın babasına kızıyla evlenip evlenemeyeceğini sordu.

Baba sonradan adamın aile geçmişini ve oldukça yüksek olan gelirini

araştırdı ve ‘Hayır’ dedi.

d) Yüksek okul öğrencilerinin %20’si okulu bitirmeden okuldan ayrılır.

Okuldan ayrılan bu öğrencilerin çoğu okula o kadar kötü hazırlanmış ki,

yüksek okula hiç girmemiş olmaları gerekirdi.

1.

a) Bir avukat iki adamı suç mahallinden beş mil uzaklıktaki ormana kadar

takip eden bir polis köpeğinden bahsetti. Bu köpeğin adamların suç

işleyip işlememiş olduklarını tespit edebildiğini söyledi.

b) Glenda “Sak üstünde damdağan kaz beline vurmayı” deyince utancından

kıpkırmızı oldu.

111

c) Sokrat “Kişiler kendilerini tanımayı öğrenmelidir.” öğüdünde bulundu.

Onun bu öğüdü yüzlerce yıl önce olduğu kadar günümüzde de geçerli

görünüyor.

d) Hem Tıp Birliği hem de Amerikan Diş Derneği içme suyunda çeşitli

kimyasalların kullanımına destek verdi. Bu desteği verdiler çünkü bu

kimyasalların diş çürümesini engellemeye yardımcı olduğu anlaşılmıştır.

2.

a. Küçük iş sahipleri haftada atmış saat çalışınca yaşamdan tat alamayacak

kadar yorgun olacaklarını fark ederler ama haftada sadece yirmi saat

çalışınca da yaşam için gerekli olan parayı kazanamazlar.

b. Kuşlar uçabilir ama kedi ve köpekler uçamazlar. Bu kuşların kedi ve

köpekler tarafından yakalanmalarını zorlaştırır.

c. Eğer bir problemin iki çözümü varsa o zaman bu yanıtlardan biri doğru

diğeri de yanlış olmalıdır.

d. İnsanlara iyi akıl yürüttüklerini söylerseniz sizi çoğunlukla severler ama

onları bir konuda akıl yürütmeye sevk ederseniz o zaman sizi

sevmeyebilirler.

3.

a. Kadınlar erkeklerden daha uzun yaşadığına göre, evli bir kadının dul

kalma ihtimali, evli bir erkeğin dul kalma ihtimalinden daha yüksektir.

b. Kadınlar ne yedikleriyle erkeklere göre daha fazla ilgilidir ve bu onların

erkeklere oranla daha uzun yaşamalarının sebebidir.

c. Bir kitabı ders için okurken çok dikkatli okumak zorundasın.

d. Bir kitaba göz atarken kitabın sadece aradığın fikir ve gerçekleri içermesi

ihtimali yüksek bölümlerine bakarsın. Bu yüzden göz atma daha hızlıdır

ancak dikkatli okumadan daha iyi değildir.

4.

a. Seksen yaşında bir kadın gerçekte sadece bir kere doğum günü olduğunu

söyledi.

b. Restorandaki tabelada “Kaliteli yemek vakit alır. Hızlı servis

parolamızdır” diye yazılıydı.

c. İyi sebze yetiştirmek çok gübre ister ama bazı sebzeler için çok fazla olan

diğerleri için çok azdır.

112

d. Okuduğun her şeye inanmamalısın, yazar gerçeği bildiği şekliyle anlatıyor

olsa bile.

5.

a. Birkaç yıl önce bir doktor ‘Kalbiniz bir molayı hak ediyor’ başlıklı bir

kitap yazmıştı. Kitabında sigaranın kalbe aşktan daha ağır geldiğini

söylemişti.

b. Bazıları her zaman olanı bozmaya ve sevdiğimiz yaşam biçimini

değiştirmeye uğraşır. Bu tür bir kişinin kamu görevinde yeri yoktur.

c. Bir reklam indirimdeki montların yüksek kalitede olduğunu ve

fabrikasından ucuza alınabileceğini söylüyordu.

d. Fakir insanlara yardımcı olmak için doktorun zengin arkadaşları ve

meslektaşlarınca hastane için büyük miktarda para toplanmıştı.

6.

a. Dört çizgi nasıl her zaman bir kare oluşturmazsa üç tane 5 de her zaman

‘555’ rakamını temsil etmez.

b. Jim’in takımı ülkedeki en iyi takımdı, dolayısı ile Jim’in takımının

ülkedeki en iyi oyunculara sahip olduğunu biliyoruz.

c. Her şehirde köhne evlerde yaşayan insanlar vardır. Birçok durumda bu tür

insanlar, daha iyi bir ev tutmak veya satın almak için gerekli parayı

kazanamazlar.

d. Ben ve Dick elmaları topladığımızda Tom “ İyi olanları sepetin üst

kısmına ve üzeri lekeli olanları da sepetin altına yerleştirdik” dedi.

7.

a. Kadınlar daha zayıftır ve haftada kırk saatten fazla çalışmamaları

konusunda yasayla korunmalıdırlar.

b. Boston’da yaşayan birçok insanın en sevdiği yemek fasulyedir. Aynı

zamanda Boston’un fasulye yemeği birçok New York’lunun da en sevdiği

yemektir.

c. Jimmy Carter Georgia’nın Plains şehrindendir. Ailesi, diğer insanlardan

daha nitelikli olmasına rağmen sıradan insanlar gibi davranır.

d. Çocuklardan bir tanesi bizden yardım istedi fakat ona bizim de kafamızın

karıştığını söyledik.

113

8.

a. Dersin ilk gününde öğretmen “Sadece erkek öğrencileri ön tarafta,

görebileceğim bir yerde, istiyorum. Çalışmak için burdayız, lakırdı için

değil” dedi.

b. Sözlük ‘Cadaloz’ kelimesini arsız ve kavgacı kadın olarak tanımlıyor.

c. Yasanın 9. Maddesi kadın ve erkeklerin aynı beden eğitimi sınıflarında

olmaları gerektiğini belirtir.

d. Kadının eğitim dışında özgürlüğüne dair en etkili faktör, iş dünyasına

girmiş olmasıdır.

9.

a. Papaz, Tanrı’nın insanları kendi suretinden yarattığını ve evrim fikrinin

yanlış bir inanış olduğunu söyledi.

b. Bazı reklamcılar bir ürünü satabilmek için mümkün olan her türlü yolun

mübah olduğuna inanıyor görünüyorlar.

c. Ünlü şarkıcı Bob Brown Happy marka sigarayı destekliyor. O halde bu

sigaralar ses için iyi olmalı çünkü Bob Brown’un muhteşem bir sesi var ve

günde iki paket sigara içiyor.

d. Bebekler yürümeden önce emeklerler, o halde sen de yürümeden önce

emekledin.

10.

a. Eğer bir problemin üç çözümü varsa bunların ikisi her zaman yanlış ve bir

tanesi her zaman doğru olmalı.

b. Amy bir araştırmacıdır. Aynı zamanda bir atlettir. Amy birçok atletin iyi

öğrenciler olduğunu buna futbolcuların da dahil olduğunu söyledi.

c. Bir ülkede Yargıtay’ın görüşleri ülkenin hukuk normlarını belirledikçe

ülkenin hukuk normları değişir.

d. Bir montu ya giyersin ya taşırsın ama aynı montu aynı zamanda hem giyip

hem taşıyamazsın.

11.

a. Milyonlarca hayvan doğar, büyür ve yavrularını denize bırakır. Ancak,

milyonlarcası ölür ve hiç bir zaman yetişkinliğe erişemez.

b. On milyon yaratık içinde sadece bir tanesi vahşi ölümden kaçabilir.

Kalan 9.999.999 yaşamak için onları yiyen diğer hayvanlar tarafından

yenirler.

114

c. Gübre iyi portakalın yetişmesi için gereklidir, bu yüzden eğer iyi

gelişmemiş bir portakal görürseniz, çiftçinin onu gübrelemediğini

bilirsiniz.

d. Mars küçük bir gezegendir, dünyanın onda birinden biraz büyüktür fakat

diğer gezegenlerden daha büyük görünür.

12.

a. Eğitim ücretsiz olmalıdır ama aileler gerekli kağıt ve kalem masrafını

ödemelidir.

b. On yaşında bir erkek çocuk, dokuz yaşında bir kızı doğum günü partisine

davet etti.

c. Genç köpekler yeni numaralar öğrenebilir ve yaşlı köpekler de yeni

numaralar öğrenebilir.

d. Bazı balıklar yüzebilir ve uçabilir fakat bazı balıklar uçamaz.

13.

a. Bir reklam, ürünün tarif edildiği şekilde kullanıldığında Amerikan Tıp

Birliği tarafından onaylandığını ifade etti. Ancak A. T. B. nasıl

kullanılacağını yazmamış.

b. Neden Kamp Çorbası yemeli? Çünkü çalışan insanlar 100 yılı aşkın bir

süredir bu çorbayı pişiriyorlar ve bu size bir şeyler anlatıyor olmalı.

c. Çoğu kadının elleri bulaşık yıkamaktan dolayı pürüzlü, kızarık ve

kurudur. Çok az şey elleriniz için sert sabunlardan daha zararlıdır, bu

yüzden onları kullanmamaya çalışmalısınız.

d. Geceleri uyumanıza yardımcı olmak için sıcak bir duş ve sabah

uyanmanız için soğuk bir duş gibisi yoktur.

14.

a. Kelime kelimedir! Eğer on kelimeyi öğrenmek on dakika alıyorsa elli

kelimeyi öğrenmek elli dakika alır.

b. Ordusu sonunda yenilgiye uğrayanlar arasından bazı büyük generaller

çıkabilir. Ancak, başkanlığa seçilenler muzaffer generallerdir.

c. Denizler, dünyanın ihtiyacı olan tüm suyu barındırır. Maalesef deniz

tuzludur ve dünya tatlı suya ihtiyaç duyar. Neyse ki, tuzlu su da

avantajlar sunar.

115

d. Birçok insan, isminde ‘r’ harfi geçmeyen aylarda istiridye yemeyecekler.

Bu insanların bazıları muhtemelen batıl şeylere inanırlar ve bunun

farkında bile değildirler.

15.

a. Bazı yönlerden her birey diğer bireylerden farklıdır. Fakat herkes hayatta

olması bakımından diğer kişilere benzer.

b. Güneyliler yavaş konuşurlar ve bu Birleşik Devletler’in diğer

bölgelerinden gelen kişilere farklı gelir.

c. Zengin olan öğrencilerin her ikisi de iyi kitap özeti hazırladı ve fakir olan

öğrencilerin her ikisi de kötü hazırladı. Bu, zengin öğrencilerin fakir

öğrencilerden daha iyi olduğunu gösterir.

d. Yüksek okula girenlerin neredeyse yarısı bitirmemektedir. Okulu

bırakanların çoğu o kadar kötü hazırlanmış ki yüksek okula hiç girmemiş

olmaları gerekirdi.

16.

a. Modern kadının rolü ile ilgili bir tartışma panelinde bir konuşmacı

“Kadınlar artık ikinci sınıf olarak kabul edilmiyor” dedi.

b. Okulda, öğrencilere, onları gelecekteki hayatlarının gerçeklerine göre

hazırlayan etkinlikler sağlanmalıdır.

c. Eğitim başarısı ve evlilikteki başarı arasında yüksek bir paralellik vardır.

d. Ev dışında çalışan kadınlar yalnızca, ait oldukları yer olan evlerine

dönecekleri zamanı düşünmektedirler.

17.

a. Muhakeme düşünmenin türlerinden biridir; bu yüzden insanlar

muhakeme yaparken düşünürler ve düşünürken muhakeme yaparlar.

b. Profesör, askerlerin de canilerin de insan öldürdüğü için şartları farklı

olsa da katil olduklarını söyledi.

c. Eğitim sona ulaşana kadar bir kerede bir basamak çıkılan bir

merdivendir.

d. Büyük bir yazar, yerel bir okul yönetimine erken yaşlarda okuma

öğretimine harcanan zamanın iki katına çıkarılması gerektiğini söyledi.

Okul yönetimi, büyük bir yazar okuma hakkında çok şey bileceği için

öneriyi uygulamaya koydu.

116

18.

a. Adalet tuhaf şeydir. Bazı insanlar, insanları kesmek için yüksek

meblağlarda para alırken bazı insanlar bunu yaptığı için hapse atılıyor.

Sana göre adalet bu mu?

b. Bazı varlıklı kadınlar çamur banyosunu severler. Bazı domuzlar çamurda

yatmayı sever. Bu açıdan bazı varlıklı kadınlar ve bazı domuzlar aynıdır.

c. Ya dirisindir ya ölü, bir insan aynı zamanda hem diri hem de ölü olamaz.

d. Televizyon programları öğretebilir veya eğlendirebilir fakat aynı anda

öğretip eğlendiremez.

19.

a. Eğer insanların paralarını değer verdikleri alanlara yatırdıkları doğruysa

gelirinin bize göre büyük bir bölümünü eğitime yatıran Rusya, eğitime

bizden daha çok değer veriyor.

b. Vücut ısısında şiddetli artış ya da düşüş olan kişi hasta olabilir. Ancak bir

kişi ortalamanın üzerinde veya altında vücut ısısına sahip olup hasta

olmayabilir

c. İki adam birkaç köpekbalığının sırtına bindi. Köpekbalıkları onlara zarar

vermedi ve sonra köpekbalıkları sakin bir şekilde yüzerek uzaklaştılar.

Bu durum köpekbalıklarının ehlileştirilebileceğini kanıtlar.

d. Tarihteki hiçbir iki dönem aynı olmadığı için tarih kendini tekrarlamaz.

Bu kısmen değişimden kaynaklanır.

20.

a. Tüm canlıların suya ihtiyacı vardır. Bu nedenle yaşamı sürdürmeleri için

canlılar suya ihtiyaç duyar.

b. Kadınlar erkeklerden daha uzun yaşar. Bu yüzden evli olan kadınlar

eşlerinden daha uzun yaşarlar.

c. Pek çok kişi karşılığını ödediği şeyleri aldığını bilir ama hayattaki en iyi

şeyler bedavadır.

d. Yılanlar ve salyangozlar sürünürler. Bu yüzden bebeklere çok benzerler

çünkü bebeklerde sürünürler.

21.

a. Coca Cola yaptığın her şeye can katar. Bu yüzden Coca Cola iç, canına

can katılsın.

117

b. Politikacı “Devlet işlerinde ayakları yere basan insanlara ihtiyaç vardır

ve şaşırtıcı olan bu işlerde sade insanların çok az olmasıdır” dedi.

c. Avukat iki görgü tanığının sanığı suçu işlerken gördüklerini söylediği

için sanığın suçlu bulunması gerektiğini söyledi.

d. Politikacı, dinleyicilere eyalet yasasına göre eski bir mahkumun kamu

görevinde çalışamayacağını söyledi.

22.

a. Adlandırmak bilmek demektir. Ancak bir şeyi bilebilir ama

adlandıramayabilirsin. Bu yüzden adlandırmak her zaman bilmek

anlamına gelmez.

b. Bazen sağa dönmek doğrudur ve bazen de sola dönmek doğrudur. Bu

yüzden bazen sol doğrudur.

c. İki parça bir bütün edebilir ve bir parça bir bütün olurken bir bütün de bir

parça olabilir.

d. Şık bir elbise dikmek için gördüğün en iyi elbiselerin kumaşını kullan.

Aynı zamanda aynı düğmeleri ve en iyi fermuarları kullanmalısın. Bu

senin en şık elbiseye sahip olmanın garantisi olacaktır.

23.

a. Almanlarla İtalyanlar arasındaki farkı söylemek kolaydır çünkü

İtalyanlar kısa ve esmerken Almanlar uzun ve sarışındır.

b. Saçma demek bir şeyin anlamsız veya aptalca olmasıdır. Söylediğin şey

benim için saçmadır çünkü hiçbir anlamı yok.

c. Polis sınıfımızda trafik işaretlerinin anlamları hakkında konuştu.

Hiçbirimiz henüz araba kullanamasak da hepimizin işaretlerin ne anlama

geldiğini bilmesi gerektiğini söyledi.

d. Yukarı aşağının zıddıdır. Yukarı ve aşağı bir yön bildirdiğine göre bunlar

zıt yönlerdir.

24.

a. Araştırmalar entelektüel arayışlara veya bir mesleğe yönelen kadınların

kendilerini daha iyi gördüklerini göstermiştir.

b. 1964 İnsan Hakları Hareketi ırk, inanç, cinsiyet farkı gözetmeksizin eşit

işe eşit ücreti garanti altına almıştır.

c. General konuşmasında “Deniz kuvvetlerinde kadınlara yer yoktur, biz

sadece birkaç iyi adam arıyoruz” dedi.

118

d. Geçmişte bankalar, yatırım ve kredi dernekleri ve diğer pek çok kredi

kurumları yatırım ve kredi kartlarıyla ilgili olarak kadınlara negatif

ayrımcılık uygulamışlardır.

25.

a. Pek çok kişi bir şeylerin ya yanındadır ya da karşısındadır çünkü

görüşlerini ortaya koyan büyük bir adama saygı duyarlar. Bu insanlar

kendileri yerine başka birinin düşünmesine izin verirler.

b. George Washington bizi yabancı ülkelerle ilişkiler konusunda uyardı.

Şimdiki liderlerimiz onun bu önerisini dikkate almalı çünkü o ne

söylediğini biliyordu.

c. Bir mil birkaç futbol sahasından daha uzundur. Bu yüzden bir mil

koşabilirseniz birkaç futbol sahası uzunluğunda bir mesafeyi

koşabilirsiniz.

d. İnsanların eski bir üründen hoşlanmamalarını sağlamak başka bir ürünün

satışının artışına neden olabilir. Ancak bu her zaman böyle olmaz.

26.

a. Okulda iki tür öğrenci bulunmaktadır. Çalışkan öğrenciler ve tembel

öğrenciler.

b. ‘Tümü’, ‘sadece’ ve ‘daima’ sözcüklerini kullanmazsan her şeyi

biliyormuş gibi görünmekten kaçınma konusunda kendine yardımcı

olabilirsin

c. Bir adam tütünü bırakmak zorunda kaldığını çünkü doktorunun günde 3

paket sigara içmeye devam etmesi durumunda ciddi solunum sorunları

yaşayacağını anlattığını söyledi.

d. Okuldaki derslerden ‘A’ alan öğrenciler futbol, basketbol veya diğer

birçok spor türü için boş zaman bulamayabilirler.

27.

a. Birçok kişi tetanozun kendisinden çok tetanoz aşıları nedeniyle

hastalanmaktadır. Sizi hasta eden aşıları yaptırmak aptalcadır.

b. Bazı domatesler sarı, bazıları kırmızıdır. Bazı barbunyalar pembe iken,

bazı mısırlar kırmızıdır. Bu yüzden sebzeleri renkleriyle

tanımlayamazsınız.

c. Bir şirket ürünlerini ucuza mal edip, ucuza satabilse ve bu durumda kar

edebilse gene de kötü pazarlamacılara sahip olabilir.

119

d. Bazıları hem kısmen haklı hem kısmen haksız olabilir. Hemen hemen her

zaman haklı veya hemen hemen her zaman haksız olan kişileri bulmak

olağan değildir.

28.

a. İnsanlar okumak istediklerini okumakta özgür olmalıdır ancak bazı

kitaplar halk kütüphanelerinden uzak tutulmalıdır.

b. “Erken yatıp erken kalkmanın insanı sağlıklı, varlıklı ve akıllı yaptığı”

söylenegelmiştir.

c. Akıllı kadın ve akıllı erkeğin akıllı çocuk sahibi olmaları olasıdır.

d. İki el bir elden daha hızlı olabilir ancak dört el iki elden yavaş olabilir.

29.

a. Herkes bilir ki doğru insanlar Brown ayakkabılarını giyer. Brown

ayakkabıları tarz sahibi insanlar için doğru tarz ayakkabılardır.

b. Güç haklılık anlamına gelebilse de güçlü olan her zaman haklı değildir

ve haklı olan her zaman güçlü değildir.

c. Yargıtay insan hakları bildirgesini ihlal ettiğini düşündüğünden dolayı

devlet okullarında ibadeti yasakladı.

d. Reklamcıların amaçlarından biri insanların sahip oldukları şeylerden

tatmin olmamalarını sağlayarak, bunun yerine reklamcıların sattıkları

şeyleri istemelerini sağlamaktır.

30.

a. Kuzey Carolina valilerinin çoğunun uzun sakalları vardı. Muhtemeldir ki

uzun sakallı olmaları onların vali olarak seçilmelerine yardımcı olmuştur.

b. En iyi on otomobilin parçalarından üretilen bir otomobil, bu on arabadan

birinin en azından dengi olacaktır.

c. Dünyayı yok edebilecek şeyleri üretmek çok zeki insanlar gerektirir.

Ancak bu tür şeylerin kullanımını engellemek çok yüksek eğitimli

insanlar gerektirir.

d. İngilizcede ‘and’ ya da ‘may’ bağlaç ve edat olarak kullanılabilir, bundan

dolayı her iki kelime de bağlaç ya da edat olabilir.

31.

a. Tom, Brenda partiye giderse kendisinin gitmeyeceğini söyledi. Tom

partiye gitmedi çünkü Brenda ve Mary Jo partiye gittiler. Tom her biri ile

120

birlikte olmaktan mutlu olurdu ancak ikisiyle aynı yer ve aynı zamanda

değil.

b. Güneyliler yavaş konuşma eğilimindedir. Bundan dolayı birinin

konuşmasına bakarak onun güneyli olup olmadığına karar verebilirsiniz.

c. Mahalia bir konuşma yaptı ancak kimse onu dinlemedi, bundan dolayı

konuşmasını duyan tek kişi kendisiydi. Mahalia kendi konuşmasını

duymaktan hoşlanır.

d. Annette küçük kardeşine, “Yarın bugünden sonraki gündür, dün

bugünden önceki gündür “ dedi. Sonra, “Dün hiçbir şey yapamayız ama

yarın için hazırlanabiliriz” dedi.

32.

a. Kadınlar kimi zaman ağır yük kaldırmayı gerektiren işlerden

korunmuşlardır.

b. Tıp profesörü, kadınların tıp doktoru olabilmeleri için ne yeterince akıllı

ne de yeterince güçlü olduklarına inanıyordu.

c. Eşit haklar düzenlemesi kapsamında kadınlar için zorunlu askerlik

uygulamasının getirilmesi ya da getirilmemesi hukukçular için bir

tartışma konusudur.

d. 1964 yılında yapılan sivil haklar antlaşması mesleki eğitim, yükselme ve

sosyal güvenlik konularında fırsat eşitliği sağlamıştır.

33.

a. Terri öğretmenine içecek su alıp alamayacağını sordu. Terri ilaç içmesi

gerektiğini söyledi.

b. Terri öğretmenine içecek su alıp alamayacağını sordu. Terri, en iyi

arkadaşı Helen’ın yeterince su içmediği için buna ihtiyaç duyduğunu

söyledi.

c. Terri öğretmenine içecek su alıp alamayacağını sordu. Boğazını

temizlemek için su içmesi gerektiğini söyledi.

d. Terri öğretmenine içecek su alıp alamayacağını sordu. Terri susadığını

söyledi.

34.

a. Annem suda kalabileceğimi ya da sudan çıkabileceğimi söyledi. Ben de

ona yüzebileceğimi ya da güneşlenebileceğimi ama her ikisi birden

yapmayacağımı söyledim.

121

b. Bazı çiçekler ya yeşil ya da pembedir. Bazı çiçekler ya mavi ya da

pembedir. Benim mavi çiçeğim pembe renge dönüşüyor.

c. Bir insan ya ölüdür ya da sağdır. Bundan dolayı eğer sağ değilsen bu

cümleyi okuyamazsın.

d. Bir yanıt ya doğru ya da yanlıştır ve benim yanıtım doğru, bundan dolayı

seninki yanlıştır.

35.

a. Tatillerde daha fazla araç trafiğe çıkar. Tatil zamanlarında daha fazla

kaza olmasının bir nedeni budur.

b. Sigara içmek hastalıklara neden olabilir. Eğer sigara içmezsen hasta

olmama şansın daha fazladır.

c. Şehrimizdeki en yaşlı adam daima günde 10 mil koşmuştur. Eğer sen de

bunu yaparsan en az onun kadar uzun yaşarsın

d. Fırtınadan sonra yerde daha fazla yaprak olur. Yaprakların ağaçlardan

düşmesinin nedeni rüzgar olmalı diye düşünüyorum.

36.

a. Soldan gidiyor olabilirsiniz ama hala haklı olabilirsiniz.

b. Tüm insanlar eşit haklara sahip olmalıdırlar ama daha iyi olan insanlar

diğerlerinden daha fazla haklara sahip olmalıdırlar.

c. Gökyüzü karardığında yağmurun yağmasını bekleyebilirsin, bundan

dolayı karanlık gökyüzü yağmur yağacağı anlamına gelir.

d. Otomobillerin çoğu uçaklardan daha yavaştır. Bundan dolayı çoğu

otomobil nispeten yavaştır.

37.

a. Annem bana "Büyüme çağımdayken, annem bana akşam dokuzda evde

olmam gerektiğini söylemişti" dedi.

b. Dorothy Jean, “Tatildeyken sana mutlaka mektup yazacağım, ya da

kartpostal göndereceğim hatta telefonla bile arayabilirim” dedi.

c. Matt iyi beslendi, hasta olduğunda doktora gitti, spor yaptı, sigara ve

alkol kullanmadı. Matt uzun yaşadı.

d. Bu yumurta kafalıları hükümetten göndermeliyiz ve iktidarı ele

geçirebilecek halktan dürüst kişiler bulmalıyız.

122

38.

a. Torbadaki ilk elmanın içinde kurt vardı. Bundan dolayı Dan elmalarla

dolu torbayı attı.

b. Bob tahtayı ikiye böldü. Bu iki parça, köpeği Dewey’in yeni evinin yan

parçaları olacaktı.

c. Pat birçok kurabiye yaptı. O ve ailesi bir kısmını eve ayırdı ve kalanını

grip olan bir arkadaşına götürdüler.

d. Ray, ağaçlık bölgede yeni evini yapmak için bir bölgeyi temizledi. Kış

yaklaşıyordu ve ailesi sıcak bir yuvaya ihtiyaç duyuyordu.

39.

a. Şoför her demiryolu kavşağında otobüsü durduruyordu. Otobüsü tekrar

hareket ettirmeden önce kapıyı açıp kapatıyordu.

b. Ann otomobiline benzini ücretsiz alıyor. Babasının bir benzin istasyonu

var ve babasına ödeme yapmıyor. Bundan dolayı ona benzin ücretsizdir.

c. Yaşlı bir köpek yeni numaralar öğrenemez, bu yüzden yaşlı insanlar da

öğrenemez çünkü onlar da yaşlı köpekler gibidir.

d. Jeff kızgındı çünkü Jimmy maket uçağını kırmıştı ve bunun için özür

dilememişti.

40.

a. Kız çocukları şeker, baharat ve bunlar gibi güzel şeylerden

yapılmışlardır.

b. Ordunun personeline yaptırdığı birçok görev kadınlar tarafında da pekala

yapılabilir.

c. Kadınlar genellikle erkeklerden daha uzun yaşam süresine sahiptirler.

d. Sigara içmek sağlığa zararlı olabilir.

41.

a. Eski bir deyişe göre ‘Günde bir elma doktoru uzak tutar’. Eğer herkes

günde bir elma yerse hiç kimse hastalanmaz.

b. Polis memuru dün sınıfımızda yeni trafik işareti hakkında bilgi verdi.

Okula yürüyerek gelen herkesin bu işaretin ne anlama geldiğini bilmesi

gerektiğini söyledi.

c. Postacı şükran gününde posta getirmeyeceğini, bunun yerine evde

ailesiyle hindi yiyor olacağını söyledi

123

d. Genç adam doktor olmak istediğini söyledi. Büyük babası küçük

kasabadaki tek doktordu. Genç adam bir gün büyük babasının yerini

alacağını umuyordu.

42.

a. Mary Jo sinemaya gitmek istedi fakat yeterli parası yoktu. Bu yüzden

Mary Jo sinemaya gidemedi.

b. Yeni doğan bebekler tek başlarına yemek yiyemez, elbiselerini giyemez

ve yürüyemez. Yardım almalıdırlar.

c. Bir kişi hem doğru hem de yanlış olamaz. Ya tamamen doğrudur ya da

tamamen yanlış.

d. Çorbasını bitirdikten sonra, Josh bir kâse daha istedi ve sonra bir kase

daha istedi.

43.

a. Tüm kargalar siyahtır. Bu yüzden, bir kuşun karga olarak

adlandırılabilmesi için siyah olması gerekir.

b. Erkek çocukların çoğu futbol oynamayı sever. Bu yüzden, Paul da erkek

çocuğu olduğuna göre futbol oynamayı sevmelidir.

c. Eğer iyi göremiyorsan, gözlük sana yardımcı olabilir. Eğer iyi

duyamıyorsan, sana yardımı olmayacaktır.

d. İnsanlar sıcak havada daha çok susarlar, bu yüzden sıcak günlerde soğuk

günlerden daha çok meşrubat satılır.

44.

a. Yasalar haklarımızı korumak için yapılırlar, bundan dolayı haklarımızı

korumayan yasalara bile uyulmalıdır.

b. Çoğu insan adildir fakat bazı insanlar diğerlerinden daha adildir.

c. Kızların çoğu örgü örer ve dans eder fakat bazı kızlar örgü örmez ve

dans etmez.

d. Dick’in elleri büyük ve elleri küçük olan Tom’dan daha fazla bezelye

tutabiliyor ama eli küçük olan Jim, Dick’ten daha fazla bezelye

tutabiliyor.

45.

a. Lynne sahip olduğu şeyleri herkesle paylaşan cömert biridir. Bunun için

onun cömert olduğunu düşünüyoruz.

124

b. Herkes başkanla aynı fikirde olmalı. Eğer bir kişi başkanla aynı fikirde

değilse o kişi iyi bir Amerikalı değildir.

c. Üzücü fakat gerçek olan şu ki; yılbaşı herkes için yılın mutlu bir an

değildir. Bazı insanlar yılbaşında üzülür.

d. Güneş dünyayı ısıttığı için, eğer güneş doğmasa dünya donardı.

46.

a. Köpekbalıklarının insanları yediği bilindiğinden köpekbalığı bulunan

yerlerde yüzmek akıllıca değildir.

b. Eğer köpeğini eğitmek istiyorsan nazik ve kibar olmayı unutmamalısın.

c. Eğer yeni bir kelimeyi öğrenmek bir dakika alıyorsa yüz dakika içinde

yüz yeni kelime öğrenilebilir.

d. Rüzgarı göremesen bile rüzgarın ne yaptığını görebilirsin.

47.

a. Erkek kardeşim Paul bir hurda ile geziniyor. Bu kardeşimin aracının çok

eski bir model olduğu anlamına gelir.

b. Almanya zengin bir ülkedir çünkü tüm Almanlar çok çalışkandır ve

bilimsel zekaya sahiptirler.

c. Sekreteri, Bay Ward’ın şu anda meşgul olduğunu söyledi. Büyük

olasılıkla Bay Ward sekreterine öyle dedirtti.

d. John dün gece bardaktan boşanırcasına yağmur yağdığını söyledi. Gün

boyunca da çok yağmur yağdı.

48.

a. İsveç’te ev işleriyle uğraşma ve annelik, toplumsal önem taşıyan

meslekler olarak görülür ve diğer mesleklerle aynı sosyal statüye

sahiptir.

b. Erkeklerdeki özsaygı, mesleki başarı ve meslekte bir hedefe ulaşmayla

yakından ilişkilidir.

c. Bugünün iş dünyasının büyük bir bölümü erkekler tarafından

yönetilmektedir.

d. Televizyonda bir yemek programı sunucusu tarifin bir erkeğin bile takip

edebileceği kadar kolay olduğunu söyledi.

49.

a. Tim ‘Best Milk’ içti çünkü ünlü bir beysbol oyuncusu eğer bir erkek

çocuk büyüyüp adam olmak istiyorsa içilecek süt ‘Best Milk’tir’ dedi.

125

b. Çocuklar kocaman doğum günü pastasını yemekten hoşlandı ama ertesi

sabah çoğu mide bulantısıyla uyandı.

c. Uçak otobüsten hızlı gider. Eğer bir ülkeyi boydan boya çabucak geçmek

istiyorsan uçağa binmelisin.

d. Her hayvan yaşamak için su içmelidir. Eğer su olmasaydı ölürlerdi.

50.

a. Bazı şeyler siyahtır. Bazı şeyler beyaz. Diğer bazı şeyler siyah beyazdır.

b. İnsanlar ya iyidir ya da kötü. İyi insanların içinde hiç kötülük yoktur ve

kötü insanlar içinde de hiç iyilik yoktur.

c. Kış, çoğu Eskimonun bir şeyler ürettiği zamandır çünkü avlanmak ve

balık tutmak için hava çok karanlıktır.

d. Bal arısının iğnesi vardır ve iğnesini kendini diğer hayvanlardan

korumak için kullanır. İğnesini kullandığında ölür.

51.

a. Diana kız kardeşine “Üç ders alıyorum. Toplamda 13 saat dersim var”

dedi. Kardeşi “İki tane dört saatlik ders mi alıyorsun” diye sordu. Diana

“Evet, iki tane dört saatlik ve bir tane beş saatlik ders alıyorum” dedi.

b. Brian hayvanat bahçesine gittiği için mutluydu. Hayvanları görmek

eğlenceliydi. Bunun yanı sıra hayvanat bahçesinde şeker ve dondurma

alıp yiyebiliyordunuz.

c. Sam’in arkadaşı “Sam dükkanı soymuş olamaz. Dükkan soyulduğunda

benim evimdeydi.” dedi.

d. Adam büyük bir yılanla oynadı ve yılan onu ısırmadı. Bu yılanların

ısırmamak için eğitilebileceğini gösterir.

52.

a. İlk ve son zıttır, ancak ilk son, son da ilk olabilir.

b. ‘A’ alfabenin ilk harfidir, ancak bir kelimenin ya da cümlenin son harfi

olabilir.

c. Küçük büyük, büyük de küçük olabilir, öyleyse bir şey hem küçük hem

büyük olabilir.

d. Yalnız olmayı seven insanlar birlikte yalnız olmalıdır.

53.

a. Mumun alevine hızla üflersen alev ya söner ya daha da canlanır.

b. Yağmur bir gece önce yağdığı ve güneş çıktığı halde yer hala ıslaktı

126

c. Bazı kıyafetler bir yıllık olmalarına karşın demode ama 10 yıllık bazı

kıyafetler hala moda

d. Eğer çağı yakalamışsan Pepsi içersin çünkü herkes Pepsi-neslinin bir

parçası olmak ister.

54.

a. Eğer bitkiler susuz kalırsa ölür. Eğer hayvanlar susuz kalırsa ölür. Bu

yüzden insanların suya ihtiyacı vardır, yoksa ölürler.

b. Sütün tamamını küçük bardaktan büyük bardağa boşalt. O zaman daha

büyük bardakta daha az sütün olur.

c. Fred’in annesi “Hemen çıkman lazım yoksa okula geç kalacaksın, dün

geç çıktın ve geç kaldın” dedi.

d. Eğer kamp ateşleri dikkatlice söndürülmezse, orman yangıları çıkabilir.

55.

a. Saçları uzun olan ve saçlarını taramayan erkek çocukları iyi çocuklar

değildir, onlardan uzak durmalısınız.

b. Postacı postaları Pazar ve bazı tatil günleri hariç her gün getirir.

c. Koyu renk saçlı insanlar açık renk saçlı insanlar kadar eğlenirler.

d. İnsanlar sağlıklı diş ve damağa sahip olmak için yılda iki kez dişçiye

gitmelidir.

56.

a. Pek çok kültürde, kadınlar tarih boyunca hizmetçilik ya da ev işleri

haricinde tüm işlerin dışında tutulmuşlardır.

b. Almanca’da ev hanımı ‘hausfrau’dur.

c. Uluslararası Okuma Birliği ‘man’, ‘men’, veya ‘he’ kelimelerini içeren

hiçbir metni yayınlamayacak.

d. Koca, karısına “Çalışmayacaksın, çünkü kadının yeri evidir” dedi.

127

Appendix III. Translation Team and Editor

Translation Team

Name Sex Professional Background (degree, field of study)

Linguistic Background (primary language, English fluency)

A. Selmin SÖYLEMEZ F Ongoing PhD. TEFL Turkish, ELT expert

K. Sinan ÖZMEN M Ongoing PhD. TEFL Turkish, ELT expert

Egemen AYDOĞDU M Ongoing PhD. TEFL Turkish, ELT expert

Expert (proofreader and editor)

Name Sex Professional Background Linguistic Background

Abdülvahit ÇAKIR M Professor Dr. TEFL Turkish, ELT Professor

128

Appendix IV. Answer Sheet

ANSWER SHEET

Participant’s Number: ____________ Date:

1. Male □ Female □

2. Age ________

3. Current Year Status:

Freshman______ Sophomore______ Junior______ Senior______

1 a b c d

2 a b c d

3 a b c d

4 a b c d

5 a b c d

6 a b c d

7 a b c d

8 a b c d

9 a b c d

10 a b c d

11 a b c d

12 a b c d

13 a b c d

14 a b c d

15 a b c d

16 a b c d

17 a b c d

18 a b c d

19 a b c d

20 a b c d

21 a b c d

22 a b c d

23 a b c d

24 a b c d

25 a b c d

26 a b c d

27 a b c d

28 a b c d

29 a b c d

30 a b c d

31 a b c d

32 a b c d

33 a b c d

34 a b c d

35 a b c d

36 a b c d

37 a b c d

38 a b c d

39 a b c D

40 a b c D

41 a b c d

42 a b c d

43 a b c d

44 a b c d

45 a b c d

46 a b c d

47 a b c d

48 a b c d

49 a b c d

50 a b c d

51 a b c d

52 a b c d

53 a b c d

54 a b c d

55 a b c d

56 a b c d

129

Appendix V. Answers of The Reasoning Fallacies Test

1. A 29. A2. C 30. B3. B 31. B4. B 32. B5. B 33. B6. B 34. D7. A 35. C8. A 36. B9. C 37. D10. A 38. A11. C 39. C12. A 40. A13. B 41. A14. A 42. C15. C 43. B16. D 44. A17. D 45. B18. D 46. C19. C 47. B20. C 48. D21. A 49. A22. D 50. B23. A 51. D24. C 52. D25. B 53. D26. A 54. B27. A 55. A28. A 56. D

130

Appendix VI. Task I

TASK 1 (FACT and OPINION)

Type An inductive approach to the teaching of identifying facts

and opinions in written texts

Goals Students will have

distinguished between facts and opinions in written texts

developed an insight in identifying whether a statement

is a fact or an opinion

recognized signal words commonly found in facts and

opinions

Materials Written text samples. PowerPoint slides.

Teaching Modes Group work, lecture, classroom discussion

Time 45 + 45 (90 minutes approximately)

Procedure

Pre

1. Students are given three sets of five sentences and asked to

determine which one of five sentences is different from others.

2. Students are asked to determine what makes the sentence

they have chosen different from those of others.

Wh

ile

3. The answers are elicited by using guided discovery method.

4. The students are introduced to definitions of facts and

opinions.

5. The students are exposed to some of the common signal

words utilized in fact and opinion sentences.

6. Students are given new sentences to be identified as fact and

opinion by referring to the key signal words.

7. Students are given some fact sentences and asked to turn

them into opinions.

Pos

t

8. Students work in groups of four. Each group is given a

written text to be analyzed in terms of fact and opinion

statements.

131

Appendix VII. Pre-Activities for Task 1

Which one of these sentences is different from others?

Abraham Lincoln’s birthday is on February 12.

Spiders have eight legs.

It is easy to learn how to write your name.

Some schools have 200 students in them.

Ice cream is kept cold in a freezer.

If you have a cold you should stay home.

Coca cola is the best kind of pop to drink.

Summers are warmer than winters in most parts of the world.

Pumpkin pie needs to be part of Thanksgiving Day.

It would be fun to visit Disneyworld or Disneyland every weekend.

Smoking is a nasty habit.

Smoking is an unhealthy habit.

Daffodils are the prettiest of all the spring flowers.

Summer is the best season of all.

London is the best city to visit when touring in England.

132

Appendix VIII. Identifying F/O in a Paragraph

Please underline the facts, highlight the opinions in the following paragraph.

The most admired person in American history is Thomas Jefferson. At the age of

nine, Jefferson studied Latin, Greek and French. I think it is astonishing to learn three

languages at the age of nine! He entered the college at the age of sixteen. After

graduating from college, Jefferson studied to become a lawyer. He also became an

architect, and he designed his own home, Monticello. It is the most amazing home you

will ever see. Jefferson invented many things for his house that other houses of that time

did not have. For example, Monticello had dumbwaiter, a small elevator to move food

from one floor to another. He also invented the swivel chair. In my opinion, he is the

smartest man who ever lived.

133

Appendix IX. Task 2

TASK 2 (ARGUMENT)

Type A deductive approach to the teaching of arguments


analyzed what makes a statement an argument.

discussed the basic components of an argument,

premises and conclusion, in practical examples.

Materials Written text samples. PowerPoint slides.

Teaching Modes Pair work, lecture, classroom discussion

Time 45 + 45 +45 (135 minutes approximately)

Procedure

Pre

1. The students discuss what an argument might be by referring

to their background information.

2. The ideas of the students are elicited by some discovery

questions.

Wh

ile

3. The term argument and its components are introduced

through lecturing.

4. The students are given some set of tasks in which they

pinpoint the premises and the conclusion of the given arguments

in the light of the information presented in the lecture.

5. The students are introduced some common flaws of

reasoning in terms of identifying an effective arguments.

Pos

t

6. Students are given extra tasks, relatively difficult to

complete, on identifying arguments in a written text.

134

Appendix X. Identifying Premises and Conclusions

Identify the premises and conclusions in the following passages, each of which

contains just one argument.

1. But the price of fossil and nuclear fuel is only a small fraction of their total cost.

Society pays the other cost for damaged health and property, oil spills in the oceans,

polluted or poisoned rivers, lakes and beaches, acid rain, killed poisoned fish and oyster

beds, and human misery.

MOSES CAMMER, "Solar Energy Will Prove Itself Cheaper”

The New York Times, July 12, 1988, p. 2g

2. It is hard to argue that Western astrology must be true because it has such a long

tradition behind it, because Chinese and Indian astrology have equally long traditions. If

one is right, the others are wrong.

MARTIN GARDNER, "Seeing Stars," The New York

Review of Books, June 30, 1988, p. 4

3. FairTest charged that another examination, the Scholastic Aptitude Test, which most

colleges use as one measure of which high school students they admit, was biased

against girls, again pointing out that they as a group scored lower on that test even

though they earned better grades than boys.

LEE A. DANIELS, "Groups Charge Bias in Merit

Scholarship Testing,"

The New York Times, June 29, 1988, p. 25

4. Lying is as much a part of normal growth and development as telling the truth. The

ability to lie is a human achievement, one of those abilities that tends to set them apart

from all other species.

ARNOLD GOLDBERG, "Lies: Mental Disorder

or Normal Growth?"

The New York Times, May 17, 1988, p. 19

135

5. The light that we see from distant galaxies left them millions of years ago, and in the

case of the most distant object that we have seen, the light left some eight thousand

million years ago. Thus, when we look at the universe, we are seeing it as it was in the

past.

STEPHEN W. HAWKING, A Brief History of

Time: From the Big Bang to

Black Holes (Toronto: Bantam Books, 1988), p. 28

6. …..the advanced technologies applied in supercomputers tend to quickly permeate

the entire computer industry. So the nation that leads in supercomputer development

tends to have a jump on other countries in producing more powerful--and more

lucrative--lower-level computers.

DWIGHT B. DAVIS, "Supercomputers: A

Strategic Imperative?"

High Technology, May 1984, p. 44

7. Forbear to judge, for we are sinners all.

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, Henry VI, Part III, iii

8. Thomas Moore, the director of domestic studies at the Hoover Institution at Stanford

University, argues that poverty statistics overstate the number of poor people because

researchers don't add in such noncash benefits as food stamps or Medicaid when

calculating family incomes.

VICTOR F. ZONANA, "Population Puzzle," The

Wall Street Journal, June 20, 1984

9. Since there are no mental diseases, there can be no treatments for them.

DR. THOMAS S. SZASZ, in Carol Levine, ed.,

Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial

Bio-Ethical Issues (Guilford, Conn.: The Dushkin

Publishing Group, Inc., 1984), p. 179

10. Since the good, according to Plato, is that which furthers a person’s real interests, it

follows that in any given case when the good is known, men will seek it.

(Avrum Stroll and Richard Popkin, Philosophy

and the Human Spirit)

11. When individuals voluntarily abandon property, they forfeit any expectation of

privacy in it that they might have had. Therefore, a warrantless search or seizure of

abandoned property is not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

136

(Judge Stephanie Kulp Seymour, United States v. Jones)

12. The classroom teacher is crucial to the development and academic success of the

average student, and administrators simply are ancillary to this effort. For this reason,

classroom teachers ought to be paid at least the equivalent of administrators at all levels,

including the superintendent.

(Peter F. Falstrup, Letter to the Editor)

13. To every existing thing God wills some good. Hence, since to love any thing is

nothing else than to will good to that thing, it is manifest that God loves everything that

exists.

(Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica)

14. Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim

at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which

all things aim.

(Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics)

137

Appendix XI. Task 3

TASK 3 (FALLACIES: Appeal to False Authority Fallacy and Either –or

fallacy)

Type A deductive approach to the teaching of fallacies in written

texts.


gained awareness in identifying fallacies in arguments.

learnt two aspects of fallacy, namely Appeal to False

Authority Fallacy and Either –or fallacy

Materials Written and spoken text samples. PowerPoint slides.

Teaching Mode Lecture, Group work, Pair work, Brainstorming

Time 45 + 45 + 45 (135 minutes approximately)

Procedure

Pre

1. Students are asked to draw a mind map on the board by

referring to the previous lesson in which they learnt what

argument is.

2. The ideas of the students are elicited by some discovery

questions.

Wh

ile

3. The students are introduced fallacies through lecturing.

4. The students carry out some tasks in which they pinpoint

fallacies by showing their types.

5. The students are given a task in which they identify fallacies

by giving underlying reasons.

Pos

t


complete, on identifying fallacies in arguments in a written text.

138

Appendix XII. Identifying the Fallacies (Appeal to Authority and Either-or)

Examine the arguments, find the premises and conclusions of the arguments

and find the fallacies, if the argument has.

1. Professor Lewis, the world authority on logic, claims that all wives cook for

their husbands. But the fact is that his own wife does not cook for him.

Therefore, his claim is false.

2. I'm becoming a vegetarian. I.B. Singer said it is the ethical thing to do, and

he won the Nobel Prize!

3. Either you are alive or you are dead, for a person cannot be both alive and

dead; but he can be sick or well.

4. I'm buying a Bumpster mountain bike. My critical thinking instructor says

they're the best, and she is so logical!

5. I'm going to see that new movie. My best friend said it was very good, and

we always like the same things!

6. The brilliant William Jenkins, the recent Nobel Prize winner in physics,

states uncategorically that the flu virus will be controlled in essentially all of

its forms by the year 2,050. The opinion of such a great man cannot be

disregarded.

7. The United States policy toward mainland China was surely mistaken

because Shirley McLaine, the well known actress, said, at the time, she had

grave misgivings about it.

139

Appendix XIII. Pre-Activity

Examine the arguments, find the premises and conclusions of the arguments

and find the fallacies, if the argument has.

1. Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year."

Senator Bill: "Why?"

Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge

deficit and we can't live with the deficit."

2. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally acceptable. After all, a woman should

have a right to her own body."

Jane: "I disagree completely. Dr. Johan Skarn says that abortion is always

morally wrong, regardless of the situation. He has to be right, after all, he is a

respected expert in his field."

Bill: "I've never heard of Dr. Skarn. Who is he?"

Jane: "He's the guy that won the Nobel Prize in physics for his work on cold

fusion."

Bill: "I see. Does he have any expertise in morality or ethics?"

Jane: "I don't know. But he's a world famous expert, so I believe him."

3. Kutsi: I'm not a doctor, but I play one on the hit series "Doctors." You can

take it from me that when you need a fast acting, effective and safe pain

killer there is nothing better than MorphiDope 2000. That is my considered

medical opinion.

140

Appendix XIV. Task 4

TASK 4 (FALLACIES: Hasty Generalization and Appeal to Common Practice)


texts.



learnt two aspects of fallacy, namely Hasty

Generalization and Appeal to Common Practice


Teaching Mode Question and Answer, Lecture, Group work, Pair work,


Procedure

Pre

1. Students are given some sample dialogues and asked to

identify the fallacies referring to the previous lesson in which

they learnt what an Appeal to False Authority and either-or are.

Wh

ile

2. The students are introduced Hasty Generalization and Appeal

to Common Practice fallacies through lecturing.

4. The students carry out some tasks in which they name the

types of fallacies.


by giving underlying reasons.

Pos

t



141

Appendix XV. Task 5

TASK 5 (FALLACIES: Part-whole Fallacy and Self Contradictory Fallacy)


texts.



learnt two aspects of fallacy, namely Part-whole Fallacy

and Self Contradictory Fallacy


Teaching Mode Brainstorming, Question and Answer, Guided discovery,

Lecture, Group work, Pair work,


Procedure

Pre

1. Students are asked about the fallacies and the way of

questioning arguments and whether they have understood the

overall aim of teaching fallacies in reading classes.

2. After discussion about fallacies, students are given some

sample statements and asked to find out the fallacious

reasoning in the statements.

Wh

ile

3. The students are introduced Part-whole and Self

Contradictory fallacies through direct explanation.

4. The students are provided samples in which they can

understand the types of fallacies clearly.


by explaining reasons.

Pos

t



142

Appendix XVI. Task 6

TASK 6 (FALLACIES: Sexism Fallacy and Stereotyping Fallacy)


texts.



learnt two aspects of fallacy, namely Sexism Fallacy and

Stereotyping Fallacy


Teaching Mode Question and Answer, Lecture, Group work, Pair work,


Procedure

Pre

1. Students are told some proverbs/sayings in their native

language and challenged to explore the fallacies in these

sayings.

2. Since they have gained an insight, they were expected to find

out the sexism fallacy even if they cannot name it.

Wh

ile

3. The students are introduced Sexism and Stereotyping

fallacies through lecturing.

4. The students are given extra examples about these types of

fallacies.


by explaining the underlying reasons.

Pos

t

6. Students are given extra tasks on identifying fallacies in

arguments in a written text.

143

Appendix XVII. Wrap-up Activity

1. You can believe the moon is covered with dust because the president of our

neighbourhood association said so, and he should know. (Appeal to False

Authority)

2. A frustrated Ford owner says: “My car broke down today! And my friends car

was broken last week. It is a ford, too. Fords are worthless pieces of garbage!”

(Hasty Generalization)

3. Herkes bu adama güvenip parasını yatırıyorsa bir bildikleri vardır; biz de

paramızı ona verelim. (Appeal to Common Practice)

4. He always tells the truth; if he said he himself was lying it must be true. (Self-

Contradiction Fallacy)

5. This computer is made up with light metals, so it must be light. (Part-whole

Fallacy)

6. He is from Konya. He must be a religious person. (Stereotyping Fallacy)

7. Well, it's time for a decision. Will you give 10 TL to our kermes, or are you on

the side of educational destruction? (Either-or Fallacy)

8. All secretaries must wear a skirt and a shirt. (Sexism Fallacy)

gazi̇ university - Gazi Üniversitesi Açık Erişim Sistemi

Documents

Transcript of gazi̇ university - Gazi Üniversitesi Açık Erişim Sistemi