CHAPTER 3 MOORE & PARKER CRITICAL THINKING

CHAPTER 11 OECD AVERAGE AND OECD TOTAL BOX
 CONTENTS PREFACE IX INTRODUCTION 1 REFERENCES 5 CHAPTER
 NRC INSPECTION MANUAL NMSSDWM MANUAL CHAPTER 2401 NEAR‑SURFACE

32 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS IN THIS CHAPTER A STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 13 MULTILEVEL ANALYSES BOX 132 STANDARDISATION OF
CHAPTER 6 COMPUTATION OF STANDARD ERRORS BOX 61

Chapter 2... Moore & Parker... Critical Thinking

Chapter 3 ... Moore & Parker... Critical Thinking


CLARITY IN WRITING AND SPEAKING

Definitions:

Purposes:

stipulative

explanatory

precising

persuasive/rhetorical/biased

Types:

Def. by example

Def. by synonym

analytical definition: genus/species/difference

essential ingredients

denotation ... to denote.. to “point out” or “point to”

connotation ... the meaning of the word or phrase


also, the emotive force (accd. to M & P),

But more than that... the “sense” of a term must be explained often in many various ways, circum-ambulating the term until understanding is achieved.

Ambiguous claims ... claims with more than one possible meaning

Equivocation... the misuse of multiple meanings for a term

Semantic ambiguity

She is cold. He doesn’t use glasses. He’s on the right side all the time. I know a little Greek. She disputed his claim.

“Cross” word puzzles are fun.


Syntactical ambiguity

“People who protest often get arrested.”

“He chased the girl in his car.”


[Here is an example of syntactic ambiguity: both syntactic and semantic: from Harpers Magazine: regarding the subject of boredom, in life, and during college classes:

“At best, they may acquaint you with the sensation by incurring it.”


by incurring it… syntactical ambiguity

Who incurs it? The instructors or the students?


(should have been: “inflicting it” rather than “incurring” it.


Grouping ambiguity

Plumbers make more money than NFL quarterbacks.

College freshmen read more than Oxford professors.


Vagueness

Some terms are not precise enough in meaning to know what is intended. These are “vague” rather than “ambiguous”.


Fallacies (p. 44) ... Composition and Division

Composition:

attributing to the whole some characteristic belonging to the individuals, which compose it.

Division:

attributing to the parts what is true of the whole.

EXAMPLES (from 7th Edition, pg. 57)

Sampras and Agassi are the two best tennis players in the United States, so they’d make the best doubles team. (f. of composition)


We don’t spend all that much on military salaries. After all, who ever heard of anyone getting rich in the Army? (f. of composition)


“The Kings don’t have a chance against the Lakers. The Lakers are better at every position except power forward.” (f. of comp.)


“A balanced daily diet consists of the right proportion of protein, carbohydrates, and fat. So each meal should consist of the same proportion of protein, carbs, and fat.” (f. of division)


Averages: often omit important details.

the mean ... the total divided by the # of items

the median... half above & half below

the mode ... the most common figure (pay, score, etc.)


page 3


CONFIGURING USER STATE MANAGEMENT FEATURES 73 CHAPTER 7 IMPLEMENTING
INTERPOLATION 41 CHAPTER 5 INTERPOLATION THIS CHAPTER SUMMARIZES POLYNOMIAL
PREPARING FOR PRODUCTION DEPLOYMENT 219 CHAPTER 4 DESIGNING A


Tags: chapter 3, parker, thinking, moore, chapter, critical