Insufficient or inadequate information is usually seen as the greatest threat to the integrity of an argument. However, the fact is that even arguments, which are supported with a great amount of information, can prove to be faulty because of structural weaknesses. For example, suppressed, ignored, or unconsidered evidence can invalidate conclusions. Similarly, biased assumptions, failures in logic, and the neglect of counter-arguments can all lead to fallacies in reasoning (UNB, para 1). Thus, it is evident that critical thinking necessarily involves the consideration or avoidance of logical fallacies if it is to succeed in being "...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." (Facione, 1998, p. 14) There are a multitude of logical fallacies that may occur in reasoning or arguments. Since it would not be possible...
[ View Full Essay]