Critical Thinking and Several Underpinnings of Social Science

                                                                  Critical Thinking and Several Underpinnings of Social Science

Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457	Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%	Writer Classification: PhD competent
Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago	Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours	Revision: Permitted
Sources: 4-6	Course Level: Masters/University College	Guarantee Status: 96-99%

Instructions

Critical Thinking and Several Underpinnings of Social Science
HSB Sociology Discussion
The discussion question : The first four chapters of Is That True? (ITT) clarifies the
concept of critical thinking and several underpinnings of social science, including the
elements of an argument, everyday arguments, and the logic of the social sciences.
We are introduced to grounds, warrants, and conclusions and why anecdotes are
considered weak evidence. Best (2021) explains that facts require social agreement,
which is why different facts may exist among different groups and at different times
throughout history. Simply claiming something to be a fact does not end the debate.
More importantly, we come to understand the logic of social sciences and causal
explanations. The beauty of social science is that the search for knowledge is never-
ending because "the evidence is never perfect; is it always subject to critical
evaluation" (Best, 2021, p. 37). share two "big ideas" that were new or insightful for
you. Explain why these were significant and how you related to them. Identify
something you didn't understand well or that you had questions about. Be sure to
use in-text citations when appropriate and page numbers so others can easily find

the passages you're discussing! My answer to the discussion: Is That True? Critical
thinking can be elaborated as assessing or judging an argument to see whether it is
conclusive enough (Chapter 2, p. 8). Critical thinking is therefore used in evaluating
a statement that asserts something to be the case since critical thinking is about
evidence. Facts and evidence are important. Nonetheless, it’s similarly important to
be able to recognize the evidence’s basis and the connection between the proofs,
which is where critical thinking comes in. When thinking critically, it is important to
consider three aspects which are the grounds that provide basic information, the
warrants that justify drawing some conclusion, and the conclusion itself. It is worth
noting that warrants are implicit in the sense that if the person arguing and those
who hear it share the same values, it may seem unnecessary to spell out the
argument's warrants. One insightful idea that I learned after reading the book is that
it is important to recognize facts from assumptions since assumptions may hinder us
from thinking critically as we may be convinced that the false ‘facts’ are indeed true
(Chapter 2, p.11). I found this perceptive because I realized that in most discussions
people tend to assume that assumptions are facts. For instance, Christians may
argue that Jesus is the son of God the creator, but Islam will think otherwise. Both
would be convinced that they are right due to strongly held beliefs. Another issue I
found insightful is the use of ad hominem arguments which focus on the person who
has said something, rather than what has been said (Chapter 3, p. 18). I find this
sensible since using ad hominem arguments poses the danger of closing off the
listener from whatever ideas the person may be presenting. It is therefore important
to listen and find evidence before making a conclusion, rather than disagreeing with
a statement because it was said by a person with whom you probably disagree.
Most people find it as a seductive line of thinking because it seems to excuse us
from taking our opponents seriously, which is not right. This is similar to regarding a
claim as a myth since by doing so, it gives a listener no need for reasoning. As such,
critical thinking involves judging the quality of evidence. My classmates posts: 1-
Betzabe Avila: There were actually many ideas in this reading that stood out to me. I
think the first chapter was a great way to express in words what it means to think
critically. In my college experience, professors have always put emphasis on
thinking critically. This idea may come new to many but as the text mentions, it is a
tool we use in our everyday life. The text states, "this book views critical thinking as
a set of tools for evaluating claims…we encounter claims all the time in
conversations, in what we read, in the media, indeed, on pretty much every occasion
we connect with other people, and we've all had to learn to interpret those
claims"(page 2). I also liked the idea that was mentioned that although we like to
stay in the comfort of assuming we already know something, we should question.
When we consider our assumptions may be wrong, we can think critically. 2- Emily
Reynoso: One "big idea" that was insightful to me was that "evidence is almost
never complete or perfect" (Best, 2021, p. 16). For me, I get so caught up in trying to
find the best evidence that proves my argument that I forget that evidence isn't
perfect. Evidence is used to support a claim and is key to have a successful

argument, but it is also important to note that evidence can change over time and
might not give the bigger picture. This comment made the think about cross-
sectional and longitudinal studies. We can conclude based on our observations at
that time, but we can also build on the results over time.Another insightful idea that I
learned from the reading was that metaphors might misdirect us (Best, 2021). This
statement was insightful because I've always seen metaphors as a helpful tool when
making an argument. After all, they allow the audience to grasp a better
understanding. However, I learned that metaphors "can discourage thinking critically
about the claim being made" (Best, 2021, p.23). I never considered that there was a
problem with metaphors simplifying a complex claim. I've seen this as helpful
because they keep the audience's attention and allows the presenter to draw
similarities between claims.When reading the nonspuriousness section, I was a little
uncertain about why we can never declare that a relationship is nonspurious (Best,
2021). I understand that "it is possible for a critic to argue that some other factor may
explain the relationship between what we think is the cause and what we consider
the effect of that cause" (Best, 2021, p. 34). However, wouldn't that diminish the
importance of evidence? If there will always be another argument to assess, then
wouldn't some evidence become insufficient? If so, then we can't say that a claim or
argument is a fact. I'm confused about the technicalities of each argument. If anyone
can explain it to me, I would greatly appreciate it. write reply… For your TWO peer
replies (click the reply button in the author's post), engage with the author by
elaborating, comparing or contrasting, sharing counterpoints, or drawing connections
to specific sociological concepts or theories. This is an opportunity to demonstrate
critical thinking, so avoid simplistic replies that mainly repeat Best or your
classmate's contributions. Try to bring something new, insightful, or provocative to
the discussion! You want to further the conversation by adding new ideas,
information, or perspectives. It's OK to play "devil's advocate", just let others know
so we're all on the same page. Be sure to use in-text citations when appropriate and
page numbers so others can easily find the passages you're discussing! Write about
10-11 sentences paragraphs.

Critical Thinking and Several Underpinnings of Social Science

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Critical Thinking and Several Underpinnings of Social Science

Critical Thinking and Several Underpinnings of Social Science

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!