Explain The Six Rules For Critical Thinking Of Claims

9/29/2015 There are six rules for critical thinking about claims. The first being falsifiability followed by logic, comprehensiveness, honesty, replicability, and sufficiency. If you can apply these rules and no one will ever be able to sneak up on you and steal your belief. To begin with, falsifiability must be possible to consider evidence that would prove the claim false. If nothing imaginable could ever disprove a claim, it is meaningless. There are two key ways this rule is violated the first one being the undeclared claim; a statement so broad or vague that it lacks meaning, such as the claim that quartz crystals can restore balance and harmony to a person’s spiritual energy. How would an individual disprove that? The undeclared claim has the advantage

The multiple out means heads I win, tails you lose. The second rule is logic, which is any argument in support of a claim must be both valid and sound. To be valid, the arguments grounds must be true. To be sound, the rules of logic must be correctly used to reach conclusions based on such principles. Comprehensiveness is evidence that must be exhaustive, that is all of the available evidence must be considered. The successes of psychics, for example, are cited without reference to their much more numerous failures. Honesty is the evidence must be evaluated without self-deception. The more honest conclusion would be that the original result must have been a coincidence. Replicability is the fifth rule which is If the evidence for a claim is based upon an experimental result, or if the evidence offered in support of a claim could logically be explained as coincidental, then the result must be repeated in subsequent experiments or trials. The rule of replicability, which requires independent persons to follow the same procedures and achieve the same results, is an effective way of correcting bias, error, or fraud in experiments. When I correctly predict the roll of the dice, is it psychic ability or