1.Define the term Critical Thinking?

Ans : Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally about what to do or what to believe. the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement.

It is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness.

People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked

2.State the characteristics of a critical thinker?

Ans : critical thinker questions everything, including existing social norms and traditions.

  • thinks systematically, considering all aspects of a problem and looking at each element in its wider context .carefully examines ideas and information

  • looks beyond what may appear as obvious

  • uses evidence to support claims

  • uses logic and reason in their arguments

  • avoids making assumptions

  • can recognise (and avoid) logical fallacies

  • strives to be aware of their own cognitive biases

  • considers different perspectives

  • uses the above critical thinking skills to make judgement

3.Discuss the elements involve in an argument process

ans. An argument involves the process of…

▪ establishing a claim and then

Claims are PROPOSITIONS or RESOLUTIONS supported by evidence. EVIDENCE consists of facts or conditions that are objectively observable, believes or statements generally accepted as true by the recipients or conclusions previously established.

▪ proving it with the use of

just as any civilised argument takes place.

• logical reasoning,

• examples, and

• research

4.What you understand by the term sphere in an argument.


A SPHERE is a concept that guides how an argument is produced. There are three types of sphere for an argument. These spheres are personal, public and technical.

Sphere is important in understanding how to produce and receive arguments. Arguments need to be adopted to the specific sphere.

The first sphere being the PERSONAL SPHERE, contains relatively informal arguments among people in typically casual settings.

The PUBLIC SPHERE contains arguments that are intended for public or general audiences. Very precise and proper documentation.

The TECHNICAL SPHERE of argument is specific to expertise, the realm of specialized knowledge and language. In order to participate in this field you must posses the proper knowledge and language in order to actively have a part in the argument . There is a possibility of jargon, for effective communication.

5.write short notes on the three sphers of argument.

The personal sphere is a certain sector of societal life in which an individual enjoys a degree of authority, unhampered by interventions from governmental or other institutions. Examples of the sphere are family and home.

The “public sphere” is generally conceived as the social space in which different opinions are expressed, problems of general concern are discussed, and collective solutions are developed communicatively. Thus, the public sphere is the central arena for societal communication. In large-scale societies, mass media and, more recently, online network media support and sustain communication in the public sphere.

Technical sphere arguments, however, require specialized forms of reasoning. Scientific data is often required to prove arguments in the technical sphere, and grounds for argument are tied to the technical knowledge of the field being discussed.

6. mention any four ways to construct the introduction of argument.


Introduction acquaints the reader with the topic and purpose of the paper.

Some points to consider while constructing a introduction are

▪ Personal anecdote(Story)

▪ Example—real or hypothetical

▪ Question

Engage the audience by asking questions.

▪ Quotation

utilize proper data from trusted sources

▪ Shocking statistics

utilize data to get participation of audience.

▪ Striking image

Introduce the topic of discussion to the audience to generate reader interest in the argument.

7. explain the coorientation view of argument.

Ans. A co-orientational approach to argument presumes that the relationship between arguer and recipient is as important as the content of the argument. Rather than viewing arguments as a set of seperate, discrete , and definable statements, a co orientation approach holds that the parts of an argument can be fluid and changing as the argument evolves during the interaction of arguer and recipient

8.define the term argument chain.

Ans. An argument chain uses a proved argument as evidence for an unproved claim.

9.describe the three perspectives of argument.

The three perspectives of argument are:

Logical perspective:(It asks, is the argument sound?)  presumes there are objective, universal standards for evaluating arguments  arguments are unilateral, complete, self-contained  based upon formal logic, standards for determining validity/invalidity.

Dialectical perspective:(Asks-Has the discussion been handled so as to achieve a candid and critical examination of all aspects of the issue in question?)  views argument as a back and forth, give and take process  arguments are multilateral, they evolve, change, and develop over time  involves testing arguments in the “marketplace of ideas,” assumes the strongest arguments will prevail.

Rhetorical perspective:(Asks: Has the arguer constructed the argument so as to successfully influence a particular audience?)  views arguments as being audience-centered  arguing is strategic: arguments must be adapted to the listener’s frame of reference  standards for evaluating arguments are person-specific, situation dependent.

10.Write short notes on four different types of listening.

Ans. The four types of listening are appreciative, empathic, comprehensive, and critical.

Appreciative Listening

When you listen for appreciation you are listening for enjoyment. Think about the music you listen to. You usually listen to music because you enjoy it. The same can be said for appreciative listening when someone is speaking. Some common types of appreciative listening can be found in sermons from places of worship, from a motivational speech by people we respect or hold in high regard, or even from a standup comedian who makes us laugh.

Empathic Listening

When you listen empathically you are doing so to show mutual concern. During this type of listening you are trying to identify with the speaker by understanding the situation in which he/she is discussing. You are stepping into the other’s shoes to get a better understanding of what it is he/she is talking about. Usually during this type of listening you want to be fully present in the moment or mindfully listening to what the speaker is saying. Your goal during this time is to focus on the speaker, not on yourself. You are trying to understand from the speaker’s perspective.

Comprehensive Listening

If you are watching the news, listening to a lecture, or getting directions from someone, you are listening to understand or listening to comprehend the message that is being sent. This process is active. In class, you should be focused, possibly taking notes of the speaker’s main ideas. Identifying the structure of the speech and evaluating the supports he/she offers as evidence. This is one of the more difficult types of listening because it requires you to not only concentrate but to actively participate in the process. The more you practice listening to comprehend, the stronger listener you become.

Critical Listening

Have you ever had to buy an expensive item, such as a new appliance, a car, a cell phone, or an iPad? You probably did some research beforehand and listened closely to the salesperson when you went to compare brands. Or perhaps your best friend is telling you about some medical tests he/she recently had done. You listen closely so you can help your friend understand her results and the possible ramifications of the findings. Both of these scenarios are examples of critical listening. Critical listening is listening to evaluate the content of the message. As a critical listener you are listening to all parts of the message, analysing it, and evaluating what you heard. When engaging in critical listening, you are also critically thinking. You are making mental judgments based on what you see, hear, and read. Your goal as a critical listener is to evaluate the message that is being sent and decide for yourself if the information is valid.

11.state some of the barriers to listening?

Ans . Four causes of poor listening.

a. not concentrating.

b.listening too hard.

c.jumping to conclusion.

d. focusing on manner of delivery and personal appearance.

12. mention some ways how the barriers of listening

can be overcome.

Ans. The things to be an active listener :

a. give undivided attention.

b. Do not interrupt the speaker.

c. let the speaker finish his or her statements.

d. Do not be distracted by internal or external interfaces.

e. Do not prejudge the speaker.

13. non-verbal communication is culturally conditioned . Justify with suitable example.

Ans. Non-verbal communication is communication that occurs without words which is continuous. Non-verbal communication is different from person to person and especially from one culture to another. Cultural background defines their non-verbal communication as many forms of non-verbal communications like signs and signals are learned behaviour.

Eye Contact

Western cultures mostly consider eye contact to be a good gesture. It shows attentiveness, confidence and honesty. Other cultures such as Asian, Middle Eastern, Hispanic and Native American do not take it as a good expression. It is taken as a rude and offensive expression.

Unlike in Western cultures taking it as respectful, other do not consider it that way. In Eastern cultures women should especially not have eye contact with men as it shows power or sexual interest. In some cultures, whereas, gazes are taken as a way of expression. Staring is taken as rude in most cultures.


Gestures such as thumbs up can be interpreted differently in different cultures. It is taken as “Okay” sign in many cultures whereas is taken as a vulgarism in others like Latin American cultures and in Japan some even take it as money.

Some cultures take snapping fingers to get the attention of a waiter as alright whereas some take it as disrespect and very offensive. Showing feet is taken as offensive in some Middle Eastern cultures. Some cultures take pointing fingers as insulting too. In Polynesia, people stick out their tongue to greet people which is taken as a sign of mockery in most of other cultures.


Touches are taken as rudeness in most cultures. Shaking hands is considered to be acceptable in many. Similarly, acceptability of kissing, hugs, and many other touches are different in different cultures. People in Asia are more conservative in these types of non-verbal communication.

14. briefly discuss any four ways how to overcome communication barriers.

15. explain how “asking questions” help design an effective argument.

16.explain the reason why people do not hesitate to ask questions and the consequence they

face for the same.

. When the Claim is above LOD (Level of Dispute), i.e. in the zone of disagreement – 2. Arguer makes assumption by the that evidence is true ,and accordingly provide reasoning 3. If evidence is true and reasoning makes sense then claim is assumed to be true. 4. So then claim comes in the zone of agreement below LOD and gets accepted. above LOD in zone of disagreement?  The idea of argument chain comes in. Then the arguer will use a proved argument as evidence for unproved claim. .(The process of linking proven claims to unproven claims is called chaining.)  Then provide more evidence and support with reasoning.  This is how the chain will move.  A stage will come when audience agrees and the LOD rises.  Therefore claim now comes below LOD and audience agrees.  Previously disputed evidence is now proven conclusion

Human societies are complex • Developed over generations through experiences, symbols, histories, structures & framework to understand surroundings. • People & experiences are different. • Arguments take place among people who may or may not share the same experiences • Lack of common approaches for understanding & interpreting arguments may lead to misunderstanding CULTURE • Systems of shared meanings that are expressed through different symbolic forms such as rituals, stories, symbols, myths that hold a group of people together. • People who share a common culture share a similar communication pattern. ETHICS • Is the study of what is morally right or just. • Systematic set of ethical principles • Ethics can be personal or formally adopted by groups of similar people. E.g: professional bodies. OBJECTIVE OF ARGUMENT • Strengthens individuals, and creates a relationship. • Strengthens community, help groups of people to live and work together. • Aristotle argued that arguers should consider those issues that are fair & just to the members of the community. Cultural Argument Patterns • Deductive pattern • Inductive pattern • Abductive pattern • Narrative pattern Deductive pattern • States claim or position explicitly. • Subsequent statements or support are designed to support the initial claim. • Disagreement with another position is assumed. Inductive pattern • One speaker has a viewpoint. • That speaker uses various examples or statistical generalization to support that viewpoint. • The general claim being supported can be stated at either the beginning or the end. • Additional examples, when added add cogency(clarity/more logic) to the view-point. Abductive pattern • Speakers work colaboratively to reach a conclusion. • Speakers share reasoning; one person’s statement may serve as a premise for the other’s claim. • Hypothetical cases may be used to test the speaker’s reasoning. • The conclusion is not stated at the beginning but emerges from the discussion. Narrative pattern • Narratives are used to make a point. • Narratives come from the speaker or others’ personal experiences. • They are mini-stories that describe circumstance and involve other characters and in which the narrator plays a role. • The point, if it is explicitly stated at all, is often stated at the end of the story. Culture & values • Culture assign levels of importance to different values. – Some cultures value possessions & others value people. – Some cultures value collectivism & relationship & others value individualism. – Some value progress & change & others value tradition. DEVELOPING CULTURAL ARGUMENT COMPETENCE Competence in intercultural argument is defined as the ability of an arguer to function in a manner that is perceived to be relatively consistent with the needs, capacities, goals, and expectations of individuals from one cultural environment while satisfying one’s own needs, capacities, goals, and expectations. ETHICS AND ARGUMENT • Arguments are generally considered ethical and just when they – Strengthen the individual or strengthen the community. • Arguers who act to undermine their audiences or weaken community bonds or structures are generally considered unethical. STRENGTHENING THE INDIVIDUAL- • Arguments must strengthen individuals/recipients by providing opportunities to make free, informed, critical choices and become better people in their community. • When arguers educate, offer alternative perspectives, or provide new information, they offer their audiences greater opportunities for free and better decision making. • Arguments should work to create opportunities for the recipients and not limit them. • The recipient’s right to make free choices should be respected. • This is how arguers can act ethically. Contd… STRENGTHENING THE COMMUNITY- • Arguers should consider the issues of what is fair and just for the members of a community. • The basic moral question that the arguer should ask is, “Does the decision treat everyone the same way, or does it show favoritism and discrimination?” • If arguers seek to enhance the integrity of the community, they should balance the needs of the majority and protect the interests of the minority. • Ethical arguments are those that balance outcomes and promote the decisions that achieve the greatest good for the greatest number. Developing an Ethical Code • Requires arguers to take responsibility in argumentative encounters. • Arguers should have clear understanding of :- -Argument -Construction of arguments -Ethical uses of arguments. • Both arguer & recipient must have a clear sense of their own ethic of argument. Ethics for Arguers • Arguers should be accountable & responsible for their own arguments. If they mislead the recipient through poorly constructed arguments, motivates an audience to take wrong actions, then the arguer is accountable. • Arguers should promote significant choice. Arguers should encourage the recipients to make voluntary decisions, free from physical or mental coercion. Arguers should provide the best available information for their hearers so that they may make well-informed and reasoned decisions. • Arguers should promote positive relationship with their audience. Recipients are to be treated as partners in the decision-making process. Arguers should not force ideas on the recipients, but rather to provide audience members with the information necessary to produce their own decisions. Ethics for Recipients • Recipients need to be critically aware & be vigilant of the arguments. • Recipients should be aware of attempts which might influence them • Should be informed • Understand how fallacies persuade. Recipients should be aware of how arguers use argumentative devices and fallacies to shape and direct their decisions by constraining or confusing their understanding.

Nature of Claims & Propositions Every argument use claims & Propositions. •They define and focus the direction of a discussion or debate. •A claim is a statement about something, which could, in theory, be supported with evidence. It is an assertion about the way things are, or were, or will be, or should be. Claims are, almost by definition, controversial, in the sense that not everyone agrees with them. That is why they require evidence. •Claims are the end points of an individual argument. •They are supported by reasoning and evidence and focus on a single issue/idea. •While arguing, different arguments are developed and all of them has a claim. Proposition • Propositions are main claims that serve as the principal claim of an extended argument. • Propositions in an extended argument function like the thesis in an essay. Formulating a proposition Claims and propositions need to be both controversial and clear. Expressing well-developed propositions and claims requires: • Controversiality/Challenge-A proposition for argument should challenge what people already believe or do. If a claim or proposition is controversial, it states a position that is not currently accepted or adhered to by the audience. • Clarity- Claim must focus arguments on a particular set of issues. Contd… • Avoid Double-Barreled Statements- They advance two or more claims simultaneously and, often lead arguers in separate directions because the relevant issues for each part of the claim are different. • Balance- It is the requirement that the issues for and against a propositions be included equally in the propositional field. Types of claim Claims are divided into the categories of – FACT, VALUE & POLICY • Claims of Fact. (existence of something/definition or classification/facts — inferences about past present or future) • Types of factual claims (generally “objective”) – Factual / historical (e.g: There is no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.) – Relational – causal connections(e.g : A diet high in fat will harm your health) – Predictive (e.g : Every home in India will have an internet connection.) • proof requires: – sufficient and appropriate grounds • reliable authority • recent data • accurate, typical data • clearly defined terms -no loaded language – a clear distinction between fact and inference. Claims of Value (taste & morals / good-bad) (make value judgments/ resolve conflict between values, according to criteria supplied by the arguer) • proof required: – Establishing standards of evaluation (i.e. a warrant that defines what constitutes instances of the relevant value) – note the priority of the value in this instance. – Establish the advantage (practical or moral) of your standards. – Use examples to clarify abstract values – Use credible authorities for support. e.g: Stem–cell research is beneficial to society. Grading undermines the quality of education. • Claims of Policy (action / should or ought, it calls for specific course of action& focus on whether a change in policy or behaviour should take place) – usually involves sub-claims of fact and value • proof required: – Making proposed action clear – need (justification) – plan, (must be workable) – benefit (advantages) – consider opposition / counter arguments e.g: We should rent this apartment. Child marriage should be banned.