The Nuts and Bolts of Critical Reasoning

Who decides what is reasonable? How can it be decided? Who has the superlative clarity of mind to ordain what is reasonable, and what isn’t? These are some of the key questions which philosophers and thinkers asked. Be it that they only had their government, which was often tyrannous, their gods, which were often absent from court, and their minds which were-ever present, they chose the latter and deduce arguments that they could define as illogical, through nothing but their own ability to display the self-evident absence of reason.

This week in Praxis, we went over the lectures of the nuts and bolts of critical reasoning, and what makes certain arguments fallacious, and others reasonable. Below is my take on the segment, and what I could extract. I hope it shows you a little bit of info, and that you can enjoy!

Until next time,


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s