Reflections: At the heart of critical thinking lies the ability to analyze. Extracting key ideas, pulling out hidden assumptions, and setting out the structure of arguments are important aspects of analysis. It also helps to have a creative, expansive side where we generate ideas and turn over alternatives in our minds. It helps to keep this broader view in mind as we dissect arguments, organize the various components, inspect fine details, and see how it all works together.

Goals of this Chapter: My goals for this chapter are to lay out tools and techniques for evaluating arguments and weighing evidence. Since so much rests on the relationship between the premises (the evidence cited) and the conclusion ( thesis), the first half of the chapter focuses on evidence.

First, look at the evidence: Examining evidence is vital for assessing the quality of reasoning. I start with the range of types of evidence and give an overview of the different forms evidence can take. We can then turn to sorting and weighing evidence. I include a checklist for weighing evidence to pull it all together for easy reference.

Second, setting out an analysis: We are now ready to proceed to analysis of articles. A short analysis does not have the level of detail and complexity of a longer analysis, so looking at the differences is a good idea. With the basics of argument and the use of a flow chart, you have some tools for seeing the way an article/argument is structured. Using the guidelines and list of steps (e.g., of argumentation may be a help in developing your thinking and your writing skills. Going over the tables and guidelines will give you an overview and help reinforce what you've already learned.

Aspects of Analysis

1. Attention to Context: To stay focused we need to be aware of the context. Issues and problems do not exist in a vacuum, but are embedded in people's lives and usually take place within a certain location and time frame. We need to pay attention to this.
   
   
2. Assessing Credibility: When making your list of standards (criteria), think about what makes the person seem credible. Proximity to the crime, ability to observe easily, conflict of interest, background information, professional training, cultural factors, and personal characteristics may all affect a person's ability. These factors act as criteria for credibility of witnesses.
   
   
3. Cogency: When assessing an argument, one key concern is whether or not the reasoning is cogent. This means that the argument is convincing because of the quality and persuasive force of the evidence supporting the conclusion. A cogent argument is well reasoned and clearly structured so we can follow the argument, seeing how the evidence lays the foundation for the conclusion.
   
   
4. Developing Analytical Skills: An effective analysis entails recognizing the focus, pulling out evidence, seeing the structure of the reasoning involved, weighing strengths and weaknesses, considering alternative explanations, examining assumptions to root out those that are unwarranted, looking for omissions and potential sources of bias or prejudice.
   
   
5. Analyzing Arguments; There are different ways in which thoughts and ideas get expressed.: (1) Assumed neutrality or objectivity: The goal of an exposition is to relay information or to present all relevant sides or perspectives on a particular issue. (2) Argument: In an argumentative essay, evidence is given in support of a particular position. The goal here is to be persuasive and our task in analyzing the work is to determine the strength of the reasoning. (3) Creative expression: The goal here is to creatively use images or stories to explore issues, ideas, feelings, states of mind, and so on. ]
   
   

A. Types of Evidence:
Some evidence comes in the form of facts or factual claims. Some evidence comes in the form of confessions or testimony (e.g., personal, eyewitness, or expert testimony). Some evidence comes in the form of statistical data, government reports, relevant policies or guidelines. Whatever the form it take, evidence must be examined in a careful analysis.

1. Claims of Fact versus Speculation
   
   
2. Speculation
   
   
3. The Scope of a Claim
   
   
4. Credible Sources
   
   
5. Value Claims
   
   
6. Statistical Evidence
   
   
7. Circumstantial Evidence:
   
   
8. Conditional Claims
   
   
9. Analogies
   
   
10. Cause and Effect Reasoning
    
    

Independent versus Interdependent Evidence:When one piece of evidence is sufficient in and of itself, we would say that that piece independently, or singly, establishes the conclusion. If we lack one definitive piece of evidence, then we have to look at the way our evidence works together. When this occurs, we say each contributing piece of evidence is interdependent. With interdependent premises, the evidence operates as a package deal. This is strongest when the evidence works together like interlocking pieces, holding up the conclusion. And when that evidence poses no clear conflicts or contradictions if we assume it is actually true we have corroborating evidence. With corroborating evidence it is gets harder to attack a case, because the foundation gains more strength

B. Weighing Evidence
In the process of trying to evaluate an argument, chain of arguments, policies, and decision making we need to have some systematic way of dealing with the evidence. That is, we need to see how to evaluate the strength of the evidence and prioritize it in terms of its role in supporting the particular goal. Here is a guide for weighing evidence.

→ The Checklist for Weighing Evidence includes: Scope, Relevance, Support, Testimony, Facts Stack Up, Circumstantial Evidence, Statistical Claims, Conditional Claims, Value Claims, Analogy/precedent, and Omissions

Analysis of an Article or Argument
Once we feel comfortable handling evidence, we can tackle all sorts of arguments, great and small. Let's start first with the title, to see if it sets the stage for any interpretation that may follow.

A. Structure
An analysis of an article involves looking at the way the article is structured, determining the author's position, frame of reference, and method of approach; examining the use of language; and checking for bias. There may be bias as shown through the use of language, which shows the values or position favored by the author, or the explicit or implicit expression of attitudes or values. There could be bias in the very way in which evidence is presented.

B. Basics
Central to an analysis is an examination of the key claims or arguments. Clarify what is being argued (the thesis) and then set out the premises. Then pull out and weigh the evidence. The argument may rest on such things as research data, statistics, physical evidence, causal claims, comparisons, testimony, personal statements, confessions, and anecdotes. Examine the evidence carefully. Similarly, it is important to look at any assumptions we make. Your personal reaction is generally a separate issue from an analysis. You could incorporate reactions at the end; say right before the conclusion, to add a personal note to your essay.

C. Staying Focused in Short Analysis Papers
In a short essay (less than five pages) be selective. Zero-in on the most important aspects; you cannot do everything. Nevertheless, if you are writing clearly and concisely, you can do a lot in a brief analysis. The key aspects you'd want to include are (1) a statement of the article's focus or thesis, (2) key points and organization, (3) use of language, (4) strengths, (5) weaknesses, and (6) persuasiveness of the article. In some cases you might want to focus on one area, but generally try to give an overview of all six.

D. Using a Flow-Chart to Determine Structure
Once you know where the argument is headed, you can see how it's structured. One of the ways to discern the structure is with a flow chart. Go through the article, boxing each paragraph. Number each box (paragraph). On a separate sheet of paper (or there on the article), draw boxes for all your paragraphs joined by arrows going from one to the next. Then put a descriptive label of each paragraph (brief summary of the key points--think telegram). Do this for all your boxes/paragraphs

E. Analysis of Longer Articles
Try a flow chart to block out the article or a brief summary of each paragraph. Once you get an overview, you are in a better position to do your analysis. Tips for analyzing longer articles:

1. Titles and Subtitles. Look at: Frame of Reference/Point of View, Language, Bias, Images, Impact, Effect, Overall Thrust or Direction.
2. Language. Look for: Loaded Terms (positive or negative), False-neutral terms, Technical or Scientific terms, Connotations, Language of Description.
3. Structure. To get a sense of structure try any of the following: Block out, Create a Flow Chart, List the sequence of information. Note who has first and last word. Do a Quantitative analysis.
4. Testimony. Examine: Credibility and Potential conflict of interest v. impartiality of the person being cited. Decide if the person/source in question is reputable. Check for possible bias.
5. Factual Reporting. There are three things to look at: Who is reporting, whether the report is sufficient, and whether the reporter is biased or unbiased. Check the frame of reference of the author, possible omissions or error.
6. Literary Analysis. This includes: Themes, Plot line and Narrative structure, Character development, Perspective, Description, Connection between form and content, Moral, spiritual, and social concerns, Use of language, Symbols and images.
7. Socio-Cultural Frames. Be attentive to social and cultural frameworks: Treatment of social issues or moral problems, Cultural baggage and biases, Societal attitudes. Recognize the social and cultural context of the author and work.
8. Use of Statistics. Use of statistics signal us to look at: Date of study, Size and diversity of sample, Strength of percentage in inferring conclusion, Relevance of study to topic, Assumptions or cultural attitudes embedded in study.
9. Fallacies. Any fallacious reasoning needs to be pointed out. Note any fallacies and determine the degree to which the author's work is affected by any such errors.
10. Argumentation. This is at the center of any detailed analysis and includes these steps:
    • Define the problem or Clarify the Thesis
    • Separate background information from evidence
    • Weigh evidence
    • Assess Support (e.g., credibility of sources and documentation)
    • Assess Testimony, Use of Facts, and Factual Reporting,
    • Recognize and Assess Circumstantial Evidence,
    • Recognize and Assess Statistical Evidence
    • Recognize and discuss any Value claims
    • Examine Use of analogies, precedents, and metaphors
    • Examine any Causal or other Inductive Arguments
    • Examine any Deductive Arguments
    • If Deductive: (True Premises → True conclusion) = Valid argument
    • If Deductive: (Valid + Premises actually true) = Sound argument