In this section

Common Mistakes in Higher Thinking

Unfortunately, errors can be made when we employ higher level thinking. It is important to be mindful of the following when evaluating your work and the work of others.


Consider the Source

You just read an article about the health benefits of consuming dairy products

  • Is the creator of this article a physician? Dietician? Dairy farmer or supplier?
  • One clearly has more to gain from an increased consumption of dairy products than the other

Understanding before Criticizing

  • Make sure you fully understand a point of view before jumping to the side that says “wrong!”

Watch for Emotion, Bias, and Prejudice

  • We are emotional creatures and some topics can make us go from 0 →100 very quickly and with little thought
  • When we feel strongly (emotionally), we lose the ability to think critically and objectively
  • Be aware of an author and yourself doing this
  • Are you swayed with hard facts, logic, and well thought out arguments or through emotion?

Maybe you hate cats, you had a bad experience with one. Do not let that experience and those negative feelings influence your thoughts on an article titled “Why cats make the best pets.” This is called bias, when we bring our previous experiences, thoughts, and attitudes to the table.

Everyone has bias. It is impossible not to. What you need to look out for is strong or harsh bias. It is your job to evaluate the arguments and evidence, not to disagree or agree immediately because of your experiences.

Non Sequitur

  • This is Latin (Harry Potter spell language) for “does not follow”
  • What this means is, don’t reach a conclusion because something else doesn’t fit or work

EX: There are no cake crumbs on the person’s lips, so the person did not
eat the cake.

They could have eaten the cake and wiped away the crumbs. The one does not mean the other happened.


Selective Perception

  • This is when we see only the evidence, arguments, and points of view that support our own beliefs, perceptions, and understandings while ignoring the evidence, arguments, and points of view which contradict

EX: Believing all adults who play video games don’t shower, but ignoring or overlooking those adults who do shower


Dogmatism

  • We all have beliefs. It is bad to cling to those beliefs out of pure stubbornness and despite a long list of evidence saying they’re wrong

EX: Believing the Earth is flat despite all the evidence saying it’s not


Double Standard

  • This is where we have two sets of judgemental standards
  • One set is higher or harsher when applied to a specific topic
  • The other set is lower or kinder when applied to a specific topic in the same context

EX: It’s okay for us to criticize Bill in those shorts, but not okay for Bill to criticize us in those shorts


Wishful Thinking

  • Thinking something is true simply because you want it to be and not because of sound evidence and logic

EX: Believing you will do well in a course, despite not attending class, doing the readings, or studying


Hasty Generalization

  • When a conclusion is reached too quickly and grounded in only a couple instances or forms of evidence

EX: All hippies are dirty because you saw a couple dirty hippies at a festival one time

Jumping to Conclusions

  • Reaching a conclusion based on a solitary instance and ignoring all other instances which contradict

EX: Believing someone doesn’t like you because they didn’t reply to your text right away, ignoring all the other reasons which could be keeping that person from their phone


False Analogy

  • If two things are similar in a particular respect, then they must be similar in others

EX: Semis and pedal bikes both require a person to operate them, so they both require driver’s licenses


Glittering Generality

  • A statement (often positive) that is not supported by evidence or logic
  • It’s argument stems from the use of broad language

EX: They are an intelligent person. He is an awesome human being. She has the best dog.
Intelligent, awesome, and best are words that can sway opinion, but there is no fact behind them


Straw Man Argument

  • This is an argument that misrepresents contradicting arguments by oversimplifying them or highlighting the most extreme position

EX: Todd thinks their friends should be nicer to the new kid. Bill thinks Todd wants to be better friends with the new kid than Todd is with Bill


Ad Hominin Argument

  • Instead of attacking an individual’s argument, the individual themselves is attacked

EX: You are too young to know what you’re talking about
The argument is dismissed because the person is young, not because of any weaknesses the argument might have


Red Herring

  • Irrelevant issues are addressed/given attention in order to disguise/draw attention away from the main issues

EX: Severus Snape in Harry Potter #1 is a red herring. Attention is focused on him being the bad guy, when really… it’s Quirrell all along


Smoke Screen

  • A smoke screen is a thing whose purpose is to conceal, confuse, mislead, and/or disguise the main argument of contradicting evidence

EX: A politician fighting against universal healthcare because it is an added expense for taxpayers when really, that politician is funded by pharmaceutical companies


Slippery Slope

  • Believing bad things will happen in a domino-like effect (one thing will lead to another) if a position, belief, or point of view is not accepted

EX: If marijuana becomes legal, then everyone will develop drug addictions


Deceptive Language

  • Using strong language or emotional language to prove a thing is true, not evidence or logic

EX: “It’s obvious that…” or “Winston Churchill was a fool…” or “Clearly this shows…”


Appealing to Authority

  • If an authority figure (celebrity, politician, etc.) says a thing, then it must be true

EX: Buying Brand X cereal because Martha Stewart says it’s delicious

Appealing to Tradition

  • If something has been true for a long time, it must be true
  • If something has been done a certain way for a long time, that must be the best way of doing it

EX: Throughout history, marriage was a union between a man and woman, so it should remain as such


Talking in Circles

  • Reaching a conclusion by rewording one’s position
  • No answer has been reached, no evidence or logic provided
  • The opinion has simply been reworded to look different and like a conclusion


Cuseo, Joseph B, Aaron Thompson, Michele Campagna, Viki Sox Fecas. Thriving in College and Beyond: Research-Based Strategies for Academic Success and personal Development. Dubuque: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company, 2016.

Ellis, Dave. Becoming a Master Student. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006.