Intellectual Standards for Evaluating Reasoning
Educated and reasonable thinkers use intellectual standards—clarity, precision, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, logicalness, and fairness—to assess reasoning. Skilled thinkers routinely ask targeted questions to ensure their thinking meets these standards.
THE IDEA
Evaluating Reasoning (Overall)
Educated and reasonable thinkers use intellectual standards to assess reasoning. These standards include, but are not limited to, clarity, precision, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, logicalness, and fairness. Skilled thinkers routinely ask questions specifically targeting these standards.
- Questioning Clarity. Thinking is always more or less clear. Questions that focus on clarity in thinking are:
- Could you elaborate on what you are saying?
- Could you give me an example or illustration of your point?
- I hear you saying “x.” Am I hearing you correctly, or have I misunderstood you?
- Questioning Precision. Thinking is always more or less precise. Questions that focus on precision in thinking are:
- Could you give me more details about that?
- Could you be more specific?
- Could you specify your concerns more fully?
- Questioning Accuracy. Thinking is always more or less accurate. Questions that focus on accuracy in thinking are:
- How could we check that to see if it is true?
- How could we verify these alleged facts?
- Can we trust the accuracy of these data given the source from which they came?
- Questioning Relevance. Thinking is always capable of straying from the task, question, problem, or issue under consideration. Questions that focus on relevance in thinking are:
- I don’t see how what you said bears on the question. Could you show me how it is relevant?
- Could you explain what you think the connection is between your question and the question we have focused on?
- Questioning Depth. Thinking can function either at the surface of things or probe beneath that surface to deeper matters and issues. To figure out whether a question is deep, we need to determine whether it involves complexities. Questions that focus on depth in thinking are:
- Is this question simple or complex? Is it easy or difficult to answer?
- What makes this a complex question? Are conflicting points of view relevant?
- How are we dealing with the complexities inherent in the question?
- Questioning Breadth. Thinking can be broad or narrow. Breadth of thinking requires the reasoner to think insightfully within more than one point of view or frame of reference. Questions that focus on breadth in thinking are:
- What points of view are relevant to this issue?
- What relevant points of view have we considered?
- Am I failing to consider this issue from an opposing perspective because I am not open to changing my view?
- Have I entered the opposing views in good faith, or only enough to find flaws in them?
- I have looked at the question from an economic viewpoint. Does it have an ethical dimension?
- I have considered a liberal position on the issue. What would conservatives say?
- Questioning Logic. Thinking is more or less logical. Questions that focus on logic are:
- Does all this make sense together?
- Does your first paragraph fit in with your last? Does what you say follow from the evidence?
- Questioning Fairness. Thinking can be more or less fair. Questions that focus on fairness are:
- Do I have any vested interest in this issue?
- Am I sympathetically representing the viewpoints of others?
When to use it
Evaluating a policy proposal for a research paper by systematically checking each standard.
Providing constructive feedback on a colleague's presentation by focusing on clarity, relevance, and logic.
Reviewing your own reasoning before a major purchase to avoid biases—check for accuracy of price comparisons and depth of long-term costs.
Facilitating a group discussion to ensure all perspectives are considered (breadth) and arguments are fair to opposing views.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Applying Relevance to a Business Proposal
During a team meeting, a manager presents a new software tool that would streamline data entry. A colleague asks, "How does this tool specifically address our current bottleneck in report generation?" This question targets the standard of relevance, ensuring the proposal directly connects to the team's main challenge.
Using Depth in a Historical Analysis
A student writing an essay on the fall of the Roman Empire initially lists external invasions as the cause. After applying the depth standard, she asks, "What internal complexities like economic decay or political corruption contributed?" This leads to a more nuanced argument that considers multiple layers of causation.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Think of a recent decision you made. Which intellectual standard did you rely on most? Which one might you have overlooked, and how could using it have changed your reasoning?
When evaluating a news article, check its claims using the standards of accuracy and precision. Are the facts verifiable? Are the numbers specific? What questions would you ask the author?
Consider a controversial topic. How might applying the breadth standard—by seeking out opposing viewpoints in good faith—deepen your understanding of the issue?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- The Art of Asking Essential Questions Based on Critical Thinking Concepts and Socratic Principles (Linda Elder, Richard Paul)