What is the difference between truth and Validity?
What are the aspects of each?
Which is a better argumentative tool?
“Critical thinkers need to think in terms of arguing over validity
of opposing viewpoints as opposed to arguing over which of the
opposing viewpoints is the truthful one.”
Truth is the complete accuracy of propositions, statements,
sentences, assertions, and Beliefs.
one and only truth
Threshold is measured at absolute certainty
tied to self-esteem
Validity is the quality of scholarship being used to support the
arguments being made.
Many valid positions possible
Threshold is measured using the entire continuum of
tied to information available
Who makes a better case?
it is better to argue validity. if there is truth, then there is no
argument needed to take place.
You can’t argue an absolute fact, but there can be many valid
positions on a claim.
Validity promotes constructive argumentation.
In oder to have a valid point one must have a certain degree of
keep in mind that there may be many valid positions. Therefore,
the more facts available to back-up your position the better chance
you have to sway the audience.
GOOD CRITICAL THINKERS ALWAYS ARGUE
the degree of validity on the
continuum of Certainty
the breakthrough point!
WHEN THE AUDIENCE
supports the argument
THIS ARGUMENT HAS
REACHED THE THRESHOLD
Truth and Validity are not inherently connected!
VALIDITY = FACTS
TRUTH ≠ VALIDITY
We use facts to argue validity
Truth is absolute, and can’t be argued!
Reaching the threshold is a goal the audience
must reach for their claim to be accepted.
Avoid dogmatism. Critical thinking is about