Becoming a fair-minded thinker May AlGhamdi 201500279 Outline Weak Vs. Strong Sense Critical Thinking What Does Fair-mindedness Require Intellectual Humility: Knowledge Of Ignorance Intellectual Courage: Being Willing To Challenge Beliefs Intellectual Empathy: Entertaining Opposing Views Intellectual Integrity: Holding Ourselves To The Same Standards To Which We Hold Others Intellectual Perseverance: Working Through Complexity And Frustration Confidence In Reason: Recognizing That Good Reasoning Has Proven Its Worth Its Worth Intellectual Autonomy: Being An Independent Thinker Recognizing The Interdependence Of Intellectual Virtues Natural Vs. Critical Thinking Conclusion Weak Vs. Strong Sense Critical Thinking Critical thinking is used for self-centeredness and fair-mindedness. Weak sense critical thinkers miss important high-level skills. Weak sense critical thinkers come in the form of sophistic thinkers. Strong sense critical thinkers are more on the fair-minded side. Strong sense critical thinkers are more willing to change their opinion when other choices are introduced. What fair-mindedness requires Ability to treat all viewpoints alike; avoiding all chances to ever be biased or prejudiced when giving their part of the argument. Intellectual Humility: Knowledge Of Ignorance Intellectually humble people’s ability to perform and think. Recognizing our boundaries and biases, not claiming to have any more than what we already have. Opposite of intellectual arrogance. Intellectual Courage: Being Willing To Challenge Beliefs Ability to address beliefs or viewpoints that are reinforced either on the individual or their surrounding community. (similar to the idea of skepticism) Can investigate further in the reinforced ideologies rather than following the crowd. (i.e. will explain when things that are feared shouldn’t be feared. Opposite of intellectual cowardice. Intellectual Empathy: Entertaining Opposing Views Putting our feet in others’ shoes, ability to relate. Bases of human thinking nature emerges from human life. Opposite of intellectual centeredness. Intellectual Integrity: Holding Ourselves To The Same Standards To Which We Hold Others Being a paragon of virtue. Expecting others to have the same basics standards we have. Honestly admitting discrepancies, inconsistencies, lack of correlation, etc. Opposite of intellectual hypocrisy. Intellectual Perseverance: Working Through Complexity And Frustration Working our way through complexities despite frustrations and being pushed aback and being challenged by the challenges we have to undergo during the process. Opposite of intellectual laziness. Confidence In Reason: Recognizing That Good Reasoning Has Proven Its Worth Its Worth People will always rely on reasoning and having valid ones to back up arguments or information. People start to form their opinions on different matters in different grounds after witnessing proof ...

1. Becoming a fair-minded thinker
May AlGhamdi 201500279
Outline
Weak Vs. Strong Sense Critical Thinking
What Does Fair-mindedness Require
Intellectual Humility: Knowledge Of Ignorance
Intellectual Courage: Being Willing To Challenge Beliefs
Intellectual Empathy: Entertaining Opposing Views
Intellectual Integrity: Holding Ourselves To The Same
Standards To Which We Hold Others
Intellectual Perseverance: Working Through Complexity And
Frustration
Confidence In Reason: Recognizing That Good Reasoning Has
Proven Its Worth Its Worth
Intellectual Autonomy: Being An Independent Thinker
Recognizing The Interdependence Of Intellectual Virtues
Natural Vs. Critical Thinking
Conclusion
Weak Vs. Strong Sense Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is used for self-centeredness and fair-
mindedness.
Weak sense critical thinkers miss important high-level skills.
Weak sense critical thinkers come in the form of sophistic

2. thinkers.
Strong sense critical thinkers are more on the fair-minded side.
Strong sense critical thinkers are more willing to change their
opinion when other choices are introduced.
What fair-mindedness requires
Ability to treat all viewpoints alike; avoiding all chances to
ever be biased or prejudiced when giving their part of the
argument.
Intellectual Humility: Knowledge Of Ignorance
Intellectually humble people’s ability to perform and think.
Recognizing our boundaries and biases, not claiming to have
any more than what we already have.
Opposite of intellectual arrogance.
Intellectual Courage: Being Willing To Challenge Beliefs
Ability to address beliefs or viewpoints that are reinforced
either on the individual or their surrounding community.
(similar to the idea of skepticism)
Can investigate further in the reinforced ideologies rather than
following the crowd. (i.e. will explain when things that are
feared shouldn’t be feared.
Opposite of intellectual cowardice.

3. Intellectual Empathy: Entertaining Opposing Views
Putting our feet in others’ shoes, ability to relate.
Bases of human thinking nature emerges from human life.
Opposite of intellectual centeredness.
Intellectual Integrity: Holding Ourselves To The Same
Standards To Which We Hold Others
Being a paragon of virtue.
Expecting others to have the same basics standards we have.
Honestly admitting discrepancies, inconsistencies, lack of
correlation, etc.
Opposite of intellectual hypocrisy.
Intellectual Perseverance: Working Through Complexity And
Frustration
Working our way through complexities despite frustrations and
being pushed aback and being challenged by the challenges we
have to undergo during the process.
Opposite of intellectual laziness.
Confidence In Reason: Recognizing That Good Reasoning Has
Proven Its Worth Its Worth
People will always rely on reasoning and having valid ones to

4. back up arguments or information.
People start to form their opinions on different matters in
different grounds after witnessing proofs on certain aspects of
the overall matter.
Out general logical system of our thinking nature improves
when our opinions and made decisions rely on accurate
reasoning and valid proofs, for that there always is correlation
between facts yet none with not so much with information.
Opposite of distrust in reasoning.
Intellectual Autonomy: Being An Independent Thinker
Thinking for ourselves while adhering to appropriate standards.
Requires
Complete authorship of a person over themselves in order to
perform well when independently thinking.
Not controlled by emotions
Being of competency nature.
Relates to confidence in reasoning.
Opposite of intellectual conformity (compliance with societal
standards)
Recognizing The Interdependence Of Intellectual Virtues
Rightfully adjusting due to having mutual dependence on the
different characteristics of a good intellectual critical thinker.
Knowing that our “alienated” viewpoints are no harm, as long
as they’re backed up with reasoning that is valid to us.
Recognizing that, sometimes, one must avoid scrutinizing into
inferred information for that arrogance can also, sometimes, be
useful. (flexibly)

5. Conclusion
Being a fair minded thinker requires many characteristics, self
assurance and confidence being the most important.
Relating to other people’s nature is important in order to
achieve fair-mindedness.
One must always back up their arguments with clear valid
reasoning in order to be believed and taken seriously.
Work cited
Elder, L. and Paul, R. (2002). Becoming a Fair-minded Thinker.
Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional
and Personal Life. (pp. 21-50)
Chapter__________. Purpose: This Learning Log is a written
record of your learning. It allows you to enhance your learning
by reflecting on what you acquired from the chapter presented
in class.
Read the following writing prompts and write specific examples
and details of what you have learned.
1. What are the main ideas / key points of the chapter?

6. 2. What connections can you make between what you already
know and the content of the chapter?
3. What did you find interesting? What did you not find
interesting at all? Explain your answers.
4. Select a key concept covered by the chapter. Where can
you find additional information about this concept? List at least
two reputable sources (books or articles) in APA style.
At least a complete paragraph must be written for each of the 1-
4 questions.