Asking the Right Questions (9/e)

看的是英文书，看完之后根据网上的笔记做了一张思维导图。 先看完思维导图在看全书的话，能大大提高效率。 以下是思维导图的下载地址： https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzBZeiRfzCSreE94T24zVmVmaW8 以下是我做的笔记，有兴趣的话看看： CHAPTER 1: The benefit of asking the right questions: Mental check: Did i ask "why" someone wants me to believe something? Did I take notes as i thought about potential problems with what was being said? Did I evaluate what was being said? Did I form my own conclusion about the topic? You must be an active reader and listener. You can do this by asking questions. We bring lots of personal baggage to every decision we make. However if you are to grow, you need to recognize these feelings, and, as much as you are able, put them on a shelf for a bit. Only that effort will enable you to listen carefully when others offer arguments that threaten or violate your current beliefs. This openness is imoportant because many of our own positions on issues are not especially reasonable ones; they are opinions given to us by others, and over many years we develop emotional attachments to them. A successful active learner is one who is willing to change his mind. If you are ever to change your mind, you must be as open as possible to ideas that strike you as weird or dangerous when you first encounter them. Your time is valuable. Before taking the time to critically evaluate an issue, ask the question, " who cares?" To see domination and victory over those who disagree with your as the objective of critical thinking is to ruin the potentiallly humane and progressive aspects of critical thinking. He who knows only his side of the case knows little of that. Doing is usually more fun than watching;doing well is more fun than simply doing. Frequently, those faced with an opinion different from their own respond by saying, "Oh, that's just your opinion." But the issue should not be whose opinion it is, but rather whether it is a good opinion. The right questions: 1. what are the issues and the conclusions? 2. what are the reasons? 3. which words or phrases are ambiguous? 4. what are the value conflicts and assumptions? 5. what are the descriptive assumptions? 6. are there any fallacies in the reasoning? 7. How good is the evidence? 8. Are there rival causes? 9. Are the statistics deceptive? 10. what significant information is omitted? 11. what reasonable conclusions are possible? Ending P13 CHAPTER 2: WHAT ARE THE ISSUE AND THE CONCLUSSION? In general, those who create web pages, editorials, books, magzine articles, are trying to change your perceptions or beliefs. You must first identify the controversy or issue as well as the thesis or conclusion being pushed onto you. Otherwise, you will be reacting to a distorted version of the attempted communication. we often react to the images, dramatic illustrations, or tone of what was said instead of the reasoning that was intended by the person communicating with us. so, getting straight about the person's conclusion and issue is an essential first step in effective human interaction. Descriptive issues are those that raise questions about the accuracy of the past, present, or future. They demand answers attempting to describe the way the world is, was, or going to be. Questions begin with "DO, WHAT, WHO, HOW" probably are descriptive questions. Prescriptive issues are those that raise questions about what we should do or what is right or wrong, good or bad.Questions with "SHOULD, WHAT OUGHT TO BE DONE, MUST..." usually are prescriptive questions. social controversies are often prescriptive issues. Identify the issue and conclusion first, otherwise you will get lost when you reading the remaining. A conclusion is the message that the speaker or writer wishes you to accept. To identify the conclusion, ask the questions: what is the writer or speaker trying to prove? what is the communicator's main point? In short, the basic structure of persuasive communication or argument is: This because of that; this refers to te conclusion; that refers to the support for the conclusion. this structure represents the process of inference. Remember: To believe one statement/conclusion because you think it is well supported by other beliefs is to make an inference. When people engage in this process, they are reasoning; the conclusion is the outcome of this reasoning. Once you have found the conclusion, use it as the focus of your evaluation. It is the destination that the writer or speaker wants you to choose. Your ongoing concern is: Should I accept that conclusion on the basis of what is supporting the claim? How to find the conclusion: 1. ask what the issue is. First, look at the title. Next, look at the openning paragraphs. 2. look for indicator words.(逻辑关联词） 3. look at the beginning and at the end. 4. Remember what a conclusion is not.( examples, statistics, definitions, background information, evidence) 5. check the author's background. 6. Ask the question "and therefore?" Ending at Page 23 CHAPTER 3: WHAT ARE THE REASONS? Identifying reasons is a particularly important step in critical thinking. An opinion cannot be evaluated fairly unless we ask why it is held and get a satisfactory response. Focusing on reasons requires us to remain open to and tolerant to of views that might differ from our own. Question: what are the reasons? Reasons + Conclusion = Argument You can not determine the worth of a conclusion until you identify the reasons. Reasons are explanations or rationales for why we should believe a particular conclusion. The first step in identifying reasons is to approach the argument with a questioning attitude, and the first question you should ask is a why question. If a statement does not answer the question, "why does the writer or speaker believe that?" then it is not a reason. In especially complicated arguments, it is frequently difficult to keep the structure straight in your mind as you attempt to critically evaluate what you have read. to overcome this problem, try to develop your own organizing procedure for keeping the reasons and conclusions separate and in a logical pattern. 1. circle indicator words 2. Underline the reasons and conclusion in different colors of ink, or highlight the conclusion and underline the reasons. 3. label the reasons and conclusion in the margin. 4. after reading long passages, make a list of reasons at the end of the essay. Note: when someone is eager to share an opinion as if it was a conclusion, but looks puzzled or angry when asked for reasons, weak-sense critical thinking is the probable culprit. we come to each conversation, essay, or lecture with a loyalty to the beliefs we already have. Thus, our existing beliefs can be an obstacle to our listening and learning. But at another level, we know there are thoughtful reasons that we have not yet encountered. For our personal growth, we have to give "fresh" reasons a real chance to speak to us. CHAPTER 4：WHAT WORDS OR PHRASES ARE AMBIGUOUS? While identifying the conclusion and reasons gives your the basic visible structure, you still need to examine the precise meaning of these parts before you can react fairly to the ideas being presented. Now you need to pay specia attention to the details of the language. you cannot react to an argument unless you understand the meanings (explicit or implied) of crucial terms and phrases. Question: WHAT WORDS OR PHARASES ARE AMBIGUOUS? A warning: we often misunderstand what we read or hear because we presume that the meaning of words is obvious Whenever you are reading or listening, force yourself to search for ambiguity; otherwise, you may simply miss the point. There is no way to avoid ambiguity in reality. But what can and should be avoided is ambiguity in an argument. when someone is trying to persude us to believe or do something, that person has a responsibility to clarify any potential ambiguity before we consider the worth of the reasoning. Ambiguity refers to the existence of multiple possible meanings for a word or phrase. example equality-having equal access to necessities of life responsibility-directly causing a event aggression-doing deliberate phisical harm to another person You now know where to look for ambiguous terms or phrases. The next step is to focus on each term or phrase and ask yourself, " do i understand its meaning?" In answering this very important question, you will need to overcome several major obstacles: 1.you need to get into the habit of asking, "what does the author mean by that?" instead of, " i know just what you mean." 2. could any of the words or phrases have a different meaning? a good test for determing whether you have identified an important ambiguity is to substitute the alternative meanings into the reasoning structure and see whether changing the meaning makes a difference in how well a reason supports the conclusion. The adversiser hoped that you would assign the most attractive meaning to the ambiguous words. Try to creat a mental picture of what these phrases represent. if you cannot, the phrases are ambiguous. if different images would cause you to react to the reasons differently, you have identified an important ambiguity. examine the context carefully to determine the meaning of key terms and phrases. If the meaning remains uncertain, you have located an important ambiguity. If the meaning is clear and you disagree with it , then you should be wary of any reasoning that involves that term or phrase. 一个值得思考的例子： 军队官员希望控制监狱里自杀者的数目，但自杀难免会发生，可能因为自杀代表荣誉。他们怎么做呢，他们建立一个叫"self-inflicted Hazardous Incidents"的目录，并告诉犯人自杀的话只能被判定进入以上那个目录，而不算作自杀. Political terms aids to cause the intended emotional impact. Revenue enhancement-positive response to tax hikes Extreme-undesirable, unreasonable Terrorist-Wild, crazy, uncivilized Reform- Desirable changes As a critical thinker, we must be sensitive to their intended emotional impact and the role of ambiguity in encouraging that impact. After you have attempted to identify and clarify ambiguity, what can you do if you are still uncertain about the meaning of certain key ideas? The next step we suggest you ignore any reason containing ambiguity that makes it impossible to judge the acceptability of the reason. CHAPTER 5: WHAT ARE THE VALUE CONFLICTS AND ASSUMPTIONS Remember: the visible surface of an argument will almost always be dressed in its best clothes because te person presenting the argument wishes to encourage you to make the argument your own. Assumptions are: 1.hidden or unstated (in most cases) 2.taken for granted 3.influential in determining the conclusion 4.potentially deceptive An assumption is an unstated belief that supports the explicit reasoning. For ethical or prescriptive arguments, an individual's values influence the reasons he provides and , consequently, his conclusion. In fact, the reasons will logically support the conclusion only if the value assumption is added to the reasoning. By value assumption, we mean a taken-for-granted belief about the relative desirability of certain competing values. when authors take a position on a social controversy, they typically prefer one value over another value- they have value priorities or preferences. Values are the unstated ideas that people see as worthwhile. They provide standards of conduct by which we measure the quality of human behavior. when you look for value assumptions, look for an indication of value priorities. ask yourself what values are being upheld by this position and what values are being relatively downgraded in importance. we hold our value preferences only up to a point value assumptions are very contextual NOte: we suggested earlier that a good starting point in finding value assumptions is to check the background of the author. One cautions is omportant. It isn't necessarily ture that, bevause a person is a member of a group, she shares the particular value assumptions of the group. One important means of determing value assumptions, then, is to ask the question, "why do the particular consequences or outcomes presented as reasons seem so desirable to the writer or speaker?" Remember: when you identify value assumptions, you should always try to state value priorities. clues for identifying value assumptions: 1. investigate the author's background 2. ask "why do the consequences of the author's position seem so important to her?" 3. search for similar social contrversies to find analogous value assumptions 4. use reverse role-playing. take a position opposite the author's position and identify which values are important to that opposit position 5. look for common value conflicts, such as individual responsibility versus community responsiility Remember that complete reasoning with respect to prescriptive issues requires reasons and value assumptions. CHAPTER 6: WHAT ARE THE DESCRIPTIVE ASSUMPTIONS? Descriptive assumptions are beliefs about the way the world is; prescriptive or value assumptions are beliefs about how the world should be. One important kind of descriptive assumption to look for is a definitional assumption-the taking for granted of one meaning for a term that has multiple possible meanings. How to locate the assumption: 1. Keep thinking about the gap between the conclusion and reasons. Keep asking " how do you get from the reason to the conclusion?", "if the reason is true, what else must be true for the conclusion to follow?", "supposing the reason were true, is there any way in which the conclusion nevertheless could be false?" 2. Look for ideas that support reasons. 3. Avoid stating incompletely established reasons as assumptions. CHAPTER 7: ARE THERE ANY FALLACIES IN THE REASONING? how acceptable is the conclusion in light of the reasons provided? Remember: the objective of critical reading and listening is to judge the acceptability or worth of conclusions. your first step at this stage of the evaluation process is to examine the reasoning structure to determine whether the communicator's reasoning has depended on false or hightly doubtful assumptions or has trcked you through either a mistake in logic or other forms of deceptive reasoning. 3 common tricks are: 1. providing reasoning that requires erroneous or incorrect assumptions. 2. distracting us by making information seem relevant to the conclusion when it is not 3. providing support for the conclusion that depends on the conclusion's already being true. Quetion: are there any fallacies in the reasoning? A fallacy is a reasoning "trick" that an author might use while trying to persuade you to accept a conclusion. there are a variety of ways of making irrelevant attacks against a person making a claim, the most common of which is attacking his character or shifing attention to his circumstances or interests. Ad hominem: an attack, or an insult, on the person, rather than directly addressing the person's reasons. we suggest that you adopt the following thinking steps in locating fallacies: 1. Identify the conclusions and reasons. 2. Always keep the conclusion in mind and consider reasons that you think might be relevant to it; contrast these reasons with the author's reasons. 3. If the conclusion supports an action, determine whether the reason states a specific and/or concrete advantage or a disadvantage; if not, be wary! 4. Identify any necessary assumption by asking yourself, "if the reason were true, what would one have to believe for it to logically support the conclusion, and what does one have to believe for the reason to be true?" 5. ask yourself, " do these assumptions make sense?" if anobviously false assumption is being made, you have found a fallacy in reasoning, and that reasoning can then be rejected. 6. check the possibility of being distracted from relevant reasons by phrases that strongly appeal to your emotions. Slippery slope: making the assumption that a proposed step will set off an uncontrollable chain of undesirable events, when procedures exist to prevent such a chain of events. Searching for perfect solution: Falsely assuming that because part of a problem would remain after s solution is tried, the solution should not be adopted. It takes the form: a solution to X does not deserve our support unless it destroys the problem entirely. if we ever find a perfect solution, then we should adopt it. but because the fact that part of a problem would remain after a solution is tried does not mean the solution is unwise. Equivocation: a key word is used with two or more meanings in an argument such that the argument fails to make sense once the shifts in meaning are recognized. Appeal to popularity: an attempt to justify a claim by appealing to sentiments that large groups of people have in common; falsely assumes that anything favored by a large group is desirable. The public often has not sufficiently studied a problem to provide a reasoned judgement. be wary of appeals to common opinion or to popular sentiment. Appeal to questionable authority: supporting a conclusion by citing an authority who lacks special expertise on the issue at hand. Unless we know that these authorities have special knowledge about this issue, we must treat this reason as a fallacy. The best way to check how fairly a position is being represented is to get the facts about all positions. Appeals to Emotions: the use of emotionally charged language to distract readers and listeners from relevant reasons and evidence. Straw person: Distorting our opponent's point of view so that it is easy to attack; thus we attack a point of view does not truly exist. Always be cautious when controversies are treated as if only two choices are possible, there are usually more than two. when a communicator oversimplifies an issue by stating only two choices, the error is referred to as an either-or false dilemma fallacy. to find either-or fallacies, be on the alert for phrases like the following: either...or the only alternative is the two choices are because A has not worked, only B will Either-Or( or False Dilemma): Assuming only two alternatives when there are more than two. Wishful thinking: making the faulty assumption that because we wish X were true or false, then X is indeed true or false. CHAPTER 8: HOW GOOD IS THE EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes beliefs about the way the world is, was, or is going to be that the communicator wants to accept as "facts." These beliefs can be conclusions, reasons, or assumptions. We can refer to such beliefs as factual claims. the first question you should ask about a factual claim is, "why should I believe it?" your next question is, "does the claim is a mere assertion. you should seriously question the dependability of mere assertions. IF there is evidence, your next question is, "how good is the evidence?" To evaluate evidence, we first need to ask, "what knd of evidence is it?" Knowing the kind of evidence tells us what questions we should ask. Major kinds of evidence include: intution personal experience testimonials appeals to authorities personal observations case examples research studies analogies when a communicator supports a claim by saying "common sense tells us" or "I just know that it's true." she is using intuition as her evidence. we must be very wary of claims backed up only by intuition. sometimes "hunches" are not blind. As critical thinkers, we would want to find out whether claims relying on intution have any other kinds of evidential support. Hasty Generalization Fallacy: A person draws a conclusion about a large group based on experiences with only a few members of the group. Personal testimonials: commercials, ads for movies oftern try to persuade by using a special kind of appeal to personal experience. people's experiences difer gretly. we need to ask, "does the person providing the testimony have a relationship with what he is advocating such that we can expect a strong bias in his testimony? authorities are much more careful in giving an opinion than others. For example, Newsweek and Time are much more likely to carefully evaluate the available evidence prior to stating an opinion than is "The National Enquirer". our relatives are much less likely than editorial writers or major newspapers to have systematically evaluated a political candidate. was she a firsthand observer of the events about which she makes claims? has a newspaper reporter, for example, actually witnessed an event, or has she merely relied upon reports from others? if she authority is not a firsthand observer, whose claims is she repeating? why should we rely on those claims? In general, you should be more impressed by primary sources or direct observers than by secondary sources, those who are relying on others or their evidence. Has the authority developed a reputation for frequently making dependable claims? Have we been able to rely on this authority in the past? CHAPTER 9: HOW GOOD IS THE EVIDENCE 2 A difficulty iwth personal observation, however, is the tendency to see or hear what we wish to see or hear, selecting and remembering those aspects of an experience that are most consistent with our previous experience and background. Research findings do not prove conclusions. At best, they support conclusions. Research findings do not speak for themselves! Researchers must always interpret the meaning of their findings, and all findings can be interpreted in more than one way. Thus, researchers' conclusions should not be treated as demonstrated "truths". The need for financial gain, status, security, and other factors can affect reserch outcomes. clues for evaluating research studies: 1. what is the quality of the source of the report 2. does the report detail any special strengths of the researh? 3. has the study been replicated 4. how selective has the communicator been in choosing studies 5. is there any evidence of strong-sense critical thinking 6. is there any reason for someone to have distorted the research 7. are conditions in the research artificial and therefore distorted 8. how far can we generalize, given the research sample 9. are there any biases or distortions in the surveys, questionnaires, ratings, or other measurements that the researcher usus? Remember: we can generalize only to people and events that are like those that we have studied in the research. For variety of reasons, people frequently shade the truth. For example, they may give answers they think they ought to give, rather than answers that reflect their true beliefs. Remember: you cannot assume that verbal reports accurately reflect true attitudes. political candidates have increasingly resorted to case examples in their speeches, knowing that the rich details of cases generate an emotional reaction. such case, however, should be viewed more as striking examples or anecdotes than as proof, and we must be very suspicious of their use as evidence. Be wary of striking case examples as proof!

本以为是一本让人读完思路更清晰、更明确的书，读完后却让我陷入了完完全全的混沌状态。它让我无法正视那些既有的观念和结论，它让我对身边的信息充满不信任感，它甚至让我无法去思考，在“得出”和“推翻”之间陷入思维的死循环。以当前的眼光审视以往的观点，确确实实可以发现我们曾陷入某种程度上的思维误区，而这仅仅是出于与本书的作者产生了共鸣或是趋同心理，并不能证明我们真的走出了思维的误区。如果只是吸取书中的观点一味称道的话，那只能证明我们一无所获，因为忘记了去“批判”，去打破书中已有的思维定式。 本书共有十三章，其内容却涉及到多种学科的知识，例如统计学中的数据分析，传播学中的从众心理和趋同心理，逻辑学中的思维方法，文学中的语法应用等，不仅让我们的写作更具条理和逻辑性，更能让我们在辩论中快速找出对方漏洞并做到论证的“天衣无缝”。第一章：恰当提问的益处。本章的重点主要是海绵式思维方式和淘金式思维方式，海绵式思维方式注重对知识的获取，淘金式的思维则注重对其所获得的知识进行积极的互动，后者似乎更能与批判性思维联系起来。但这两种看似截然不同的思维方式，却是缺一不可。没有海绵的“吸入”，我们就没有足够的知识储备，无法对“金”进行识别，从而也不能很好的达到淘金式思维方式的高度。只有在二者并用的前提下，我们才能快速获得高质量的信息。第二章：怎样找到问题和结论。本章中将问题归为两类，即描述性问题和规范性问题。简单来说，前者描述的是一个“是”的问题，而后者描述的是一个“应不应该”的问题。在做出批判之前，我们不仅应找到问题，更要找到结论，寻找结论时我们可以从询问问题、寻找标志性词和有可能出现的位置入手，还可以将那些不是结论的内容一一排除。第三章：怎样找到理由。理由是证明结论的关键，可以使我们的写作更易于阅读。在实际中，我们可以采用一些自己认为合适的方法把理由和结论标注或罗列出来,分析起来更具针对性。第四章：怎样找到含糊的词语。寻找含糊的词语应从那些貌似正确其实意义歧生的关键词语入手，而寻找关键性词语时我们又必须克服妄自假定的与作者“一拍即合”以及某词只有一种意义的误区。在理解词义的时候要因环境不同而赋予词语不同的意思，在这一点上，有时候即使是词典这种较权威的解释也无济于事。寻找含糊的词语并加以分析让我们在日常生活中识别一些像广告之类的“骗局”，明确己见，不至于在现代信息的狂轰滥炸中迷失。第五章：什么是价值冲突和价值假设。要真正对论辩有所理解，要到理由向结论的运动中寻找文章中的假设。在对作者进行价值假设时，我们首先要理解价值是什么，只有那些最能影响你的行为和选择的观念，才可被放入价值的领域之内。作者的价值偏好在他的阐述理由和结论中起着关键作用，这也是为什么我们在平时的阅读中要追溯作者的背景。在判断价值假设时还可以运用类比和反串等方法，分析与论题类似的情况，生活中有很多“由此及彼”的推论，而在类比中找出它们的不同又可以对结论的正确与否进行新的判断，确定结论的正确与否实际上是一个不断“推翻”的过程。第六章：什么是描述性假设。描述性假设是正对描述性问题来说的，如果在推理过程中我们发现理由自身并不支持结论，这时候就要求助于描述性假设，而这种描述性假设在某一个问题中也不是唯一的。日常生活中的交谈其实包含了很多描述性假设，在潜移默化中，我们并没有将其放大，而是自动“理所当然”化了。寻找描述性假设实际上也是在理由和结论的鸿沟中寻找联结，从而完成从理由到结论的推演。我们还需对寻找到的假设进行“淘金式”的选择，因为并不是所有的描述性假设都是有价值的。第七章：推理中存在谬论吗。本章指出一些易影响的“技巧”：推理中的错误的假设，看起来与结论相关的信息对我们进行思维的分散，对已知的正确的结论提供支持。识别这些障碍可以很好的避免我们陷入思维的误区。第八章：证据的可信度有多大：直觉、个人经验、证明、诉诸权威？当我们思考问题时很容易联系到自己的直觉和经验，这些可以为我们的思考提供一定的基础，从他人的成果共提取需要的信息可以大大提高我们思考问题的效率。但很多时候即使是权威为我们提供的也不一定是标准结论，在任何情况下，都不应放弃批判性思维而一味做一个接受的被动者。第九章：证据的可信度有多大：个人观察、研究、案例、类比。本章介绍的方法与第八章相比，更具科学性。但需明白即使是亲身实践也不能肯定的得出结论，调查的环境因素、变量控制、可比性等都会影响结论的不同。第八章和第九章旨在弄明白为什么这个理由值得你信任。第十章：你发现干扰性原因了吗。当一个作者对某件事的原因作出某种解释时，其他的一些解释也可能是合理的。当你努力寻找干扰性原因时，你就会发现另外的解释。如果你能确定这些解释，你必须决定是相信作者的解释还是相信其他某种解释。如果作者没有足够的理由来说服你接受他的解释，你就不会心服口服地接受他的解释，最终也不会接受他的结论。因此，寻找干扰性原因是决定是否接受某个论证的另一步。第十一章：统计数据是否具有欺骗性。作者常用统计数据来支持他们的推理。统计数据被看作是有力的证据。尽管如此，统计数据很多时候无用，因为人们常使用一些有问题的统计数据，所以确认统计数据是否存在问题非常重要。当你决定接受还是拒绝作者的结论时，需要更加小心。第十二章：哪些重要信息被遗漏了。作者为了证明自己结论的正确性往往会可以突出一些信息和忽略掉一些信息，而忽略掉的信息却是非常有用的，努力寻找作者所遗漏掉的信息，能帮助我们更好的佐证作者的观点。第十三章：什么结论可能是合理的。检验结论是否合理，不合理的话代替作者试问自己能给出怎样的结论，如果接受作者的结论，论证其合理性。 综上所述，本书主要带给我们的东西，是在以后的思考中学会问11个问题：1、 什么是论题？什么是结论？2、 理由是什么？3、 哪些词语有歧义？4、 什么是价值观冲突？什么是价值观假设？5、 什么是描述性假设？6、 推理中存在谬误吗？7、 这些证据的可信度有多大？8、 你发现干扰性原因了吗？9、 统计数据是否具有欺骗性？10、 哪些重要信息被遗漏了？11、 哪些结论可能是合理的？ 既然本书的目的是要我们学会用批判性思维去思考问题，那么本书本身也是有让人值得批判的地方的。即使再权威的方法，也不能避免人们陷入思维的误区，从事物的变化运动来说，我们永远也走不出思维的误区。在不同的时间、不同的环境，我们对同一问题的看法无不在发生着变化，即便是才经过论证的结论，也可能在下一秒被完全否定，正是书中这种不断层层论证，可能导致我们永远也无法对得到的结论满意。关于书中所提到的广告的“欺骗性”，在实际生活中我们仅凭经验已知广告夸大了本来事物的的属性，但我们还是会受广告的影响去消费，我们所考虑的问题并不是广告本身所夸张的东西，而是它所带来的潮流以及众所周知的质量保证。至于价值、价值假设这类本身比较抽象的东西，我们实在难去找到一种专门的方法对其评估，某一个人在某一时间对某一事物的看法在很多时候就是矛盾的，他自己也无法给出一个确定价值偏好，你有怎么去假设呢？另外，本书中对个人经验的理解本身也有其狭隘性，经验是指从多次实践中得到的知识或技能，亦或是人的亲身经历。它本身有可能就是已经被推演出来的正确结论，在实际生活中，如果我们总是这样事无巨细的吹毛求疵，那问题的正确答案究竟是什么呢？与其说是走出思维的误区，不如说我们从来也走不出思维的误区。

As you write and speak, it helps to be aware of the expectations careful thinkers will have. 1. What are the issues and the conclusions? 2. What are the reasons? 3. Which words or phrases are ambiguous? 4. What are the value conflicts and assumptions? 5. What are the descriptive assumptions? 6. Are there any fallacies in the reasoning? 7. How good is the evidence? 8. Are there rival causes? 9. Are the statistics deceptive? 10. What significant information is omitted? 11. What reasonable conclusions are possible? Attention: Descriptive issues are those that raise questions about the accuracy of descriptions of the past, present, or future. Prescriptive issues are those that raise questions about what we should do or what is right or wrong, good or bad. A conclusion is the message that the speaker or writer wishes you to accept.