aiMOOC

Critical thinking

QR-Code

Introduction

Critical thinking means examining a question, the reasons offered and the evidence before deciding what to believe or do. It is more than disagreeing, and it does not require treating every view as equally well supported. This course develops the German article’s historical examples into a method you can also use in daily life. You will distinguish observation from interpretation, compare perspectives and write a judgement that makes both its reasons and its limits visible.

Questions, claims and reasons

Begin with a precise question. A claim proposes something that can be examined, while a reason explains why someone supports it. Evidence is the material used to assess that reason. In a historical investigation, a date in a catalogue, a passage in a letter and your interpretation of the writer’s motive have different roles. Record what a source directly shows before adding what you infer from it.

An argument needs a connection between reasons and conclusion. A statement may sound confident and still lack that connection. Ask what would have to be true for the conclusion to follow. Define unclear words and consider another explanation. If the available evidence supports only a possibility, describe it as a possibility. Changing your confidence after finding better evidence is a strength of the process.

Evaluating sources and perspectives

Ask who produced a source, when, for whom and for what purpose. The answers help you interpret it; they do not automatically prove or disprove every statement. A witness may know one part of an event and miss another. A later account can combine evidence but may also repeat a mistake. Compare the claim with independent material and trace quotations back to their context.

People can notice evidence that supports what they already believe and overlook contrary information. Counter this tendency by deliberately looking for a serious challenge to your first explanation. On the web, leave an unfamiliar page to check what other reliable sources say about its organisation and claims. Repeated copies of the same original report do not become independent confirmation merely because they appear on different websites.

Discussion, judgement and revision

A useful discussion makes reasoning visible. Restate another person’s view fairly before questioning it, ask for evidence and respond to the argument rather than the person. In history, a carefully framed role-play can help explore a perspective, but the imagined dialogue is not a historical source. Research projects, comparisons of documents and guided debates need clear questions and a way to check their conclusions.

Write a judgement that answers the question, gives relevant evidence and explains the link between them. Include a plausible alternative and a limitation. You may conclude that more information is needed. Review the judgement when new evidence appears. Disagreement does not by itself refute a claim, and agreement does not establish it. The aim is a proportionate, revisable conclusion rather than winning an argument at any cost.

Optional video in English. Compare one idea from the video with the course text; the explanations and tasks remain usable without watching it.

Interactive Tasks

Quiz: Test Your Knowledge

What is the best starting point for an investigation?

(A clear question that can be examined)

(!A conclusion that must remain unchanged)

(!A slogan without a defined meaning)

(!A judgement based only on popularity)

How does an inference differ from an observation?

(It interprets what the observation may mean)

(!It is always a directly visible detail)

(!It needs no supporting reason)

(!It is automatically more reliable)

What should connect reasons and conclusion?

(An explanation of why the reasons support the claim)

(!The author’s confidence alone)

(!The number of capital letters)

(!The length of the text alone)

Which approach helps check a first explanation?

(Looking for relevant evidence that could challenge it)

(!Ignoring all contrary information)

(!Reading only agreeing comments)

(!Repeating the conclusion more loudly)

What is lateral reading?

(Leaving a page to investigate its source and claims elsewhere)

(!Reading only the bottom line of a page)

(!Counting the pictures in an article)

(!Treating every first search result as authoritative)

When do several reports offer independent confirmation?

(When they draw on genuinely separate evidence)

(!Whenever their web addresses are different)

(!Whenever they use the same headline)

(!Whenever one copies another accurately)

What is a fair discussion practice?

(Addressing a person’s reasons rather than attacking the person)

(!Replacing evidence with insults)

(!Claiming certainty to end all questions)

(!Misrepresenting an opposing view)

How should a historical role-play be treated?

(As a learning model that must be distinguished from actual evidence)

(!As a newly discovered historical document)

(!As proof of every imagined motive)

(!As a substitute for all source analysis)

What may a responsible judgement include?

(A limitation and an explanation of uncertainty)

(!A promise that it can never change)

(!Only the most dramatic claim)

(!A dismissal of all questions)

What should better evidence lead you to do?

(Reassess the conclusion and your confidence)

(!Hide the evidence if it is inconvenient)

(!Keep every earlier claim unchanged)

(!Judge it only by whether friends agree)

Memory Game

Claim	A statement proposed for examination
Evidence	Material used to assess a claim
Inference	An interpretation drawn from observations
Perspective	A situated point of view
Judgement	A conclusion supported by stated reasons

Drag and Drop

Match the terms with their explanations.	Concept
Define the question	Focus the investigation
Separate observation from interpretation	Show the reasoning step
Check independent sources	Test supporting evidence
Present a serious alternative	Challenge the first explanation
State a limitation	Calibrate the conclusion

Crossword Puzzle

Claim	What statement is being examined?
Evidence	What material supports or challenges a claim?
Reason	What explains support for a conclusion?
Context	What surrounding circumstances help interpret a source?
Debate	What organised discussion compares arguments?
Revision	What changes a judgement after further examination?

LearningApps

Cloze Text

Open Tasks

Easy

Focused question: Turn a broad interest in a historical event into one question that a source could help answer.

Observation and inference: Describe a public historical photograph with three observations and two explicitly marked inferences.

Argument map: Choose a short claim and list its reasons, evidence and conclusion in separate boxes.

Fair restatement: Write a neutral restatement of a fictional opposing view before asking two relevant questions.

Standard

Source comparison: Compare two accounts of one event. Explain the authors’ positions and one agreement that may need checking.

Lateral reading record: Investigate an unfamiliar public information page. Record how you checked its publisher and one important claim.

Evidence-based debate: Prepare a short debate with a precise question, shared evidence and a rule for correcting factual errors.

Role-play with boundaries: Design a historical role-play and distinguish documented details from invented dialogue and uncertain motives.

Advanced

Competing explanations: Develop two explanations for one historical observation. Identify evidence that would help distinguish between them.

Independent confirmation: Trace three online reports to their origins and decide whether they supply separate evidence or copied information.

Research judgement: Write a short judgement with an answer, evidence, reasoning, a serious alternative and a limitation.

Revision note: Introduce an invented new finding to your judgement. Explain precisely which conclusion or confidence level should change.

Learning Check

Reasoning gap: Explain why a relevant fact may still be insufficient to establish a conclusion. Give an original example.

Perspective and truth: Explain why a situated or interested source can remain useful without making every statement reliable.

Multiple reports: Assess a claim supported by three sites that all copy one press release. State what further checks you need.

Respectful challenge: Demonstrate how to question a weak argument without attacking its author or misrepresenting the position.

Proportionate judgement: Write a conclusion whose certainty matches incomplete evidence and explain what could cause you to revise it.

Learning evidence

Keep a focused question, an argument map, a source-comparison record and a short revisable judgement. Your work should show the difference between direct observation and inference, the independence of evidence and the reasons for your level of confidence.