How to think in Critical Reasoning

All Other Posts
Are you one of thousands who reads a critical reasoning argument and finds yourself completely lost? You’re not alone. To a much greater extent than the other CAT sections, CR tests whether you think in the way the CAT wants you to think. Let’s talk about what your mindset ought to be. First, recognize there are three major categories of critical reasoning questions; arguments, explanations, and processes. Your mindset has to change for each one. The most common category involves arguments, also known as assumption style questions. We’ll tackle typical argument flaws in today’s post. For an assumption style question, your mindset should be that of a skeptic. Walk into the argument thinking,” I hear what you’re saying, but you’re wrong”. You may not know why the argument is wrong, but it is. The author of the argument will draw a broad conclusion using one or more premises. Just for the sake of being able to criticize the logic of the argument, we’ll grant that the author got his premises correct. He says profits rose by 10%? Ok, we’ll agree. But he claims based on that premise that the management is improving its processes? Hold on, that’s a pretty big leap. Now we disagree. Now that  you have started acting like a skeptic, we need to insert some reasons for the disagreement. There can be lots and lots of reasons why the argument is illogical. The biggest gap, by far, is when the author has overlooked a relevant component. Take the simple “profits rose 10%, therefore management must be improving its process” argument. We’re overlooking a lot of things that are very relevant to profits rising. What if the employees took it upon themselves to do better? What if a more efficient process was introduced? What if market forces caused every similar company to increase profits or if costs were suddenly driven down by some external factor? Predict a few overlooked factors for these arguments:
  • Every time Stacey gets sad, it rains. Therefore, Stacey’s emotions can make it rain.
  • Studies show that children who have rooms that are decorated according to their gender and age are, as teenagers, more socially adjusted and generally happier than children who do not. Such decoration must encourage normal socialization and happiness.
  • Company X put more money into developing a social media marketing strategy. Soon after, Company X began receiving more attention and higher sale levels. Our company should immediately invest more money in social media strategy.
Remember to read like a skeptic. The conclusions of all of these arguments are wrong! Or, at least, hotly debatable. Don’t fall into the trap of being convinced by a well written argument (and don’t make any new plans to redecorate your children’s rooms). Here is a non-comprehensive list of the factors each argument may be ignoring:
  • Rain could be the cause, not the effect. Stacey gets sad because it rains. Things associated with rain could make Stacey sad, like grey skies. Maybe Stacey lives in an area where it rains all the time. Then, every time she gets sad, it’s raining because every time she feels anything it’s raining.
  • Children who live in highly decorated rooms could be generally more affluent than children who do not, so it’s the extra resources that are helping them out. Parents who decorate children’s rooms tend also to spend more time with their children, which is the actual cause of the benefits mentioned. Children who have such a level of personalization in their room often have their own room, and there could be a benefit to not sharing rooms with siblings.
  • Company X could make a significantly different product or work in a significantly different market than we do. In addition to investing in social media, Company X could have made investments in other areas that were the real cause of the beneficial effects. Our social media presence could already be top notch and investing more in it would yield little to no results. As skeptics, we know that there is much more to the story than what’s been expressed in two or three sentences. The author is assuming nothing else matters, but as business professionals, we recognize the world is just not that simple.
The third example we discussed actually has another kind of assumption being made as well as simply overlooking relevant factors. Unlike the other two examples, this conclusion is a recommendation for a future action. Revisit this example, thinking about what else could be missing, even if the two companies are similar enough that this comparison is warranted: Company X put more money into developing a social media marketing strategy. Soon after, Company X began receiving more attention and higher sale levels. Our company should immediately invest more money in social media strategy. What we’re missing is what happens in the future. Think of this issue as overlooking a future consequence. Maybe more money in social media is actually a good idea for our company. But what if investing in social media means we can’t invest in product development which puts us at a disadvantage in the future? Or what if increasing our social media connections leaves us open to criticism that we’re abandoning our traditional customers? An unforeseen negative outcome can lead us to question whether this is really the right process to implement. Try imagining some unforeseen consequences here: 4. Running improves ones health in measurable and long-term ways. Rachel wants to improve her health. She plans to begin a regimen of running every day for 10 miles to achieve that goal. 5. Paper production has significant negative environmental impacts. Acme Paper Company should find ways to minimize those environmental consequences by making its facilities more efficient. Both arguments are flawed for a number of reasons, many of which have nothing to do with unforeseen consequences, but let’s focus on the topic at hand. Here are some problematic consequences you might have come up with: 4. Starting an overly severe exercise regimen can lead to injuries and a decrease in health. Devoting time to running could force Rachel to sacrifice other healthful activities, so she might actually decrease her net health. Rachel could get injured due to running and should actually immediately stop running. 5. Minimizing environmental impacts could cost Acme Paper Company more than it can afford. There could be significantly better ways to minimize the negative results and maybe by focusing on efficiency, Acme is unable to improve in more significant ways. You likely came up with different effects. These problems are often missed because the answers are hard to predict. By definition, we’re talking about something that the original argument overlooked. A common temptation is to call these correct answers “out of scope” and eliminate them. Practice considering not whether the answer is discussed, but rather whether the answer would impact the conclusion. The mindset of the skeptic who is looking for overlooked factors will help you answer the majority of critical reasoning questions. You likely came up with different effects. These problems are often missed because the answers are hard to predict. By definition, we’re talking about something that the original argument overlooked. A common temptation is to call these correct answers “out of scope” and eliminate them. Practice considering not whether the answer is discussed, but rather whether the answer would impact the conclusion. The mindset of the skeptic who is looking for overlooked factors will help you answer the majority of critical reasoning questions.

Category :

All Other Posts

Share This :

Join us MBA CET 2025