Critical Thinking analyse and evaluate arguments. Arguments consists of a reason or reasons which support a conclusion and are designed to persuade someone about something. As to persuade it is necessary to use evidence to support it. The credibility of the evidence has to be judged (credible=believable). The evidence is taken from sources (a person, an article, a tv show, etc.)
There are many techniques which can be used to make the argument credible using sources and the evidence it provides, named credibility criteria, such as:
- Neutrality: the neutrality of a source shows it is impartial, it does not take sides. It has no motive to lie, distort evidence or to present information that supports only one side. They are the most reliable sources or evidences.
- Vested Interest: Someone, a person or organization, gain something from defending one point of view. Information would, probably, be distorted, they would ignore certainly evidence as to benefit themselves. Anyhow, if they have a vested interest it does not mean they are lying.
- Bias: Is sometimes a consequence of Vested Interest. Bias is favouring certain point of view, seeing things in a particular way.
- Expertise: We usually believe most things experts say. Training, knowledge, skills, and experience make them credible sources. Experts are humans so they may be wrong.
- Reputation: We tend to believe sources that have a high reputation. Despite reputation doesn’t mean that the information is reliable.
- Observation and eyewitness accounts: Eyewitnesses are usually more credible than second hand or hearsay evidence. This is due to the fact that eyewitnesses saw the event and it tends to be more reliable. As to consider its credibility it needs to be evaluated.
- Corroboration: They are the pieces of evidence that support each other and it actually increases the credibility of evidence. However, for example, if people are feared or threatened they may lie.
- Selectivity and representativeness: Evidence is usually selective due to its vast amount. Some groups or associations select evidence that only supports their view. We have to ask to ourselves: What kind of evidence is selected? Does it represent only one side?
- Context: Context means the setting or situation where the evidence is produced. It’s very important to have context as to judge the quality of evidence.
As to conclude, if we combine credibility criteria we can improve the assessment of the credibility of the evidence. Knowing how to compare credibility and truth is also important. Something that is credible does not mean true, it's just believable. While true is accurate and correct. The evidence, for example can be believable but not truth.
