200+ Critical thinking questions

• Is this an argument, a claim, a belief, an opinion, or a fact?
• If you believe that it is a fact, or if someone claims that it is a fact, ask yourself:
  • How do you know it’s a fact?
  • What evidence exists to support this “fact”?
  • Has this “fact” been proven?
  • Do the majority of experts on the subject agree that this is a fact? Is there an expert consensus on this fact? If not, why not?
• If it is a claim:
  • Is this an ordinary or extraordinary claim?
  • Do the majority of experts agree with this claim? Or is it contentious?
  • What is the source of this claim?
  • Who is making this claim?
  • Is this person an authority or expert?
  • How reliable is this source?
• What are the best arguments in support of this claim?
• What are the best arguments against this claim?
  • What do the harshest critics against this position say?
  • What arguments do skeptics of this position give?
• Has this claim already been debunked?
• What is the strongest evidence in support of this claim?
  • Is this evidence good enough to accept the arguers assertions?
  • Would this evidence stand up in court?
  • Or is the arguer/author/speaker making assertions without evidence?
• What is the strongest evidence against this claim?
• Is the preponderance of evidence for or against this claim?
  • Is there more confirming or disconfirming evidence?
• Is the expert consensus (if there is one) for or against this claim? Why?
• Do the majority of experts agree or disagree with this claim? Why?
• How can we verify or falsify this claim?
• A statement may be true, but is it relevant? Why?
• If you believe something is true, ask yourself:
  • To what degree? To what extent?
  • Under what conditions?
  • In what context or circumstances?
• Which is more likely:
  • This claim is 100% true
  • This claim is 100% false
  • This claim is mostly true, partly false
  • This claim is mostly false, partly true
  • This claim is half true, half false
  • Remember: There are degrees of “rightness” and “wrongness”. Statements are rarely 100% true or 100% false
• What are the implications of this claim? If this is true, what else must be true?
  • What further claims does this claim logically entail?
• Which of my beliefs would I have to change if I were to accept this claim?
• If this is an argument, is it deductive or inductive?
• If an argument is deductive, is it sound, valid, invalid, or unsound?
• If an argument is inductive, is it cogent, strong, weak, or unsound?
• If a speaker makes an extraordinary claim, e.g. a claim about miracles or the supernatural, ask them (if possible):
  • How do you know this?
  • How did you determine this?
  • What evidence or proof do you have for this claim?

If you’re reading a book, listening to a podcast, watching TV or YouTube

• Who is the author or speaker?
  • What is their background?
  • What makes them qualified to speak on this subject?
  • Are they an expert in the field?
  • On what basis is the author or speaker an authority or expert on the subject, or at least credible?
• What is the bias of the author or speaker?
  • Are they conservative or liberal?
  • Atheist or religious?
  • Feminist or MGTOW?
  • (No author/speaker is completely neutral, unbiased and objective)
• When was the article, book, podcast, video etc., written or recorded? Is it possibly outdated? Is there a more recent up-to-date version available?
• Why did the author write this article/book?
• Why is the speaker giving this talk? What is their motivation?
• What is the purpose of this information? Why was it created?
• Why did I choose to read/watch/listen to it?
• Who benefits from this information? Why? How?
• Is this information relevant to you? If so, how? Why do you need to know this? How does it affect you personally?
• What are the authors/speakers main arguments and assertions? What is their philosophy? What are their main points?
• Is the author/speaker arguing for anything controversial? If so, there are likely to be good counterarguments on the other side
• What kind of evidence does the author/speaker provide to support their assertions?
  • Anecdotal
  • Anonymous authorities aka “weasel words” e.g. “experts say…” “scientists say…” “studies show…”
  • Deductive or inductive reasoning
  • Expert opinion
  • Expert consensus
  • Randomized controlled trials
  • Statistics
  • Scientific studies
  • Scientific consensus
  • Or are they making assertions without evidence?
• What is the strongest evidence in support of these assertions? Is this evidence good enough to accept the authors/speakers conclusions? Would it stand up in court?
• What is the strongest evidence against these assertions?
• What might be another equally valid interpretation of the evidence or study results?
• What conclusions does the author/speaker want you to draw? What do they want you to think/believe/understand/do?
• Is the author/speaker/news station trying to push a narrative? e.g. “Diversity”, “Gender pay gap”, “Immigration”?
• Do you agree with the authors/speakers assertions? Why/why not? Anything you disagree with?
• Do you agree with the authors/speakers philosophy? Why/why not? Anything you disagree with?
• Do you agree with the authors/speakers “facts” and description of “reality”? Why/why not? Anything you disagree with?
• Do you agree with the authors/speakers arguments and rationale? Why/why not? Anything you disagree with?
• Are there any fallacies in the authors/speakers argument or rationale? If so, what?
• Does the author/speaker address counterarguments, disconfirming evidence, objections etc.? If so, how effectively do they rebut these points?
• If the author/speaker provides a “rule”, are there any exceptions to the rule that are not explained or accounted for?
• Do you agree with the authors/speakers conclusions? Why/why not? (You might agree with their arguments and rationale but not with their conclusions) Are they backed up by sufficient evidence? Or is the author/speaker jumping to conclusions too quickly from insufficient evidence?
• Are there any other equally valid conclusions or interpretations that could have been drawn from the evidence, or any other competing theories with better explanations for the evidence? If so, what?
• What is the perspective of the author/speaker? Do they seem like an insider or outsider? Why?
• Whose perspective is this information presented from? America’s or someone else’s? Conservative or liberal? Men or Women? Gen X, Y or Z?
• What perspectives/viewpoints are not represented here? What other perspectives might be equally valid, or worth looking into?
• What would (person) say about it?
• What would (group) say about it?
• Is there better evidence for one perspective/viewpoint than another?
• Is the author/speaker presenting you with both sides of the story – or only one?
• How has the author/speaker framed the information or story?
• Is the author/speaker embellishing or sensationalizing the story for dramatic effect? Do you think the story really took place the way the author/speaker tells it?
• What assumptions is the author/speaker making? What does the author/speaker have to believe is true before the rest of their argument makes sense?
• What are the implications of the authors/speakers argument? If this is true, what else must be true?
• What are the main problems the author/speaker is trying to solve? What solutions do they propose?
• Do you agree with the authors/speakers proposed solutions? Can you think of even better solutions to these problems?
• Has the author/speaker identified the real problem/s, or only a symptom of the problem?
• Is the author/speakers analysis or solution to the problem or situation oversimplified or incomplete? What needs to be unpacked or expanded upon?
• Is the author/speaker engaged in oversimplified black and white thinking as if something “always” or “never” happens, or as if “everyone” or “no one” should think/believe/do something, or as if something was right/wrong, true/false, correct/incorrect, without any grey areas in between?
• Are you engaged in black and white thinking, as if “everything” or “nothing” the author/speaker says is true? Or are you judging the validity of the information line by line, sentence by sentence, claim by claim, realizing that some parts could be true, and other parts false?
• Is the author/speaker emotional reasoning? Is it facts over feelings, or feels over reals?
• How would you describe the author/speakers tone? Dogmatic? Overconfident? Emotive? Pay attention not only to what is said, but how it’s said. How does the tone affect your response to the speech/text?
• Is the author/speaker using emotive language/tonality, and/or dramatic images or video, in an attempt to alarm, scare or outrage you?
• Is the author/speaker guilty of magical or superstitious thinking? Is there a lot of talk of “the law of attraction”, “miracles”, “soul mates” etc.?
• Does the author/speaker treat their opponents charitably and fairly? Do they treat the other side as intelligent people with a difference of opinion/perspective? Or do they demonize them as “crazy”, “dangerous”, “evil”, “dumb”, “stupid”, “racist”, “sexist”, “homophobic”, “transphobic” etc.?
• Does the author/speaker seem intellectually honest? Trustworthy? Why/why not?
• Is the author/speaker trying to be objective in their analysis and critique? Perfect objectivity isn’t possible, but are they even trying to be impartial, unbiased and objective?
• Do you like/respect/trust the author/speaker?
  • Yes: Be careful you’re not automatically believing everything they have to say without evidence, and letting them do your thinking for you
  • No: Be careful you’re not automatically dismissing everything they have to say because you don’t like them (Remember: Examine the statement – not the speaker)
• Do you like the message? Do you want it to be true? Are you inclined to believe it?
  • Yes: Beware because you’re more likely to believe it whether it’s true or not
  • No: Beware because you’re more likely to dismiss it whether it’s true or not
• Is it more likely that the author/speaker is telling:
  • The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth
  • Half-truths and holding something back
  • Straight up lying
• Is the author/speaker misquoting people, or taking quotes out of context?
• Did the person really say …? Is this a real quote/tweet? Or has the person been misquoted or quoted out of context? Is this a fake tweet?
• How are you going to use this information? What are you going to do with it? How are you going to put it into practice? How will it make a difference to your life?

If you’re watching an interview

• What is the purpose of this interview? Is it to educate or entertain the audience? Is it to promote a product or service?
• Who is the interviewee? Why is this person being interviewed?
• When did this interview take place? Is this information possibly outdated and no longer relevant?
• Is the interviewer asking the interviewee mostly softball or hardball questions?
• Is the interviewer asking the interviewee a lot of leading, loaded or gotcha questions? Do they seem to be trying to lead or trap the interviewee? e.g. “Yeah, but isn’t it true that…”, “Yeah, but don’t you think…”, “Yeah, but what about…”
• Is the interviewer really listening to the interviewee? Are they making a real effort to try to understand the interviewee and their position, or are they simply trying to promote or condemn it?
• Is the interviewer deliberately trying to make the interviewee look bad? e.g. Are they being overly disagreeable or standoffish? Do they only ask hardball or gotcha questions and then interrupt the interviewee mid-sentence with another difficult question every time the interviewee starts to give a good answer?
• Does the interviewer interrupt or cut off the interviewee if they start talking about anything controversial, or if they start talking about anything that doesn’t align with the narrative of the network e.g. anti-abortion, pro-gun or pro-Trump comments?
• Has the interview been edited to make the interviewee look bad, to paint them in a negative light?
• What additional questions would you ask the interviewee that the interviewer didn’t ask?

If you’re watching a group discussion or debate, especially on a contentious topic e.g. abortion or gun control:

• Who are the panel members? What makes these people authorities or experts on the subject?
• Are both sides of the debate equally represented with intelligent people? Or is one side represented by heavyweights and the other side lightweights?
• Is there an equal distribution of liberal and conservative pundits? Or is it a majority liberal panel with a token conservative? (or vice versa)
• Does the host seem biased towards one side over the other? Is the host picking sides and showing their approval/disapproval of one side?
• Is the audience showing an obvious bias to one side of the debate? Are they only applauding/booing one side of the debate?
• Is the host giving more airtime, credibility and/or respect to one side?
• Is the host trying to make one side look bad, ignorant or stupid?

In an argument or a debate

If you’re in an argument or a debate, or watching one:

• Is this an argument or an assertion? If it’s an argument, is it deductive, inductive or abductive? Is it sound or cogent? Valid or invalid? Strong or weak?
• Are all of the premises true and correct? Do all of the premises necessarily lead to the conclusion? Are there any unjustified leaps of logic?
• Am I clear on how each word is being defined in the argument?
• Is someone attempting to redefine words e.g. “rational”, “reasonable”, “racist” etc., to support their preferred conclusion?
• Is someone trying to shift the burden of proof? Note: The burden of proof is the obligation to provide evidence to support one’s assertion e.g. “You are guilty” and it is always on the one making the claim – not the other way around
• Has this argument already been debunked?
• Is someone making a PRATT? (Point refuted a thousand times)
• Is this a strawman or steelman argument?
• Is this the best argument in support of …?
• What are the best arguments in support of …?
• What are the best arguments against …?
• What is the strongest evidence in support of …?
• What is the strongest evidence against …?
• Is the preponderance of evidence for or against …? Is there more confirming or disconfirming evidence?
• Is the expert consensus (if there is one) for or against …? Why?
• Do the majority of experts agree or disagree with …? Why?
• Are there any fallacies in this argument or rationale? If so, what? (Fallacies don’t necessarily make an argument invalid but it’s still good to be aware of them)
• Am I 100% certain I understand my opponent’s position? Am I sure? Could I argue my opponent’s position convincingly? Could I steelman it? Could I pass the Ideological Turing Test? If not, you don’t understand it. Don’t argue for or against a position until you fully understand it
• What are the strongest points of my opponent’s argument?
• What are the weakest points of my opponent’s argument?
• What are the weakest points of my argument?
• What is the strongest evidence against my position?
• What are the best arguments against my position?
• How would I attack my argument if I had to?
• What do I like about my opponent’s position, and what do I dislike about mine?
• What aspects of my argument are likely to be unconvincing to those that don’t already agree with me?
• Does my opponent seem intellectually honest? Are they arguing in good faith? Are they willing to follow the evidence where it leads? Are they willing to admit when they’re mistaken or wrong? Am I?
• Does my opponent seem more interested in “winning” the argument or discovering the truth?

Ask the other person:

• How did you determine that?
• How did you come to that conclusion?
• What do you know that I don’t?
• Where am I wrong in my argument or rationale?
• What evidence would it take to change your mind, to convince you otherwise?
• Are these your real reasons for believing X? If all of these reasons were proven wrong, would you still continue to believe X? If yes, let’s not even worry about these reasons because they’re not the real reasons you believe X. What are the real reasons you believe X?

• Why do you think other smart people aren’t convinced by the same arguments and evidence that you are?

If you’re watching the news

• Is this “news” from a trusted source? According to this survey (which you shouldn’t trust) these are some of the most trusted news sources in America (which is only public opinion – and therefore means nothing). I’m not saying I endorse or trust any of these news sites personally:
  1. Associated Press News
  2. BBC News
  3. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism
  4. C-Span
  5. The Economist
  6. NPR
  7. PBS
  8. Politico
  9. Pro Publica
  10. Reuters
• What is the bias of this news station? Are they liberal or conservative? You can check the bias of a particular news station here: Media Bias Fact Check
• Is this even “news”? Most “news” isn’t news at all, it’s:
  • Clickbait
  • Fear mongering
  • Gossip/rumors
  • Hatchet jobs
  • Outrage porn
  • Puff pieces
  • Propaganda
• Is this really the most important “news” of the day? Why is this story being prioritized over everything else that happened today?
• Why do I need to know this? How does it affect me?
• What is the purpose of this news story? Why was it created? What does the news station want you to think/believe/do?
• When was this news story published? Is this information current, or is it outdated and/or no longer relevant?
• Has this story already been debunked?
• What do the fact checkers say?
  • Politifact
  • Snopes
  • Truth or Fiction
  • The Washington Post Fact Checker
  • Factcheck
  • Hoax Slayer

Check these websites to see if a claim or story has already been debunked, but don’t rely on any of these websites to do your thinking for you, because they may mislead you with their own political biases

• Has this story or headline been written to educate, entertain or infuriate you?
• Is the headline an accurate summary of the information – or is it just clickbait?
• Do the photos fit the story?
• Has an unflattering photo been deliberately chosen to paint the subject e.g. Trump in a bad light?
• Is it likely that this story has been embellished or sensationalized?
• How has this information been framed or spun?
• Are you being presented with both sides of the story – or only one?
• Whose perspective is this presented from? Conservative or liberal? America’s or someone else’s? Men or Women? What other perspectives might be equally valid, or worth looking into?
• What do the other news stations say? e.g. if you watch CNN or MSNBC, what does CBS or FOX say? (and vice versa)
• Are you being presented with facts or opinions?  If “facts”, on what basis are they “facts”? What evidence exists to support these “facts”?

• Do the media’s “facts” and description of “reality” seem accurate? Why/why not? Anything you disagree with?
• Did someone really say that? Or have they been misquoted or quoted out of context?
• Does the domain look credible?
• Is this satire?

How to spot a liar

• Does it seem like this person is lying or telling the truth? Why? Are they a known liar?
• Is this person motivated to deceive me? Do they stand to gain something by lying to me? What might this person gain by lying to me?
• Does the person answer your questions directly and in depth, or do they:
  • Dodge the question
  • Ignore the question
  • Attack you for asking the question, “How could you ask me a question like that!”
  • Refuse to answer the question
  • Answer a different question
  • Turn the question back on you, “I could ask you the same thing!”
  • Give short one word answers
  • Give vague or ambiguous answers
  • Talk around in circles without answering the question
• If you ask the person the same question multiple times using different words, do they give different answers and contradict themselves? Do the details in their story keep changing?
• When questioned directly does the person seem:
  • Anxious
  • Uncomfortable
  • Stressed
  • Defensive
  • Annoyed
• Does the person speak slower or faster or louder than normal when answering your questions?
• Does the person hesitate, take long pauses, or talk slower than normal when answering your questions? (maybe in an attempt to think on the spot and buy time?)
• Do they avoid eye contact and/or cover their mouth when answering questions?
• Do they start sentences and not finish them, or change topics and start talking about something else mid-sentence?
• Does the tone or volume of their voice change? Does their voice crack and/or go higher than normal? Do they cough repetitively and clear their throat, or stammer or stutter?
• Do they blink rapidly, or not at all, or have a fake or nervous smile?
• Do they roll their lips back or purse them?
• Does their body language seem uncomfortable?
• Do their emotions and facial expressions match their words? When they say they’re “good” or “okay”, do they seem good or okay?
• Does it seem like they’re in a hurry to change the subject?
• Which is more likely:
  • This person is telling “The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”
  • This person is telling half-truths and holding something back
  • This person is playing dumb and pretending to know less than they do
  • This person is straight up lying
• What does your gut/intuition say? Does it seem like they’re lying or telling you the truth? (or both)

If you want to spot a scam

• Is a stranger emailing, texting or calling you out of the blue claiming something too good to be true? e.g. you’ve entitled to a large inheritance – and all you need to do is provide bank details, or pay taxes or transfer costs? Or that you’ve won a prize in a competition or lottery you’ve never entered?
• Is someone calling you claiming to be from your bank, gas/electricity provider, phone company etc. and asking you to verify your personal contact details, password, bank details, credit card number etc.? maybe due to “unauthorized” or “suspicious activity” on your account?
• Does a google search on the exact wording of the email, text or ad reveal a scam?
• Does the email contain any grammatical or spelling errors, or overly formal language?
• Does the email ask you to click a link or open an attachment?
• If you’re buying something online is the seller asking you to make payment with an insecure payment option? e.g. direct bank transfer, money order, or a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin?
• In an online dating scenario, is someone professing strong feelings for you after only a few encounters?
• Does the person have a sense of urgency? Are they claiming to need money urgently for a personal or family emergency, medical attention, or to come see you?
• Is someone using pressure tactics, and trying to make you feel guilty or selfish for not buying their product or service, or donating to a charity?
• Is someone trying to manipulate you with sleazy sales/self-help seminar type questions e.g. “Do you want to be rich or poor?” “A winner or a loser?” “A success or a failure?”

• Does it seem too good to be true? Does it seem like a scam? If so, it probably is
• What does your gut/intuition say?

Statistics questions

“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” – Benjamin Disraeli

Ask yourself the following questions whenever you’re presented with any statistic:

• Who paid for the study or survey?
• Who conducted the study or survey? Does it come from a credible source?
• Why was the study or survey done? What is the likely agenda?
• When was the study done? Is the information outdated? Is it still relevant? Times change. Public opinion changes
• Who was polled? Conservatives or liberals? Men or women? Asians, Blacks, Hispanics or Whites? What age group? Gen X, Y or Z? How diverse was the group?
• How large was the sample size? How many people were surveyed? Is the sample size large enough? Is it qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods? Was the sample size sufficient? Was it representative enough of the wider population? Did the participants come from different cultural and social backgrounds? How generalizable are the findings?
• What are the statistics measuring?
• How long did the information take to gather? Was it a 2 week survey? A 6 month study? A 10 year study?
• What questions were asked?
• How was each question asked? Were the questions leading or loaded or worded in such a way as to encourage a certain answer?
• What is the context of the survey?
• How was the research done? Phone, email, social media, face to face?
• What is the number as a percentage? e.g. 55, 000 Americans is 0.0167% of the population
• Is the percentage statistically insignificant? e.g. 500, 000 Americans might be addicted to Heroin, but as a percentage that’s ‘only’ (any number above one is obviously too high) 0.153% of Americans
• Do the author’s conclusions and the headline logically follow from the data? Or are they reading too much into the data? Find the raw data if you can. Don’t just accept and believe headlines for statistics. Make sure it says what the headline says it says. Statistical headlines are often used to suggest things the data doesn’t actually say
• Is the research confusing causation and correlation? Check out: spurious correlations for a perfect visual example of why correlation does not equal causation
• Has this study been peer reviewed by experts?
• Beware of unsourced statistics

“I can prove anything by statistics except the truth.” – George Canning