CT Scan: Critical Thinking Scan

CT Scan: Critical Thinking Scan

14 Seasons

Critical Thinking Scan with Patricia Engler can help you process any faith-challenging message and reach a biblical, logical conclusion yourself.

Subscribe Share
CT Scan: Critical Thinking Scan
  • Catch Countless Fallacies with 1 Critical Thinking Hack 

    Episode 1

    Arguments that persuade by propaganda often use fallacies of irrelevant premises. There’s a long list of these fallacies, but one critical thinking hack can help you catch any of them. Just ask: “Is this message true or false because…” Because many people believe it? Because someone famous said s...

  • Handout 1 - Catch Countless Fallacies with 1 Critical Thinking Hack 

    167 KB

  • Don’t Creationists Use Fallacies?

    Episode 2

    Textbooks may accuse biblical creationists of using logical fallacies to defend their beliefs. It’s possible to use bad logic to argue for something true, so calling a message false because someone uses fallacies to defend it…is a fallacy. Still, bad logic lowers apparent credibility. To learn ho...

  • Handout 2 - Don’t Creationists Use Fallacies?

    169 KB

  • Appeals to Ignorance and Incredulity

    Episode 3

    Claiming that something must be true because there’s no evidence to say otherwise is a logical fallacy called Appeal to Ignorance. Another version of this fallacy is the Argument from Incredulity, which suggests something must be false because it’s hard to imagine being true. Here’s how to recogn...

  • Handout 3 - Appeals to Ignorance and Incredulity

    167 KB

  • The Elephant, the Blind Men, and the Faulty Analogy

    Episode 4

    Analogies can make arguments sound persuasive, but they can’t prove anything is true. Tips for answering analogies that argue against the Bible include finding an important difference between the things being compared and using big-picture questions to make the analogy argue for a biblical worldv...

  • Handout 4 - The Elephant, the Blind Men, and the Faulty Analogy

    155 KB

  • Answering Straw-Man Arguments 

    Episode 5

    Straw-man fallacies re-frame strong positions as weak ones, while motte-and-bailey fallacies re-frame weak positions as a strong ones. In both cases, you can respond by bringing the discussion back to what the original position said.

  • Handout 5 - Answering Straw-Man Arguments 

    182 KB

  • No True Scotsman Fallacy

    Episode 6

    No True Scotsman arguments say that no real member of some group would do something; for instance, no true scientist would reject evolution. These arguments become fallacies when they redefine a key term—like what it means to be a scientist—to avoid counterarguments. Here are some examples of how...

  • Handout 6 - No True Scotsman Fallacy

    182 KB

  • Stolen Concept Fallacies

    Episode 7

    Arguments with stolen concept fallacies assume the truth of the same thing they’re trying to disprove. For example, many arguments against Scripture rely on principles which are ultimately rooted in a Biblical worldview, including truth, logic, knowledge, scientific reasoning, morality and the va...

  • Handout 7 - Stolen Concept Fallacies

    196 KB

  • Asking Big Picture Questions

    Episode 8

    By asking big-picture questions, you can gently and respectfully address stolen concept fallacies in arguments which try borrowing biblical concepts to criticize the Bible. A helpful way to start is asking why the argument’s topic is worth raising. Let’s see some examples.

  • Handout 8 - Asking Big Picture Questions

    190 KB

  • Circular Reasoning

    Episode 9

    Circular reasoning is when an argument assumes what it’s trying to prove. Though often considered fallacies, circular arguments aren’t always illogical; they’re usually just too arbitrary to be persuasive. Yet some circular reasoning is necessary for logical thinking. Here’s how to detect—and avo...

  • Handout 9 - Circular Reasoning

    176 KB

  • Do Christians Use Circular Reasoning?

    Episode 10

    One objection to Christianity is that it’s circular reasoning to say, “God’s Word is true because the Bible says so.” And left at that, this argument is indeed circular. Does that mean Christianity is founded on a fallacy? The short answer is no, but let’s unpack why.

  • Handout 10 - Do Christians Use Circular Reasoning?

    493 KB

  • Valid Conditional Arguments

    Episode 11

    Conditional arguments use “if-then” statements, like “If God created humans, then all humans have value.” The “if” is the antecedent, and the “then” is the consequent. Let’s look at 3 valid types of conditional arguments: Affirming the Antecedent, Denying the Consequent, and Hypothetical Syllogis...

  • Handout 11 - Valid Conditional Arguments

    286 KB

  • Affirming the Consequent

    Episode 12

    Subtle, persuasive, and almost always illogical, Affirming the Consequent is a flawed “if-then” argument which argues that an “if” statement is true because a “then” statement is true. Like “If your car is out of gas, it won’t start. It won’t start; therefore, it’s out of gas.” Using real evoluti...

  • Handout 12 - Affirming the Consequent

    257 KB