形成判断
这部分是所有工作的结束，那就是最终通过审查证据，仔细的推理从而得出自己的判断结论。这就是批判性思维的目的。得出结论的过程也需要注意几部分内容。1要平衡2考虑概率3适当性的主题4判断精确到一定的程度5囊括所有可能性6避免夸大。只有做到了这些得出的结论才能说是经过批判性思考而得出的结论。这是我们的目标。
学习这部分内容的时候让我联想到了语法的重要性，这几部分的注意其实都体现在具体的语法上。原来英语语法的最终作用体现在这里啊。
game over
Judgments are conclusions arrived at through examination of evidence and careful reasoning. They are the products of thinking. Unlike feelings, judgments are not spontaneous and unconscious. They may of course, contain elements of the spontaneous – such as intuition – but, like other data, these have first been weighed and evaluated.
判断是通过审查证据和仔细推理得出的结论。他们是思考的产物。与感觉不同，判断不是自发的和无意识的。他们当然可能包含自发的元素 - 比如直觉 - 但是和其他数据一样，这些元素首先被称重和评估。
The fact that judgments are products of evaluation and reasoning does not guarantee their worth. There are foolish judgments as well as wise, superficial as well as penetrating. A judgment can easily reflect misconceptions about truth, knowing,and opinion. Or it can involve one or more of the errors in thinking detailed in Chapters 6 through 15.
判断是评估和推理的产物并不能保证其价值。有愚蠢的判断，以及明智，肤浅和渗透的。判断很容易反映对真相，认识和观点的误解。或者它可能涉及第6章至第15章中详述的一个或多个错误思想。
The strategy we have discussed for thinking critically about issues is designed to promote thoughtful judgments. By knowing ourselves and being observant, we improve our perception and guard against error. By systematically clarifying issues,conducting inquiry, interpreting evidence, and analyzing viewpoints, we rescueour thinking form preconceived notions and first impressions.
我们讨论过的批判性思考战略旨在促进深思熟虑的判断。通过了解自己并保持敏锐，我们改善了我们的认知并防范了错误。通过系统地澄清问题，进行调查，解释证据和分析观点，我们从先入为主的观念和第一印象中拯救了我们的思维。
The act of expressing a judgment can alter it. Therefore, however clear our judgments may seem in our minds, it is best to consider them formless until we have expressed them in words. These guidelines will help you express your judgments effectively:
表达判断的行为可以改变它。因此，无论我们的判断如何清晰，在我们用言语表达它们之前，最好认为它们是无形的。这些指导方针将有助于您有效地表达您的判断：
Strive for a Balanced View
争取平衡的观点
Deal with Probability
处理概率
Make Your Subject Appropriately Specific
适当地制定主题
Make Your Predicate Exact
让你的断定精确
Include All Appropriate Qualifications
包括所有适当的资格
Avoid Exaggeration
避免夸大
Let's look more closely at each of these guidelines.
让我们仔细看看这些指导方针。
STRIVE FOR A BALANCED VIEW
强调平衡的观点
A balanced view of an issue is one that reflects all the subtlety and complexity of an issue. The prevailing view exerts considerable force on most people's thinking, particularly when the issue is controversial and emotion is running high. Without realizing it, people typically adopt identical perspectives and use identical arguments, and even identical words. This happens even with people who are normally critical thinkers.
对问题的平衡观点反映了一个问题的所有微妙和复杂性。盛行的观点对大多数人的思想产生了相当大的影响，特别是当问题存在争议并且情绪高涨时。在没有意识到的情况下，人们通常采用相同的观点，使用相同的论点，甚至是相同的词汇。即使对于那些通常是批判性思考者的人来说也是如此。
At such times, hordes of liberal thinkers sound alike. As do hordes of conservative thinkers. When someone finally exercises the mental discipline to break the pattern and take a balanced look at the issue, the result is a refreshing original, and often insightful, view.
在这种时候，自由派思想家群体听起来很相似。成群的保守思想家也是如此。当有人终于运用心理规律来打破这种模式并对问题进行平衡观察时，结果是一个令人耳目一新的原始观点。
Consider the case of Salman Rushdie's book, The Satanic Verses. Because the book profoundly insulted Moslems by ridiculing their religion and the prophet Mohammed, they reacted angrily. The Ayatollah Khomeini went so far as to put out a contract on the author's life and to threaten any individuals involved in publishing or distributing the book. That reaction, extreme by any measure, evoked an extreme response. Rallies were held, and there were many gestures of support for the author and his publishers.
考虑一下Salman Rushdie的书The Satanic Verses的案例。因为这本书嘲讽穆斯林嘲笑他们的宗教和先知穆罕默德，他们愤怒地作出反应。阿亚图拉霍梅尼竟然就作者的生活签订了合同，并威胁任何参与出版或发行该书的个人。这种反应，无论如何极端，都引起了极端的反应。召开了拉力赛，并为作者及其出版商提供了许多支持的姿态。
"Freedom of expression" was the slogan the vast majority of writers and speakers crafted their reasoning around. A worthy principle, certainly, and one threatened by Khomeini and his followers. But not the only worthy principle. A few writers chose to resist the temptation to join the chorus and instead called attention to another principle, one all but forgotten at the time – the principle of respect for the religious beliefs of others.
“言论自由”是绝大多数作家和演讲者围绕他们推理的口号。当然，这是一个有价值的原则，也是霍梅尼和他的追随者所威胁的原则。但不是唯一有价值的原则。一些作家选择抵制加入合唱团的诱惑，转而提请注意另一个原则，那个原则在当时被遗忘了 - 尊重他人宗教信仰的原则。
Columnist John Leospoke of "the fact that our [principle of tolerance] calls for a certain amount of deference and self-restraint in discussing other people's religious beliefs." Professor John Esposito of Holy Cross College observed that"the First Amendment right doesn't mean you should automatically say everything you want to."
专栏作家约翰·利奥谈到“我们的[宽容原则]要求在讨论其他人的宗教信仰时需要一定程度的尊重和自我克制”。圣十字学院的John Esposito教授指出：“第一修正案的权利并不意味着你应该自动说出你想要的一切。”
Consider, too, the question of building self-esteem in people. For more than twenty years writers of self-improvement books have emphasized the importance of self-esteem,particularly in young children. So great has been this emphasis that many people assume that success or failure in school and later life is largely are flection of this factor. Almost any effort to make people feel good about themselves is applauded.
也要考虑在人身上建立自尊的问题。二十多年来，自修书的作者强调了自尊的重要性，特别是对于年幼的孩子。许多人认为学校和以后的成功或失败在很大程度上反映了这个因素，所以这些重点都是如此重要。几乎任何让人们对自己感觉良好的努力都受到赞扬。
But Barbara Lerner,Psychologist and attorney, was able to resist the powerful lure of the prevailing view and examine self-esteem critically. Her reward was the insight that self-esteem is not always good. In some cases it can be an obstacle to achievement. There is a difference, she notes, between "earned"self-esteem and "feel god now" self-esteem. The former can lead to achievement and even excellence, whereas the latter promotes complacency and ultimately,incompetency.
但是心理学家和律师芭芭拉勒纳能够抵制普遍观点的强大诱惑力，并批判性地审视自尊。她的奖励是认识到自尊并不总是好的。在某些情况下，这可能会阻碍成就。她指出，在“获得”自尊与“现在感受上帝”的自尊之间存在差异。前者可以导致成就甚至卓越，而后者会促进自满，最终导致无能。
To achieve a balanced view of the issues you address, you must be willing to look for the neglected side of the issue and, when there is good reason to do so, challenge the prevailing view.
为了对你所处理的问题有一个平衡的看法，你必须愿意寻找被忽视的问题，并且当有充足的理由这样做时，挑战普遍的观点。
DEAL WITH PROBABILITY
处理发生的概率
Despite our best efforts to investigate issues, there are times when we cannot accumulate sufficient evidence to arrive at a judgment with certainty. This is especially true with controversial issues. At such times, the irresponsible often raise their voices, choose more forceful words, and pretend certainty. That is a grave mistake, first because the pretense seldom fools good thinkers, but more importantly because it is intellectually dishonest.
尽管我们尽最大努力调查问题，但有时我们无法积累足够的证据以确定地作出判断。有争议的问题尤其如此。在这种时候，不负责任的人经常会发出自己的声音，选择更有力的话语，并 假装 确定。这是一个严重的错误，首先是因为伪装很少愚弄好的思想家，但更重要的是因为它在智力上不诚实。
As long as we have made a sincere effort to gain the evidence necessary to achieve certainty and are not deliberately choosing to ride the fence, there is no shame in admitting, "I cannot say for certain what the correct judgment is in this situation." On the contrary, there is virtue in doing so. Yet in such situations there is one further obligation we must, are responsible thinkers,meet. It is to explain, if possible, what judgment is supported by probability– that is, what judgment the evidence suggests, as opposed to proves, is correct.
只要我们真诚地努力获得必要的证据以获得确定性，而不是故意选择骑篱笆，承认“我不能确切地说，在这种情况下正确的判断是什么”并不可耻。相反，这样做有美德。然而，在这种情况下，我们必须承担进一步的义务，即负责任的思想家会面。如果可能的话，它应该解释什么判断是由概率支持的 - 也就是说，证据表明，与证明相反，证据所表明的判断是正确的。
The evidence, for example, may be insufficient to say with certainty that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer or that viewing television violence definitely harms people. Nevertheless, there is sufficient evidence on both issues to warrant your judgment about probable cause-effect relationships.
例如，证据可能不足以肯定地说吸烟会导致肺癌，或者观看电视暴力 肯定会伤害 人。尽管如此，在这两个问题上都有足够的证据来保证你对可能的因果关系的判断。
Whenever you cannot achieve certainty focus on probability.
无论何时您无法确定将重点放在概率上。
MAKE YOUR SUBJECT APPROPRIATELY SPECIFIC
使你的主题适当具体
The subject in a careful judgment is appropriately specific. Consider these sentences:
在仔细判断中的主题是适当的具体。考虑这些句子：
Today's college students are less proficient in grammar and usage than their counterparts were ten years ago.
与十年前相比，今天的大学生在语法和用法方面不够精通。
Today's U.S. college students are less proficient in grammar and usage than their counterparts were ten years ago.
今天的美国大学生 在语法和使用方面比十年前的同行不太熟练。
Today's U.S. two-year college students are less proficient in grammar and usage than their counterparts were ten years ago.
今天的美国两年制大学生的 语法和用法比十年前的同行少。
Today's students at this collegeare less proficient in grammar and usage than their counterparts were ten years ago.
今天的这个学院的学生 在语法和用法方面比十年前的学生不太熟练。
If the evidence covers only students at a particular college, only the last judgment can be sound. The other three are too generalized. To avoid this kind of error in your writing and speaking, choose the subjects of your judgments with care.
如果证据仅包括某所大学的学生，只有最后的判决可能是正确的。其他三个太笼统了。为了避免在写作和说话时出现这种错误，请小心选择您的判断主题。
MAKE YOUR PREDICATE EXACT
使你的预测准确无误
The predicate in a careful judgment asserts exactly what you want to assert. Compare these sentences:
在仔细判断中的谓词确切地说明了你想要声明的内容。比较这些句子：
Peace has been achieved.
和平 已经 实现。
Peace can be achieved.
和平 可以 实现。
Peace must be achieved.
和平 必须 实现。
Peace should be achieved.
和平应该实现
Peace could be achieved.
和平可以实现。
Peace will be achieved.
和平将会实现。
Though these sentences are very similar in construction, their meanings are very different. Unless we deliberately choose ambiguity (in which case we should expect to cause confusion), we should choose our predicates judiciously. A good example of what confusion can result is shown in the sentence that triggered the ological debate in the 1960s: "God is dead." It made a nice slogan, but exactly what did it mean? Taking it by itself, a person would have great difficulty answering. In addition to the obvious possibility, "There is no supreme being," there are at least seven others:
虽然这些句子在结构上非常相似，但它们的含义却非常不同。除非我们故意选择模棱两可（在这种情况下，我们应该会引起混淆），我们应该明智地选择我们的谓词。在1960年代触发神学辩论的句子中显示了一个很好的例子：“上帝已经死了”。它提出了一个很好的口号，但究竟意味着什么？独自一人，一个人会很难回答。除了显而易见的可能性之外，“没有至高无上的存在”，至少有七种：
Peace no longer want to believe God exists.
和平不再 想要 相信上帝的存在。
Peace are no longer able to believe God exists.
和平不再 能够 相信上帝的存在。
Peace are no longer certain God exists.
和平不再确定神的存在。
Peace no longer act as if God exists.
和平不再 行动 ，就好像上帝存在。
Peace no longer care whether God exist.
和平不再 在乎 上帝是否存在。
Peace no longer accept some particular conception of God.
和平不再 接受 某种特定的上帝概念。
Peace are no longer satisfied with the limitation of traditional human expressions of belief in God's existence.
和平不再 满足 于传统人类对神存在信仰的限制。
Anyone who wished the message to be understood would have been better off using whichever of the above sentences (or some other) expressed the judgment clearly rather than saying, "God is dead."
任何希望理解这些信息的人最好用上面的句子（或其他人）表达清楚的判断，而不是说“上帝死了”。
INCLUDE ALL APPROPRIATE QUALIFICATIONS
包括所有适当的资格
Saying that something usually happens is different from saying that it frequently happens or that it happens every other Tuesday. The more care you take to make the qualifications necessary to say what you wish, no more and no less, the more defensible your judgment is likely to be. And that includes not only qualifications of time but those of place and condition as well. In the judgment "American men over forty who never attended college tend to be opposed to the idea of women's liberation advocated by the National Organization for Women" (which may or may not be true), almost every word is a qualification. It says: a) not all men but American men; b) not members of all age groups and educational levels but those over forty who never attended college; c) not the idea of women's liberation in general but the idea advocated by the National Organization for Women.
说通常发生的事情不同于说它经常发生或者每隔周二发生一次。为了说出自己想要的资格，你更加小心谨慎，不多也不少，你的判断可能更有把握。这不仅包括时间的资格，还包括地点和条件的资格。在判断“40岁以上从未上过大学的美国男性往往反对国家妇女组织倡导的妇女解放思想”（可能会也可能不会），但几乎每一个词都是一种资格。它说：a）不是所有的男人，而是 美国 男人; b）不是所有年龄组和教育水平的成员，而是那些 从未上过大学的四十多岁的成员 ; c）不是一般的妇女解放思想，而是 全国妇女组织倡导 的思想。
AVOID EXAGGERATION
避免夸大
Most of us know one or more people for whom every occasion "memorable,"every problem is a "crisis," every enjoyable film is "worthy of an Academy Award nomination," every attractive new car or fashion"incomparable." To such people nothing is merely good or bad – it is the best or worst. Their vocabulary is filled with super lative. When someone islate for an appointment with them, they wait an "eternity." When they go to the dentist, the pain is "unbearable." Their debts are"titanic."
我们大多数人都认识一个或多个人，每个场合“令人难忘”，每一个问题都是“危机”，每部有趣的电影“值得奥斯卡奖提名”，每一款吸引人的新车或时尚都“无与伦比”。对于这样的人来说，没有什么是好的或坏的 - 这是最好的或最坏的。他们的词汇充满了最高级的。当有人迟到与他们约会时，他们会等待“永恒”。当他们去看牙医时，疼痛是“难以忍受的”。他们的债务是“泰坦尼克号”。
When such people report something to us, we have to translate it, scale it down to realistic proportions. If they say, "He was the biggest man I've ever seen, at least seven feet ten," we conclude he was about is feet six. If they say,"you've got to hear Sidney Screech's new record – it's the most fantastic performance he's ever given," we conclude it was a bit better than usual.
当这些人向我们报告某些事情时，我们必须对其进行翻译，将其缩小到现实比例。如果他们说，“他是我见过的最大的男人，至少有7英尺10英寸”，我们得出结论他是六尺六英尺。如果他们说，“你必须听到Sidney Screech的新纪录 - 这是他所获得的最棒的表演，”我们得出结论，这比往常要好一点。
We make such translation willingly if the people exaggerating are close friends. But we may still grow weary of the super lative. If the people exaggerating are only acquaintances or if we know them only through their writing or speaking, then we tend to be less patient. We cannot help losing a certain amount of confidence in them. We cannot help seeing them as people who misjudge the world around them. Moreover, they seem to lack a balance, a necessary sense of proportion in their seeing.
如果夸大其词的人是亲密的朋友，我们会随心所欲地翻译。但我们仍可能对最高级的人感到厌倦。如果夸大其词的人只是熟人，或者只有通过他们的写作或口语才能认识他们，那么我们往往不那么耐心。我们不能帮助他们失去一定的信心。我们不能将他们视为误判周围世界的人。而且，他们似乎缺乏一种平衡，在他们看来是必要的比例感。
If you want your judgments to stand the test of scrutiny by others, you will do well to avoid any such exaggerations. Where you cannot be certain your judgment is accurate,you should tend to err on the side of understatement rather than overstatement.In other words, you should take the more modest interpretation, the less extreme conclusion. That way, if you are wrong, as every human must sometimes be, you will at least have the saving grace of having demonstrated a sense of control and restraint.
如果你希望你的判断能够经得起其他人的考验，你会做得很好，避免任何这种夸大。如果你不能确定你的判断是否准确，你应该倾向于轻描淡写而不是夸大其词。换句话说，你应该采取较为温和的解释，即不那么极端的结论。那样的话，如果你错了，就像每个人必须有的那样，你至少会有节制的恩典，表现出一种控制和克制的感觉。
If your judgments meet the standards explained in this chapter, you can take pride in them, for judgment carefully arrived at is the hallmark of humanity. It is the capstone to your capacity for thinking. As such, it separates you most dramatically from other creatures, enabling you to grow in knowledge and, considerably more important, in wisdom and to improve your own life and the lives of others.
如果你的判断符合本章所阐述的标准，那么你可以为它们感到骄傲，因为仔细判断的判断是人类的标志。它是你思考能力的最佳选择。因此，它将你最显着地与其他生物区分开来，使你能够增长知识，更重要的是增长 智慧 并改善自己的生活和他人的生活。
这个系列是对超越感觉：批判性思考指南 07版做的翻译练习，如果觉得有帮助可以点链接购买第九版中文，英文原版在这里Beyond Feelings：A Guide to Critical Thinking （英语）
网友评论