Argumentation and critical thinking

Aim: The aim of this chapter is to theoretically substantiate the relationship between argumentation and critical thinking and to summarize empirical evidence of how the former supports the assessment and development of the latter. Main concepts: To fulfill the above we use concepts from informal logic theory as well as reasoning development. In particular, the argument assessment criteria of reasonableness, relevance, sufficiency, and acceptability are discussed, to show how they contribute to both argument generation and assessment, taking into consideration the dialogic context of argumentation. It is this dialogic practice of argumentation that brings to the surface, and helps develop, not only basic generative and inferential abilities but also more complex meta-strategic and epistemological skills and reasoning dispositions. Conclusions and outlook: We conclude that argumentation, together with inquiry, are two practices that help make critical thinking skills and dispositions visible, accessible, and assessable in practice, through constructing arguments, counterarguments, and rebuttals in authentic contexts of thinking together with others.