One of the central ideas of critical thinking is that the quality of anyone’s conclusion, including that of Justice Souter, is closely related to the quality of the evidence used to support that...

One of the central ideas of critical thinking is that the quality of anyone’s conclusion, including that of Justice Souter, is closely related to the quality of the evidence used to support that particular conclusion. Although Justice Souter is not making the final decision in Case 25-5, what he did certainly supports the CDA’s efforts to continue its current restrictions on its members. Evaluating evidence is often made easier by asking, what kinds of evidence would have been ideal.

 1. To form his argument, Justice Souter makes a number of assertions. Name two claims he made in Case 25-5 for which additional evidence would enhance our confidence in their accuracy. Clue: Find places where Justice Souter makes factual claims but offers no evidence beyond his statement to support their validity.

 2. To demonstrate to yourself that evidence is necessary for us to believe someone, locate two assertions made by Justice Souter in Case 25-5 that have no supporting evidence.Write two statements that say the opposite of what Justice Souter said. Do your statements assist the plaintiff in this case? Clue: If your statements were true, would the CDA’s restrictions on advertising be more likely to harm consumers than if Justice Souter’s statements were true?