Üsküdar Üniversitesi Faculty of Communication launched a free 8-week online seminar series to share its scientific knowledge with society. In the first week of the project, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Bahar Muratoğlu Pehlivan, Head of the New Media and Communication (English) Department, met with participants with her presentation titled "Critical Thinking Skills: Recognizing the Traps of Our Minds."
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan: “Critical thinking, in its simplest definition, is for a person to reflect on their own thoughts and gain a critical perspective on this action.”
Üsküdar Üniversitesi Faculty of Communication draws attention with its new project implemented within the framework of its social contribution and science communication mission. The 8-week seminar series, which will be held online every Wednesday at 20.00, started on November 19, 2025. The seminar series, where participation is completely free and a "Digital Participation Certificate" will be given to those who follow the program completely, brings expert academics together with the public on a wide range of topics, from critical thinking to digital etiquette, from a sociological reading of Turkish TV series to conscious consumerism.
The first topic of the seminar series is critical thinking skills
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Bahar Muratoğlu Pehlivan, Head of the Üsküdar Üniversitesi New Media and Communication (English) Department, who opened the seminar series, deeply examined the concept of "Critical Thinking," which is of vital importance in today's intense information pollution, in her presentation titled "Critical Thinking Skills: Recognizing the Traps of Our Minds."
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan stated that this concept is not just an indicator of intelligence but a learnable and developable skill set, saying, “Critical thinking, in its simplest definition, is for a person to reflect on their own thoughts and gain a critical perspective on this action. It is the ability to make analyses based on correct reasoning processes about our own thought systems in every area of our lives. As stated by the Critical Thinking Association, this is a guide to action. It is a method of effectively analyzing information we acquire through observation, experience, and communication. However, the first truth we must accept at this point is this: Human thought is prone to imperfection.”
Ideas we assume to be our own thoughts are actually learned assumptions
Stating that people are shaped by the influence of elements such as family, environment, education system, and media from the moment they are born, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said that ideas we often assume to be our own thoughts are actually learned assumptions.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan stated, “Culture determines our daily life practices from the moment we are born. We turn these into habits without questioning them. To be a critical thinker, we must first recognize these internalized assumptions, be able to think independently of authorities, and activate an evidence-based decision-making mechanism. To succeed in looking at our own culture, our own thinking system, and our own habits with a critical, questioning eye also means being able to understand societies and cultures that are not part of our own society and culture and are distant from us in terms of life practices, and to require an understanding and objective perspective towards those cultures. Therefore, certain differences among people such as religion, language, and culture should not prevent us from thinking fairly and impartially.”
Obstacles to rational thinking: Egocentrism and Sociocentrism
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan noted that the two most fundamental tendencies hindering rational thinking are ‘Egocentrism’ and ‘Sociocentrism,’ and that egocentrism is the effort of an individual to prioritize their own interests and righteousness in all circumstances, stating, “Humans can sometimes act inconsistently and irrationally to maintain their beliefs. The goal in an egocentric attitude is not to reach objective and correct information, but to justify one’s own thoughts. This therefore, an individual sees evidence that confirms them while ignoring evidence that refutes their idea.”
Pointing out that group centrism (Sociocentrism) lies at the root of social polarization, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said, “The group we belong to; this could be a nation, a football team, or a political party, dictates what is right and what is wrong to us. While we cover up the mistakes of our own group, we scrutinize the mistakes of the opposing group. We act with the assumption ‘We are good, they are bad.’ However, critical thinking requires asking the question, ‘If I had been born into another society, would I have the same values?’”
Scientific knowledge must be falsifiable
Also addressing the topic of “Pseudoscience,” which appears scientific but lacks scientific basis, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan explained the functioning mechanisms of astrology, fortune-telling, and some spiritual beliefs, stating, “Pseudosciences claim to be scientific but establish their hypotheses in a way that is protected against refutation. However, scientific knowledge must be falsifiable. In approaches like ‘Ask the universe, and it shall be,’ when what you desired does not materialize, the blame is placed on the individual by saying ‘You didn’t ask enough.’ This is a circular logical fallacy.”
Stating that the reason people find themselves in fortune-telling or horoscope readings is the “Barnum Effect,” Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said, “When you are told ‘You appear tough on the outside, but you are very emotional on the inside,’ you accept it. Because this is a general statement that could apply to almost anyone. People dislike uncertainty and are eager to find meaning. That's why we remember a single prediction that came true and forget thirty that didn't. We call this ‘Selective Thinking.’”
What are the reasoning fallacies?
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Bahar Muratoğlu Pehlivan addressed logical fallacies, one of the most important topics in the discipline of critical thinking, stating, "Flawed reasoning processes are the general name for logical errors we make when constructing an argument, defending an idea, or putting forward a claim. Arguments that are not properly justified, not based on correct premises, or shaped by faulty or incomplete reasoning are evaluated under this heading. Some types of these reasoning fallacies appear so frequently in our daily lives, as well as in media and politics, that they have been given specific names and definitions.”
In her speech, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan elaborated on the most common forms of faulty reasoning under the following headings:
Targeting the person, not the idea: “Ad Hominem"
Stating that one of the most common errors in discussions is character assassination, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said, "Ad Hominem refers to attempting to criticize a person's ideas, perspective by attacking that person's character or personality traits. Instead of providing valid reasons while trying to refute the opposing person's idea, it involves using arguments unrelated to that idea but attacking the person's character. For example, if a foreign economics professor has made a comment about our country's economy, and someone says, 'That professor's views are absurd because he is a foreigner,' this would be an Ad Hominem."
Distorting words: “Straw Man fallacy"
Stating that intentionally distorting an opponent's words to weaken their argument is called the "Straw Man" fallacy, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said, "Here we are talking about caricaturing and distorting the opponent's argument by using exaggerated interpretations. It means twisting that idea and making it more open to attack. For example, if someone says, 'Social media shortens attention spans,' and the other person responds, 'So what? Should we not use social media at all? Should we completely stay away from technology and return to caves?' this is a Straw Man fallacy. Because the first person did not suggest rejecting technology, but merely conveyed an observation."
Mistaking sequence for causality: “Post Hoc"
Pointing out that the sequence of events does not always create a cause-and-effect relationship, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan explained the "Post Hoc" fallacy with these words:
"This is acting as if there is a causal relationship between two temporally sequential events, simply because one occurred before the other. It is the false belief that what happens later is always the result of what happened earlier. However, everything happens after something else. Every morning when I leave the house, the school bell across the street might ring. But the school bell ringing doesn't happen because I went outside."
Broad generalizations from small samples
Touching upon the dangers of making generalizations with a small number of scientifically invalid examples, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said, "Here, it is about reaching statistical conclusions based on a small number of examples to support a claim. For example, saying, 'Everyone in our family eats a lot of sweets, but no one has developed diabetes, so I don't believe sweets cause diabetes' is a statistical error with small numbers. Our family or circle of friends alone may not represent the general population. Such generalizations usually turn out to be false."
Emphasizing that conditions existing in nature cannot be an absolute measure for social morality or truth, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said, "To claim that something is good and valid simply because it is natural is faulty reasoning. Natural phenomena do not give us what is good, right, or moral; they are value-neutral. For example, the claim that child care should always and only be the mother's responsibility just because a baby's first nourishment is provided by the mother is an attempt to derive value from a biological fact. We cannot simply take the lifestyles of animals in nature and apply them to human life. Moreover, not everything natural is good for humans; there are also poisonous plants in nature."
Correlation and causality are not the same
Also addressing the confusion between correlation and causality, one of the common errors in interpreting statistical data, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan said, "We cannot always assume a cause-and-effect relationship just because there is a correlation (relationship) between two variables."
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pehlivan stated that accepting an idea as true simply because an authority said it or because the majority does it are also logical fallacies, saying, "What an authoritative person in any field states is not sufficient to prove the truth of an idea on its own. The fallacy 'If the majority does it, it's correct' is also dangerous. The fact that the majority does something does not indicate that it is right or ethical." Assoc. Prof. Dr. Bahar Muratoğlu Pehlivan concluded her presentation by also pointing out the fallacies of "Burden of Proof / Appeal to Ignorance" and "Circular Reasoning" often encountered in daily life and discussions, stating that the fallacy called "Burden of Proof and Appeal to Ignorance" is the situation where an unproven matter is accepted as true because its opposite cannot be proven, and the fallacy of "Circular Reasoning" is trying to prove the truth of an argument by basing it on the argument itself.
Seminar Series to Last 8 Weeks
The prominent topics and speakers to be discussed in the upcoming weeks of the program are as follows:
“On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Esennur Sirer, Head of the Radio, Television and Cinema Department, will evaluate the role of the Turkish TV series industry in cultural identity formation and its economic effects in the international market in her seminar titled ‘Reading Turkish TV Series: Culture and Representations.’ Prof. Dr. Gül Esra Atalay, Dean of the Faculty of Communication, will address Netiquette, the foundations of respectful and ethical communication in the digital age, in her presentation on Wednesday, December 17, 2025; she will discuss ways to prevent cyberbullying and online conflicts. On Wednesday, December 24, 2025, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özge Uğurlu Akbaş, will convey methods for developing a personal brand through body language, empathy, and conflict resolution skills with her ‘Effective Communication’ seminar. Prof. Dr. Özgül Dağlı, Head of the Advertising Department, will share consumer rights within the framework of Law No. 502 on Consumer Protection and tips for smart shopping under the title ‘Being a Conscious Consumer’ on Wednesday, January 7, 2026.”
Visual art and urban culture are examined
The seminar series also includes different disciplines within the field of media and communication. On January 21, 2026, Prof. Dr. And Algül, Head of the Visual Communication Design Department, will examine the effects of designs on social consciousness and perception through case analyses of advertising visuals in the "Design Readings" seminar. On February 4, 2026, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cem Tutar, Head of the Cartoon and Animation Department, will address the changing neighborhood life and the space-human relationship within the framework of urban transformation processes with his "Urban Readings: Urban Space and Neighborhood Culture" seminar.
The seminar series will conclude on February 11, 2025, with the "Citizen Journalism" seminar to be presented by Prof. Dr. Süleyman İrvan, Head of the Journalism Department. Prof. Dr. İrvan will explain the role of citizens participating in news production with digital technologies, the ethical principles of this phenomenon, and its differences from traditional journalism.