Improving your conclusions using generative AI

- Are you ready to play a game with ChatGPT that will help you improve the quality of your conclusions and decisions? The game will test your knack for sorting claims into facts, truth claims, or opinions. This sorting is important because it's how you measure the strength of your conclusions and make sure your final judgements are built on solid evidence and clear reasoning. That's the goal of this last part of pick pack, to improve your chances at arriving at reliable conclusions. We'll borrow a case where a college basketball team's management had to decide whether to invest in a new training facility. They use gen AI to sort their claims, improve their conclusions, and make a wiser decision. First, let's clear up common confusion about the difference between facts, truth claims, and opinions from a critical thinking standpoint. Facts are conclusions that can be verified and proven to be true or false. Truth claims are conclusions that some believe are true, but they require context and are subject to debate. Truth claims are often supported by evidence that's not universally accepted or verifiable. They require more investigation and scrutiny to establish validity. Opinions deal with personal views, beliefs, or judgments that are subjective, are not necessarily based on fact and vary from person to person. With the training facility investment decision, the management team had claims to consider from potential recruits, coaches, sportscasters, college administrators, students, and fans. Okay, here's the game. All share each claim made by the team's various stakeholders. But before we see how gen AI sorted each claim into a fact, truth, or opinion, you'll get a chance to do the sorting. Feel free to pause the video after each claim. Then we'll see how your sorting compares to ChatGPT's, ready? Potential recruits: "It's our belief that recruits "would prefer a team with new facilities, "as it seems to indicate a commitment to excellence." ChatGPT says, this is an opinion because it reflects a subjective belief about what might influence recruits' decisions and what new facilities may indicate, without presenting concrete evidence. Coaches: "Historically, teams focusing on raw talent "and coaching have outperformed those relying "on high-tech facilities." ChatGPT says, this is a truth claim because it's asserting something that could be proven with historical data, but may require context, such as specific teams or timeframes being referenced. Sportscaster: "Statistics show that investment "in sports facilities correlates positively "with a college's overall reputation." ChatGPT says, this is a fact, assuming the sportscaster is citing actual verifiable statistics. However, the management team should verify the source of these statistics to confirm their accuracy and relevance. College administrators: "Investing in top-notch facilities "is the standard for leading sports colleges." ChatGPT says, this is an opinion because what constitutes a standard can vary. Unless there's a clearly stated standard, it's not a measurable fact. It's an evaluative statement about what the college administrators believe to be a best practice. Students: "Our college should prioritize "academic improvements over sports facilities." ChatGPT says, this is an opinion, reflecting the student's values and priorities. It's a prescriptive statement about what should be done, which cannot be objectively proven as true or false. And here is a tricky one from fans. "The team has won two championships without a new facility, "proving it's not necessary for success." This is a hybrid claim, part fact, part truth. The team has won two championships without a new facility is a verifiable piece of historical data. If the team actually won two championships, then this statement is a fact that can be proven with records. However, proving it's not necessary for success is a truth claim because it infers a cause-and-effect relationship that would need further evidence to support. Just because the team has been successful in the past without new facilities, doesn't necessarily prove that new facilities are not necessary for future success. It's a conclusion that's contingent on many variables. How did your sorting compare to ChatGPT? Once you've sorted your claims into facts, truth, opinions, check your sorting against what gen AI suggests. Then synthesize the information by doing what the basketball management team did. Number one, prioritize facts. Use established facts as the backbone of your conclusion, ensuring it's grounded and verifiable and objective information. Two, consider the relevance of truth claims. Look at whether they agree with or question the facts and determine whether you need more information to reach a well-supported conclusion. Finally, three, balance with opinions. Reflect on opinions to gauge the subjective landscape around the topic so you can tailor your conclusions to address concerns, expectations, and values of those affected by the decision. Knowing whether your conclusion stands on facts, truth claims, or opinions ensures that you're not just confidently asserting your stance, but that you're prepared for counter-arguments and ready to adapt to new information. This is critical thinking.