A series of public online seminars has begun

Üsküdar University Faculty of Communication has launched an eight week free online seminar series designed to share its academic expertise with the public. In the first week of the project, Assoc. Prof. 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 Mind.”

Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan said: “Critical thinking, in its simplest definition, is a person’s ability to think about their own thinking and gain a critical perspective on this act.”

think about their own thinking and gain a critical perspective on this act.”

Üsküdar University Faculty of Communication draws attention with its new project carried out within the mission of social contribution and science communication. The seminar series, which will be held online every Wednesday at 20.00 and will run for eight weeks, started on November 19, 2025. Participation is completely free, and those who follow the program in full will receive a "Digital Participation Certificate." The series brings expert academics to the public on a wide range of topics including critical thinking, digital etiquette, the sociological reading of Turkish TV series and conscious consumerism.

The first topic of the seminar series is critical thinking skills

Opening the series, Assoc. Prof. Bahar Muratoğlu Pehlivan delivered her presentation titled “Critical Thinking Skills: Recognizing the Traps of Our Mind,” addressing the concept of “critical thinking,” which has vital importance in today’s world where information pollution is widespread.

Emphasizing that this concept is not merely an indicator of intelligence but a learnable and developable skill set, Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan said: “Critical thinking, at its simplest, is thinking about our own thinking and gaining a critical perspective on that act. It is the ability to make analyses based on sound reasoning processes applied to our own thinking systems in all areas of life. As the Critical Thinking Community also states, it is a guide for action. It is the method of effectively analyzing the information we acquire through observation, experience and communication. However, the first truth we must acknowledge is this: human thinking is prone to error.”

Ideas we assume are our own are often learned assumptions

Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan stated that people are shaped by family, environment, the education system and media from the moment they are born, and that many ideas we believe to be our own are actually learned assumptions.

Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan said: “Culture shapes our daily life practices from the moment we are born. We turn these into habits without questioning them. To become critical thinkers, we must first recognize these internalized assumptions, learn to think independently of authorities and activate the mechanism of evidence based decision making. Being able to look at our own culture, our own thinking patterns and our own habits through a critical and questioning lens also means this: being able to understand societies and cultures that are not our own and the people raised within them, even when their ways of life differ greatly from ours. Differences such as religion, language and culture should not prevent us from thinking fairly and objectively.”

Egocentrism and sociocentrism stand in the way of rational thinking

Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan noted that the two main tendencies that hinder rational thinking are Egocentrism and Sociocentrism. Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan explained that egocentrism involves a person prioritizing their own interest and sense of being right under any circumstance. “A person may sometimes behave inconsistently or irrationally in order to maintain their own beliefs. The aim in an egocentric attitude is not to reach objective or accurate information but to justify one's own thinking. Therefore, a person sees evidence that supports their view and ignores evidence that disproves it.”

Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan emphasized that sociocentrism lies at the foundation of social polarization: “The group we belong to, whether a nation, a sports team or a political party, dictates what is right and what is wrong. We overlook our own group's mistakes, while magnifying the mistakes of the other group. We act with the belief that ‘we are good, they are bad.’ Yet critical thinking requires the ability to ask: ‘If I had been born into a different society, would I hold the same values?’”

Scientific knowledge must be falsifiable

Discussing “Pseudoscience,” which appears scientific but lacks scientific grounding, Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan explained the mechanisms behind astrology, fortune telling and certain spiritual beliefs. “Pseudosciences claim to be scientific but construct their hypotheses in a way that protects them from being disproven. Scientific knowledge must be falsifiable. In approaches like ‘Ask the universe and it will happen,’ when the desired outcome does not occur, the blame is placed on the individual with statements such as ‘You did not wish hard enough.’ This is a circular reasoning fallacy.” Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan noted that the reason people often find themselves in fortune telling or horoscope interpretations is the “Barnum Effect.” “When someone tells you, ‘You seem tough on the outside, but you are very emotional inside,’ you tend to accept it because it is a general statement that can apply to almost everyone. Humans dislike uncertainty and seek meaning. Therefore, we remember the one prediction that comes true and forget the thirty that do not. This is called ‘selective thinking.’”

What are flawed reasoning patterns?

Addressing one of the most important components of the discipline of critical thinking, Assoc. Prof. Bahar Muratoğlu Pehlivan discussed logical fallacies: “Faulty reasoning refers to the logical errors we make when forming arguments, defending an idea or presenting a claim. Arguments that are poorly justified, based on incorrect premises or shaped through incomplete or flawed reasoning fall under this category. Some of these flawed reasoning types have been given specific names because they appear frequently in daily life, the media and politics.”

Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan then detailed the most common types of fallacious reasoning.

Targeting the person instead of the idea: Ad Hominem

Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan noted that one of the most common mistakes in discussions is attacking the person rather than the idea. Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan explained: “Ad Hominem refers to criticizing a person’s ideas or viewpoints by attacking their personality or character traits. Instead of providing valid reasons to refute the argument, a person uses statements unrelated to the idea but directed at the individual. For example, if a foreign economics professor comments on our country’s economy and someone says, ‘His views are nonsense because he is a foreigner,’ this is an Ad Hominem fallacy.”

Distorting someone’s words: the Straw Man fallacy

Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan explained that intentionally twisting an opponent’s words to weaken their argument is called the “Straw Man” fallacy.
“This involves caricaturing or exaggerating the other person’s argument in order to misrepresent it and make it easier to attack. For example, if someone says, ‘Social media shortens attention spans,’ and the other person replies, ‘So what are you saying, we should never use social media? Should we avoid technology entirely and live in a cave?’ this is a Straw Man fallacy. The first person did not suggest rejecting technology but only expressed an observation.”

Mistaking sequence for causation: Post Hoc

Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan emphasized that the sequence in which events occur does not always imply a cause and effect relationship. Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan explained the “Post Hoc” fallacy as follows: “This fallacy assumes that because one event happens before another, the earlier event must have caused the later one. It is the false belief that whatever comes later is always the consequence of what came before. However, everything follows something else. For instance, every morning when I leave the house the school bell across the street might be ringing, but the bell does not ring because I stepped outside.”

Large generalizations from small samples

Discussing the dangers of making generalizations based on a small number of examples that lack scientific validity, Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan said: “This refers to drawing statistical conclusions from only a few examples to support a claim. For instance, saying ‘Everyone in our family eats a lot of sweets but no one has diabetes, so I do not believe sweets cause diabetes’ is an error based on small numbers. Our family or friend group may not represent the general population. Such generalizations often lead to incorrect conclusions.”

Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan added that natural phenomena cannot serve as absolute standards for social morality or truth: “Arguing that something is good or valid simply because it is natural is faulty reasoning. Natural facts do not tell us what is good, right or moral; they contain no inherent values. For example, arguing that childcare should always and only be the mother’s responsibility because a baby’s first nourishment comes from the mother is an attempt to derive a value from a biological fact. We cannot directly apply the living patterns of animals in nature to human life. Moreover, not everything natural is good for humans; poisonous plants are also natural.”

Correlation and causation are not the same

Touching on another common mistake in interpreting statistical data, Assoc. Prof. Pehlivan said: “Just because two variables show a correlation does not mean there is a cause and effect relationship.” Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan added that accepting a claim as true simply because an authority figure said it or because most people believe it is also a logical fallacy: “The statements of an authority figure in any field are not enough to prove a claim true. The fallacy of ‘If the majority does it, it must be right’ is also dangerous. Something being commonly done does not make it correct or ethical.”

Assoc. Prof. Bahar Muratoğlu Pehlivan concluded her talk by addressing two logical fallacies frequently encountered in daily life and debates: “Burden of Proof and Appeal to Ignorance” and “Circular Reasoning.” Assoc. Prof. Muratoğlu Pehlivan explained that the Appeal to Ignorance fallacy involves accepting a claim as true simply because it has not been proven false, and that Circular Reasoning involves attempting to prove an argument by relying on the argument itself.

The Seminar Series Will Continue for Eight Weeks

The prominent topics and speakers scheduled for the coming weeks are as follows: “On Wednesday December 3, 2025, Assoc. Prof. Esennur Sirer, Head of the Department of Radio Television and Cinema, will evaluate the role of the Turkish TV series industry in the formation of cultural identity and its economic impact in international markets in her seminar titled ‘Reading Turkish TV Series: Culture and Representations.’ On Wednesday December 17, 2025, Prof. Gül Esra Atalay, Dean of the Faculty of Communication, will discuss Netiquette, the foundation of respectful and ethical communication in the digital age, and explore ways to prevent cyberbullying and online conflicts. On Wednesday December 24, 2025, Assoc. Prof. Özge Uğurlu Akbaş will present the seminar ‘Effective Communication,’ addressing methods for improving personal branding through body language, empathy and conflict resolution skills. On Wednesday January 7, 2026, Prof. Özgül Dağlı, Head of the Department of Advertising, will explain consumer rights within the framework of Law No. 502 on Consumer Protection and share key tips for making rational purchasing decisions in her seminar titled ‘Being a Conscious Consumer.’”

Visual arts and urban culture will also be explored

The seminar series also includes sessions from different disciplines within media and communication. On January 21, 2026, Prof. And Algül, Head of the Department of Visual Communication Design, will examine the effects of visual designs on social perception and public consciousness through case analyses of advertising visuals in the seminar “Design Readings.” On February 4, 2026, Assoc. Prof. Cem Tutar, Head of the Department of Cartoon and Animation, will discuss changing neighborhood life and the relationship between space and people within the context of urban transformation in his seminar “Urban Readings: Urban Space and Neighborhood Culture.”

The series will conclude on February 11, 2026 with a seminar titled “Citizen Journalism” presented by Prof. Süleyman İrvan, Head of the Department of Journalism. He will explain the role of citizens participating in news production through digital technologies, the ethical principles of this phenomenon and how it differs from traditional journalism.