PHIL 106: Critical Thinking                                                                 

LARKIN: Fall 2002

 

Syllabus

 

 

I.  Vital Information

            A.  Course

                        1.  Number: PHIL 106.001

                        2.  Room: PH 0302

                        3.  Time: MWF 8:00-8:50 AM

 

            B.  Instructor

                        1.  Name: William S. Larkin

                        2.  Office: PH 2207

                        3.  Office Hours: MWF 12:00-1:00 PM

                        4.  Office Phone: 650-2643

                        5.  E-mail: wlarkin@siue.edu

 

 

 

II.  Course Description:

 

The main objective of this course is to provide students with the means to self-consciously distinguish good reasoning from bad reasoning and thereby gain autonomous control over their own rational cognitive processes.  We will foster habits of thought that promote an optimum blend of open-mindedness and skepticism.  We will develop a conceptual repertoire sufficient to distinguish such things as an argument’s structure from its content, validity from truth, factual claims from value judgments, and necessary truths from contingent truths.  And we will learn various techniques for analyzing and evaluating both deductive and inductive argument structures.  In the end students should be well equipped to efficiently critique the arguments of others as well as effectively produce arguments of their own.

 

 

 

III. Text:

 

Rental: An Introduction to Logic, Copi and Cohen

 

 

 

 

IV.  Course Requirements:

A.  Reading Questions: There will be eight reading assignments for which I will provide a set of questions.  Answers to these questions must be typed and handed in at the beginning of class on the day that we discuss that reading.  Each set of reading questions will be graded for effort on a 4-point scale as follows:

                                    3 = complete and on time

                                    2 = either incomplete or late (not more than one class period)

                                    1 = both incomplete and late

                                    0 = not handed in within one class period of due date.

The combined score on the reading questions will constitute 20% of the semester grade.

 

B.  Tests:  There will be three in-class, problems-oriented tests.  The test problems will be of the same type as those given for homework and worked on in lecture.  One test will be on evaluating deductive arguments and one on evaluating inductive arguments.  Each test will be worth 15% of the semester grade.

 

C.     Argument Analysis:  There will be a project involving the analysis and evaluation of an argumentative essay.  The final product will be in the form of an outline that clearly lays out and evaluates the essay’s topic, thesis, and argument structure.  There will also be a rough draft required that will be peer-reviewed.  This project will be worth 15% of the semester grade.

 

D.     Final Exam:  There will be a final exam given in class on Thursday, December 12th; 8:00-9:40 AM.  The final will cover material from the three tests as well as some new material.  The final exam will be worth 20% of the semester grade.

 

 

V.  Expectations and Policies

A.  In Class: In class students are expected to actively participate in the appropriate

manner by listening, taking notes, discussing, participating in groups, etc.  Perhaps most importantly students need to ask questions when they are not sure whether they understand some material.  Because an open atmosphere where people feel comfortable expressing their own views is essential in this course, it is above all else expected that students show respect for others in the classroom.  No behavior that is distracting to other students or the instructor can be tolerated.  Repeated requests to refrain from such behavior will negatively affect a student’s grade for the semester.

 

B.  Outside Class:  Outside class students are expected to prepare for class by reading,

preparing reading questions, practicing homework problems, and reviewing notes from previous lectures to see if they need to ask for clarification.  Students are also encouraged to go over materials with others in the class and to visit the instructor during office hours. 

 

 

 

 

VI.  Course Schedule

 

Week

Monday

Wednesday

Friday

One

Syllabus

Value of Critical Thinking

Plato’s “Euthyphro”

Two

Arguments: Structure and Content

Arguments: Structural Analysis

Descartes’ “Meditation One”

Three

OFF

Fallacies of Relevance

Deductive Concepts

Four

Truth and Validity

Rowe’s “Cosmological Argument”

Categorical Logic

Five

Categorical Syllogisms

Practice

Review

Six

TEST #1

Truth-Functional Logic

Translations

Seven

Practice

 

Truth Tables

Practice

Eight

Argument Forms

 

Practice

Review

Nine

TEST #2

Inductive Concepts

Inductive Generalization

Ten

Argument by Analogy

Argument to the Best Explanation

Refutation by Logical Analogy

Eleven

Fallacies of Presumption

Practice

Review

Twelve

TEST #3

 

Content Distinctions

Conceptual Analysis

Thirteen

Moral Truth and Moral Reasoning

Rachels, “Cultural Relativism”

Relativism cont.

Fourteen

Argument Analysis Peer Review

Singer, “Animals and the Value of Life”

Animals cont.

Fifteen

Argument Analysis DUE

Final Exam Review

Final Exam Review

 

 

 

 

 

FINAL EXAM:  Thursday, December 12th; 8:00-9:40 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VII.  Outline of Course Content

 

I.                   The Nature and Significance of Critical Thinking

A.     Readings

1.       Plato, “Euthyphro”

2.       Descartes, “Meditation One”

 

B.     Objectives of Critical Thinking

1.       Maximize true/useful beliefs

2.       Minimize false/harmful beliefs

 

C.     Path to Autonomous Control

1.       Virtues

a.       Open-Mindedness

b.       Skepticism

2.       Evaluating Reasons

a.       Concepts for Analyzing Arguments

b.       Concepts for Evaluating Arguments

 

D.     Fallacies of Relevance

 

 

II.                Deductive Arguments

A.     Readings

1.       Rowe, “Cosmological Argument”

2.       Anselm, “Ontological Argument”

 

B.     Concepts for Analyzing Deductive Arguments

 

C.     Categorical Logic

1.       Square of Opposition

2.       Venn Diagrams

 

D.     Truth-Functional Logic

1.       Translations

2.       Truth-Tables

3.       Basic Argument Forms

 

E.      Refutation by Logical Analogy

 

F.      Formal Fallacies

 

 

III.             Inductive Arguments

A.     Readings

1.       Steele, “I’m Black, You’re White, Whose Inocent?”

2.       Lycan, “Robots and Minds”

 

B.     Concepts for Analyzing Inductive Arguments

 

C.     Inductive Argument Forms

 

D.     Fallacies of Presumption

 

 

IV.              Content

A.     Readings

1.       Ayer, “The Elimination of Metaphysics”

 

B.     Distinctions

1.       A priori/A posteriori

2.       Analytic/Synthetic

3.       Necessary/Contingent

4.       Logical Necessity/Physical Necessity

 

C.     Logical Truth

 

D.     Conceptual Analysis

 

E.      Fallacies of Ambiguity

 

 

V.                 Moral Truth and Practical Reasoning

A.     Readings

1.       Singer, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”

2.       Rachels, “Cultural Relativism”

 

B.     Moral Truth

1.       Grades of Moral Truth

2.       Cultural Relativism

 

C.     Practical Reasoning

1.       Varieties of “goods”

2.       Means/End Reasoning

 

D.     Fundamental Moral Principles

1.       Divine Command Ethics

2.       Sanctity of Human Life

3.       Principle of Utility

4.       Categorical Imperative