sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bulverism, No true Scotsman, Relativist fallacy

Fall 2019 PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking

Instructor: Dr. Ryan MacPherson Schedule: Section A: Honsey Hall 308 M/W/F, 2:30–3:20 p.m. www.ryancmacpherson.com Honsey Hall 311

Course Website: http://www.ryancmacpherson.com/courses

“... a very faulty syllogism in which there are four terms, no universal premise, no essential predication, no distributed middle, and many other faults, for logicians known full well that ‘an accidental term cannot be subsumed under a substantial term.’” Martin Luther, Confession concerning Christ’s Supper (1528), in Luther’s Works, 37:195.

Catalog Description: This course focuses on the construction and evaluation of logical , with applications to civic awareness and involvement. Attention is devoted to formal logical analysis, including syllogisms and basic symbolic logic, as well as effective written communication.

Relation to Students’ Curricular Needs: ▪ fulfills General Education Core Requirement Objective #3a: Personal Responsibility and Goal 3C ▪ required for the Minor in Philosophy ▪ elective for the B.A. in Computer Science (either PHIL201 or else MATH152 Calculus II) ▪ elective for the B.A. in Legal Studies (either PHIL201 or else COMM230 and Advocacy) ▪ elective for the B.A. in Liberal Arts (Philosophy Concentration) ▪ elective for the Minor in Legal Studies ▪ elective for the Minor in Psychology ▪ elective for the Paralegal Certificate

Required Texts: ▪ Kreeft, Peter. Socratic Logic. 3.1 ed. South Bend, Ind.: St. Augustine’s Press, 2014. ISBN-10: 9781587318085. ISBN-13: 978-1587318085. $40.00. ▪ Minetor, Randi. Robert’s Rules of Order in Action: How to Participate in Meetings with Confidence. Berkeley: Zephyros Press, 2015. ISBN-10: 1623156211. ISBN-13: 978-1623156213. $12.99. ▪ Wilson, Douglas, and N.D. Wilson. The Amazing Dr. Ransom’s Bestiary of Adorable : A Field Guide for Clear Thinkers. Moscow, Ida.: Canon Press, 2015. ISBN-10: 1-591281873. ISBN-13: 978-1591281870. $20.00. ▪ Instructional Packet for PHIL 201 (distributed first day of class)

Recommended Text: ▪ Lunsford, Andrea A. The St. Martin’s Handbook. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2015. ISBN 978-1457667244. (Copies are available for reference use in the History Resource Room, HH 300.)

Objectives of the College (OCs) Pertinent to This Course: 1. Recognize that the historic Christian faith professes that God the Holy Trinity is the source of all knowledge and truth, and that His wisdom is most clearly revealed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. especially: … D. Reflect on how your course of study is shaping you for a life of Christian vocation in the family, church, and society. 2. Demonstrate intellectual, creative, and problem-solving skills. PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 2 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

A. Identify and correctly frame problems using appropriate content, theories, and methods. B. Work both collaboratively and independently to produce innovative applications of knowledge, creative expressions, or new insights connected to bodies of knowledge from various fields. C. Gather relevant information on an issue to formulate a defensible conclusion, new idea, or connections among ideas. D. Analyze quantitative and qualitative data using logical reasoning skills. E. Articulate a message effectively in oral and written forms. 3. Demonstrate an understanding of personal and public responsibility. especially: … B. Reflect upon your involvement as an engaged citizen in different communities and cultures. C. Articulate how personal choices and stances impact you and others. 4. Develop habits of thinking that apply to a fulfilling life of learning. Especially: A. Apply content knowledge and skills flexibly to new situations, including professional and vocational contexts.

Understanding Your Vocation (OC 4A) Your “vocation” is how your station in life serves as a channel of God’s blessings to the people around you. Each person has multiple, overlapping stations in life (child, sibling, spouse, parent, student, neighbor, employee, registered voter, etc.). As indicated in OC 4A, Bethany Lutheran College seeks to expand your vocational opportunities so that you might better serve others to the glory of God.

Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs): Students will demonstrate an ability to: 1. Define terms clearly, and detect and correct and other deficiencies in definitions they encounter. 2. Recognize whether a proposition is true, false, or currently undecidable by appealing to faith, intuition, experience, and/or reason. 3. Evaluate the logical form of arguments to determine their validity, and similarly construct valid arguments of one’s own. 4. Construct valid syllogisms and demonstrate their validity by appealing to Aristotle’s 6 Rules, Euler diagrams, and Venn diagrams. 5. Distinguish between inductive and deductive forms of reasoning, and identify the strengths and weaknesses of each of these two approaches to argumentation. 6. Recognize and correct approximately 50 kinds of fallacies, both formal and material. 7. Lead a meeting according to Roberts’s Rules of Order (as chairperson) and keep clear and accurate records of the same (as secretary).

Assessment: Class Participation 10 93.34 –100.00 A Quizzes 10 90.00 – 93.33 A– 20 20 86.67 – 89.99 B+ 83.34 – 86.66 B Presentation #1 6 80.00 – 83.33 B– Fallacy Presentation #2 6 76.67 – 79.99 C+ 12 12 73.34 – 76.66 C 70.00 – 73.33 C– Meeting Chairperson #1 4 66.67 – 69.99 D+ 63.34 – 63.66 D Meeting Chairperson #2 4 60.00 – 63.33 D– Meeting Secretary #1 5 00.00 – 59.99 F Meeting Secretary #2 5 18 18

Exams I–V (@10 ea.) 50 50 50

Total 100 PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 3 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

Attendance and Class Participation (formative assessment of CLOs 1–7): Students are required to earn a “class participation grade” by maintaining punctual attendance with assigned texts at hand, completing assigned study questions and worksheets prior to class, actively participating in class discussions, and being absent no more than twice during the semester. Absences may be excused if a valid reason is supplied (such as a sports event for student athletes, or a prolonged illness). However, student athletes, speech team members, or others who miss a substantial number of classes should realize that their grade likely will suffer as a consequence of not being present to learn alongside their classmates. Thus, even “excused” absences can result indirectly in lower grades. The professor reserves the right to drop students from the class for excessive absences or habitually tardy attendance. To minimize absences, students may attend the other section of class (12:30 p.m. vs. 1:30 p.m.) when necessary.

Fallacy Reports (OC 6): Each student will present two Fallacy Reports, following a rubric that guides the student in defining a fallacy, contrasting it to other fallacies, distinguishing it from proper reasoning, and so forth. The student also will select three study questions from the assigned reading concerning that fallacy and lead a class discussion aiming to discover the correct answers to those questions. Students will be evaluated according to a rubric (see course packet).

Chairperson and Secretary under Roberts’s Rules of Order (OC 7): Every class session will be run according to Roberts’s Rules of Order in order that students may master the art of logically coordinating a group discussion. Each student will serve twice as chairperson and twice as secretary throughout the semester. For the first few sessions, the instructor will model how this is to be done. The instructor also will supply an agenda for each session. Each student’s performance as chairperson and secretary will be evaluated according to a rubric (see course packet).

Quizzes and Exams (assessment of CLOs 1–7): The course is divided into five parts. During each part, study questions, class discussion exercises, and quizzes serve as formative assessment tools, providing frequent feedback to students during the learning process. At the conclusion of each part, a written exam provides summative assessment. The exams may consist of multiple-choice, true/false, matching, short-answer questions, and essay questions. Each summative assessment will focus primarily on the part of the course that was just completed, but some questions may require students to recall historical developments discussed during previous parts of the course. Assessment V will in this respect be more comprehensive than the preceding assessments, plus it also will include a set of questions specifically designed to provide a comprehensive review of the semester’s material, including a review geography quiz, as noted below.

Students should prepare for the exams daily by: ▪ completing the assigned readings and study questions/worksheets on time ▪ paying attention to lectures ▪ participating in class discussions ▪ taking notes from both the lectures and the class discussions ▪ reviewing their notes periodically

Importance of Turning in Assignments on Time: Assignments are due at the beginning of class on the dates indicated below. If a student anticipates difficulty completing an assignment on time, he or she should request a deadline extension well in advance of the due date. This policy encourages planning and communication skills that will be helpful later in life. Generally, the less often and the longer in advance that a student requests a deadline extension, the more willing the professor will be to grant the request. Unless a student has received a deadline extension, then the following late penalties will apply: ▪ a 5% grade deduction for submitting an assignment after the start of class, but prior to 4:30 p.m. on the due date; and, ▪ an additional 10% grade deduction for each additional school day that the assignment is late. (“School day” means Monday through Friday, excluding school holidays.) Written assignments must be submitted in hard copy and stapled if longer than one page. PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 4 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

Importance of Taking Exams as Scheduled: Students who do not attend class on a scheduled assessment day risk receiving zero credit for that assessment. Personal vacation plans do not constitute a valid reason to miss a scheduled assessment. Student athletes or others who know in advance that they will miss an assessment due to an official college activity should discuss the matter with the instructor prior to the scheduled assessment date. Except for unusual circumstances, such students must make up any missed exam within two school days of the scheduled assessment date.

Cell Phones, Tablets, Laptops, etc. Cell phone use is strictly prohibited in the classroom, including the ten minutes preceding and the ten minutes following the scheduled class session. Cell phones should be turned off and stowed away during those times. Students needing to call, text, access the internet, or conduct any number of other tasks via cell phone should do so in the hallway outside of class. Benches are provided. The use of tablets, laptops, and similar devices are strongly discouraged. Why? Research shows that students understand and remember information better if they take handwritten notes than if they type. The instructor desires all students to maximize their learning potential. However, some students may have special needs that can best be accommodated through typing rather than handwriting. Therefore, this guideline discouraging the use of tablets and laptops will be suggested, but not enforced. However, any student who does use a tablet, laptop, etc. must due so solely for taking notes for this course; use of electronic devices for any other purpose during the scheduled class period is forbidden.

Development of Writing Skills: Philosophers are writers, and developing good writing skills is an essential component of a liberal arts education. Therefore, careless work will not be excused simply because this is a Philosophy course, rather than an English course. Students are encouraged to make full use of the available resources for strengthening their writing skills, including “Resources for Students/Writing Aids” on the course website, the instructions for writing projects provided in the course packet, and the services of the campus Writing Center (see below).

Plagiarism Policy: Plagiarism may be defined briefly as the presentation of another’s original work as if it is one’s own, whether by copying exact wording, using similar phrasing, or pursuing a similar course of argument. Avoiding plagiarism in writing assignments generally requires nothing more than giving credit where credit is due, by referring the reader to the original source and placing quotation marks around any copied language. (See The St. Martin’s Handbook, p. 241 and sec. 34d.) Students who commit an act of plagiarism risk a failing grade for the assignment or exam and for the entire course, and even expulsion from the college. The instructor will follow whatever due process policies are established by the college, both for the sake of the student and for the integrity of the college as an academic institution that respects the intellectual property rights of others.

Writing Center: Talented juniors and seniors are available at the Ada Stokes Writing Center (Memorial Library) to provide free consultations for students seeking to produce the best possible essays for any class assignment. The faculty has nominated these students based on their previously demonstrated skills in writing, revising, and polishing essays. Contact the Academic Resource Center (http://www.blc.edu/academic-resource-center) to schedule an appointment.

History Resource Room: Several professional periodicals that serve the historical discipline are available for student browsing in the History Resource Room (HH 300). Students majoring or minoring in history are encouraged to use this room for private study and quiet conversation. PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 5 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

SCHEDULE OF ASSIGNMENTS (see the last page for calendar dates) The instructor reserves the right to modify this schedule during the course of the semester should unusual circumstances arise. Generally, students can be confident that this schedule will be followed closely.

INTRODUCTION

1. Readings: None Discussion: What is truth? Can animals think? Can computers think? What is the role of logic in a liberal arts education? What about in the “real world”? Scheduling: Each student will be assigned for two specific Fallacy Reports and to serve twice each as Chairperson and as Secretary throughout the semester. Handouts: Syllabus, Course Packet

2. Readings: Socratic Logic, Introduction, sec. 1 (introduction to logic); Bestiary, xi–xvi (introduction to fallacies); Socratic Logic, pp. 68–71 (overview of fallacies); Robert’s Rules, chap. 1 (structure) Report 2A: Bestiary, #1 (), #2 (); Socratic Logic, III.2A (Ad Hominem) Note: All students are expected to skim read every section assigned for a Fallacy Report. Each student will be assigned to present two reports, and therefore must carefully read those sections in preparation to teach the rest of the class. Optional: Socratic Logic, Introduction, sec. 2 (for teachers); Socratic Logic, chap. XVI, secs. 1–6 (applying logic to other disciplines)

3. Readings: Socratic Logic, Introduction, secs. 4–5 (all of logic; three acts of the mind); Robert’s Rules, chap. 2 (meetings); Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 34 Report 3A: Socratic Logic, III.7B (), III.7C (Quality/Quantity) NOTE: For Step 7 (see rubric), simply pick three examples from within Kreeft’s explanations of these fallacies or else think of examples on your own. Optional: Socratic Logic, Introduction, sec. 3 (classical vs. modern logic)

PART I: UNDERSTANDING

4. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. I, secs. 1–4 (understanding, concepts, terms, universals, extension); Robert’s Rules, pp. 29–33 (main motions) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 34, 72 Report 4A: Bestiary, #18 (), #20 (Distinction without a Difference); Socratic Logic, III.1A (Equivocation) Assessment: Quiz on Days 1–4

5. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. II, secs. 1–2 (terms, categories); Robert’s Rules, pp. 33–36 (subsidiary motions) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 49, 55 Report 5A: Bestiary, #21 (Composition); Socratic Logic, III.3C (Composition)

6. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. II, secs. 3–4 (predicables, division/outlining); Robert’s Rules, pp. 36–39 (privileged motions) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 61, 64 Report 6A: Bestiary, #22 (Division); Socratic Logic, III.3D (Division) PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 6 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

7. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. IV, secs. 1–2 (definition, rules), III.4G (False Assumption), III.6B (Assumptive Disproof); Robert’s Rules, pp. 39–43 (incidental motions) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 130.I Report 7A: Socratic Logic, III.7D (Abstract/Concrete), III.7E (Legal/Psychological/Physical), III.7F (Essence/Existence) NOTE: For Step 7 (see rubric), simply pick three examples from within Kreeft’s explanations of these fallacies or else think of examples on your own. Assessment: Quiz on Days 5–7

8. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. IV, secs. 3–4 (kinds of definitions, limits of definitions); Robert’s Rules, pp. 43–45 (motions that resume a matter) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 131.A

9. Assessment: Exam on Part I

PART II: JUDGMENT

10. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. V, sec. 1 (judgments, propositions, sentences); Robert’s Rules, pp. 47–51 (rules for debate) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 82, 132.II.B (introduced on p. 131); (pp. 135.C—G will be done together in class, some today and some later) Report 10A: Bestiary, #19 (Amphiboly); Socratic Logic, III.1B (Amphiboly) Report 10B: Bestiary, #4 (); Socratic Logic, III.2B (Ad Verecundiam)

11. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. V, secs. 2–3 (truth, categorical propositions); Robert’s Rules, pp. 51–56 (motions not debatable) Report 11A: Bestiary, #24 (Repetition); Socratic Logic, III.1E (Slogan) Report 11B: Bestiary, #8 (Ad Baculum); Socratic Logic, III.2C (Ad Baculum)

12. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. V, secs. 4–5 (logical form, Euler’s circles); Robert’s Rules, pp. 57–66 (amendments) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 156.A–B (introduced on pp. 155–56) Assessment: Quiz on Days 10–12 Report 12A: Bestiary, #15 (Irrelevant Thesis); Socratic Logic, III.4B (Ignoratio Elenchi) Report 12B: Bestiary, #9 (Ad Populum); Socratic Logic, III.2F (Ad Populum)

13. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. V, secs. 6–7 (tricky propositions, distribution); Robert’s Rules, pp. 66–68 (special rules for amendments) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 157.C–159.D (introduced on pp. 155–56)

14. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XV, secs. 1–4 (writing logical essays, writing Socratic dialogues, having a Socratic debate, using the Socratic method on difficult people) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 164 In Class: Reading Plato’s Ion (a Socratic dialogue) aloud together Assessment: Quiz on Days 13–14

15. Assessment: Exam on Part II PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 7 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

PART III: DEDUCTIVE REASONING

16. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. VI, secs. 1–2 (immediate inference, conversion); Robert’s Rules, chap. 6 (postponement and referral) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 159E (introduced on pp. 155–56), 171.A Report 16A: Bestiary, #49 (); Socratic Logic, III.6F (Shifting the Burden of Proof)

17. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. VI, secs. 3–4 (obversion, contraposition, inversion); Robert’s Rules, chap. 7 (democratic process) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 161.F (introduced on pp. 155–56), 172.B Report 17A: Bestiary, #16 (); Socratic Logic, III.1G (Straw Man)

18. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. VII, secs. 1–2 (contradiction, square of opposition) Robert’s Rules, pp. 85–90 (voting) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 162.G (introduced on pp. 155–56), 174, 178

19. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. VII, sec. 4 (tricky propositions) Optional: Socratic Logic, chap. VII, sec. 3 (existential import) Report 19A: Bestiary, #23 (Accent); Socratic Logic, III.1C (Accent) Report 19B: Bestiary, #17 (); Socratic Logic, III.6E (Answering a Different Argument) Assessment: Quiz on Days 16–19

20. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. VII, sec. 5 (practical applications); Socratic Logic, chap. XV, sec. 5 (reading Socratically) Report 20A: Bestiary, #7 (); Socratic Logic, III.3B (Special Case) Report 20B: Bestiary, #25 (); Socratic Logic, III.4D ()

21. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. VIII, secs. 1–4 (reason, syllogistic foundations, arguments, explanations) Robert’s Rules, pp. 91–93 (nominations and elections) Report 21A: Bestiary, #50 (Pomo ); Socratic Logic, III.4F (Contradictory Premises) Report 21B: Socratic Logic, III.6D (Substituting an Explanation for Proof), III.4E (Circular) NOTE: For Step 7 (see rubric), simply pick three examples from within Kreeft’s explanations of these fallacies or else think of examples on your own.

22. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. VIII, sec. 5 (truth, validity); Robert’s Rules, chap. 9 (leadership) Optional: Socratic Logic, Appendix (problems with mathematical logic) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 199 Report 22A: Bestiary, #10 (Ad Misericordiam); Socratic Logic, III.2D (Ad Misericordiam)

23. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. IX, secs. 1–2 (“because,” 4 causes); Robert’s Rules, Appendix (“What to Say and How to Say It”) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 205 Report 23A: Bestiary, #6 (), #12 (), #5 () Assessment: Quiz on Days 20–23

24. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. IX, secs. 3–6 (classifying and mapping arguments, deduction and induction) Robert’s Rules, Glossary Report 24A: Bestiary, #3 (Transfer), #11 (Personal Incredulity)

25. Assessment: Exam on Part III PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 8 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

PART IV: SYLLOGISTIC DEDUCTIONS

26. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. X, sec. 1 (syllogisms) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 219 Report 26A: Bestiary, #14 (Irrelevant Goals), Bestiary, #27 (Exigency)

27. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. X, secs. 2–3 (objections to syllogisms) Report 27A: Bestiary, #28 (), #44 (Hooked on Feeling) Report 27B: Bestiary, #37 (), Bestiary, #35 (Compromise)

28. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. X, secs. 4–5 (demonstrative syllogisms, convincing syllogisms), III.6A (Refuting the Conclusion) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 234 Report 28A: Bestiary, #41 (Cool-Shame); Socratic Logic, III.2E Ad Ignominiam) Assessment: Quiz on Days 26–28

29. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XI, sec. 1 (Euler’s circles) Report 29A: Bestiary, #43 (Polling Fallacy); Socratic Logic, III.5G (Slanting the Question) Report 29B: Bestiary, #45 (Ad Imperium); Socratic Logic, III.6C (Ignoring the Argument)

30. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XI, sec. 2 (Aristotle’s 6 Rules) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 253, 254 Report 30A: Bestiary, #46 (Hyperlogicism), Socratic Logic, III.4A (Non Sequitur)

31. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XI, secs. 3–4 (“Barbara Celarent,” Venn diagrams) Report 31A: Bestiary, #47 (Two-Story Fallacy), #42 (Milqetoastery) Report 31B: Socratic Logic, III.3A (Dicto Simpliciter), III.3F (Context) NOTE: For Step 7 (see rubric), simply pick three examples from within Kreeft’s explanations of these fallacies or else think of examples on your own. Assessment: Quiz on Days 29–31

32. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XII, sec. 1 (enthymemes) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 271.1–36 Report 32A: Bestiary, #40 (Sweeping Generalization); Socratic Logic, III.1F (Hyperbole), III.3G (Stereotyping)

33. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XII, secs. 2–3 (sorites, epicheiremas) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 273.37–71 (introduced on p. 271), 283 Report 33A: Bestiary, #48 (Sensitivity Shaming); Socratic Logic, III.6G (Winning the Argument, Losing the Arguer);

34. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XII, sec. 4 (mapping complex arguments) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 285

35. Assessment: Exam on Part IV PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 9 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

PART V: SCIENTIFIC REASONING

36. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIII, secs. 1–2 (hypothetical syllogisms, reductio ad absurdum); Socratic Logic, III.5C (Contrary to Fact) Report 36A: Bestiary, #32 () #33 () Report 36B: Bestiary, #29 (Petitio Principii); Socratic Logic, III.4C (Petitio Principii), III.1D (Slanting/Question-Begging Epithet)

37. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIII, sec. 3 (practical syllogisms), III.7A (Reductionism) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 299 Report 37A: Bestiary, #38 (False Analogy); Socratic Logic, III.5D (False Analogy)

38. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIII, secs. 4–5 (dysjunctive and conjunctive syllogisms) Exercises: Socratic Logic, pp. 302, 305 Assessment: Quiz on Days 36–38

39. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIII, sec. 6 (dilemmas); Socratic Logic, chap. XVII, secs. 1– 3 (mathematical logic, truth tables) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 311 Report 39A: Bestiary, #34 (Bifurcation); Socratic Logic, III.3E (Black-and-White) Report 39B: Bestiary, #39 (Hasty Generalization); Socratic Logic, III.5A (Hasty Generalization)

40. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIV, secs. 1–2 (induction, generalizations) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 317 Report 40A: Bestiary, #26 (Selective Arrangement); Socratic Logic, III.5F (Selective Evidence)

41. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIV, sec. 3–4 (Mill’s Methods, scientific hypotheses) Report 41A: Bestiary, #13 (Ad Ignorantiam); Socratic Logic, III.2G (Ad Ignorantiam), III.5E (Silence) Report 41B: Bestiary, #36 (); Socratic Logic, III.7G (Confusing Natural with Common)

42. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIV, sec. 5–6 (statistical probability, analogy) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 333 Report 42A: Bestiary, #30 (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc), #31 (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc in Statistics); Socratic Logic, III.5B (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc) Assessment: Quiz on Days 25–42

43. Readings: Socratic Logic, chap. XIV, sec 7 (a fortiori and a minore arguments) Exercises: Socratic Logic, p. 398 Discussion: Review of Parts Parts I-V Optional: Socratic Logic, 113–22 (“Love is a Fallacy”)

44. Assessment: Exam on Part V, including comprehensive questions on Parts I–IV (See schedule at: http://www.blc.edu/exams.) PHILOSOPHY 201: Logic and Critical Thinking Page 10 of 10 Bethany Lutheran College, Fall 2019 Ryan C. MacPherson, Ph.D.

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Aug. 19 20 21 22 23 Lesson 1 Lesson 2

26 27 28 29 30 Lesson 3 Lesson 4 Lesson 5 Quiz Sept. 2 3 4 5 6 Labor Day Lesson 6 Lesson 7 Quiz 9 10 11 12 13 Lesson 8 Lesson 9 Lesson 10 Exam 16 17 18 19 20 Lesson 11 Lesson 12 Lesson 13 Quiz 23 24 25 26 27 Lesson 14 Lesson 15 Lesson 16 Quiz Exam Oct. 30 1 2 3 4 Lesson 17 Lesson 18 Lesson 19 Quiz 7 8 9 10 11 Lesson 20 Lesson 21 Lesson 22

14 15 16 17 18 Lesson 23 Lesson 24 Fall Break Fall Break Quiz 21 22 23 24 25 Lesson 25 Advising Day Lesson 26 Exam Nov. 28 29 30 31 1 Lesson 27 Lesson 28 Lesson 29 Quiz 4 5 6 7 8 Lesson 30 Lesson 31 Lesson 32 Quiz 11 12 13 14 15 Lesson 33 Lesson 34 Lesson 35 Exam 18 19 20 21 22 Lesson 36 Lesson 37 Lesson 38 Quiz 25 26 27 28 29 Lesson 39 Lesson 40 Thanksgiving Break

Dec 2 3 4 5 6 Lesson 41 Lesson 42 Lesson 43 Quiz Exam V is during Final Exam Week. See https://www.blc.edu/final-exams for the schedule.