Course ID: PHIL R100 Curriculum Committee Approval Date: 04/12/2017 Catalog Start Date: Fall 2018 COURSE OUTLINE OXNARD COLLEGE I. Course Identification and Justification: A. Proposed course id: PHIL R100 Banner title: Critical Thinking Full title: Critical Thinking Previous course id: PHIL R100 Banner title: Critical Thinking Full title: Critical Thinking B. Reason(s) course is offered: This course fulfills general education requirements in critical thinking for the A.A. degree and CSU. C. Reason(s) for current outline revision: Update per five-year review cycle: textbooks, minor corrections from previous outline; etc. D. C-ID: 1. C-ID Descriptor: 2. C-ID Status: Not Applicable E. Co-listed as: Current: None Previous: II. Catalog Information: A. Units: Current: 3.00 Previous: 3.00 B. Course Hours: 1. In-Class Contact Hours: Lecture: 52.5 Activity: 0 Lab: 0 2. Total In-Class Contact Hours: 52.5 3. Total Outside-of-Class Hours: 105 4. Total Student Learning Hours: 157.5 C. Prerequisites, Corequisites, Advisories, and Limitations on Enrollment: 1. Prerequisites Current: Previous: 2. Corequisites Current: Previous: 3. Advisories: Current: Previous: 4. Limitations on Enrollment: Current: Previous: D. Catalog description: Current: This course provides an introduction to critical thinking by emphasizing analytical reasoning. The course examines inductive and deductive reasoning as well as other forms of persuasion. Topics include analysis of arguments, explanations, and informal fallacies that occur in the natural sciences, social sciences (including applied ethics), the humanities, (such as philosophy or art criticism), as well as everyday discourse. Critical thinking and problem-solving skills to be developed include identifying and evaluating arguments; recognizing and correcting reasoning errors; constructing arguments based on sound methods of reasoning; and assessing subjects from multiple theoretical points of view. Previous, if different: This course provides an introduction to critical thinking by emphasizing analytical reasoning. The course examines inductive and deductive reasoning as well as other forms of persuasion. Topics include: analysis of arguments, explanations, and informal fallacies that occur in the natural sciences, social sciences (including applied ethics), the humanities, (such as philosophy or art criticism), as well as everyday discourse. Critical thinking and problem-solving skills to be developed include: identifying and evaluating arguments; recognizing and correcting reasoning errors; constructing arguments based on sound methods of reasoning; and assessing subjects from multiple theoretical points of view. E. Fees: Current: $ None Previous, if different: $ F. Field trips: Current: Will be required: [ ] May be required: [X] Will not be required: [ ] Previous, if different: Will be required: [ ] May be required: [ ] Will not be required: [ ] G. Repeatability: Current: A - Not designed as repeatable Previous: A - Not designed as repeatable H. Credit basis: Current: Letter Graded Only [X] Pass/No Pass [ ] Student Option [ ] Previous, if different: Letter Graded Only [ ] Pass/No Pass [ ] Student Option [ ] I. Credit by exam: Current: Petitions may be granted: [ ] Petitions will not be granted: [X] Previous, if different: Petitions may be granted: [ ] Petitions will not be granted: [ ] III. Course Objectives: Upon successful completion of this course, the student should be able to: A. Distinguish fact from value, and knowledge from opinion. B. Distinguish narration from persuasion, as well as rational explanation from rational justification. C. Assess the strength or validity of the connection between premises and conclusions, evaluating whether conclusions follow from premises, deductively or inductively. D. Analyze and evaluate arguments from a variety of subject area sources in terms of logical structure, use of language, type of reasoning, and type of evidence offered. E. Analyze and evaluate assumptions and implications, both hidden and stated, of arguments from diverse sources. F. Recognize and assess the use and relevance of primary inductive reasoning forms, such as appeal to analogy, causal reasoning, probability and statistics, and scientific hypothesis testing. G. Identify informal fallacies and explain the nature of their reasoning errors. H. Distinguish between the appropriate use of scientific methodologies and the abuse of pseudo-scientific facsimiles. I. Construct arguments and be able to refute poorly reasoned arguments using a variety of logical techniques. J. Demonstrate awareness of cultural diversity (a good thing) and cultural bias (a bad thing) if they appear in argumentation. IV. Student Learning Outcomes: A. Evaluate the quality/soundness of inductive arguments. B. Apply one or more methods of inductive reasoning, for example, use of analogy, or causal reasoning, or probability claims, or hypothesis tests, etc. C. Student will give reasons pro and con in discussion of an argument, theory or position in philosophy. D. Identify fallacious forms of reasoning. V. Course Content: Topics to be covered include, but are not limited to: A. The Elements of Logic and Critical Thinking 1. Arguments a. Descriptions, explanations, justifications and other uses of language b. Premises and conclusions c. Assumptions and implications 2. Reasoning a. Deductive and inductive inferences i. Valid versus invalid inferences ii. Strong versus weak inferences iii. Sound versus unsound arguments iv. Necessary versus empirical statement-claims v. How deduction and induction can operate together in analysis b. Varieties of inductive reasoning (inductive generalization) i. Appealing to a typical example ii. Induction from past to future iii. Analogical reasoning (induction by analogy) 1. Figurative a. Simile b. Metaphor 2. Non-figurative/literal 3. Counter-argument analogies 4. Faulty analogies 5. Inductive analogy: Criteria a. Relevance of similarities (positive analogy) b. Number of similarities c. Nature and degree of disanalogy (negative analogy) d. Number of primary analogues e. Diversity among the primary analogues f. Degree of analogy between new/predicted instance and previously observed instances g. Specificity of the conclusion 6. Legal reasoning a. Literal analogies b. Precedent law/statutes: e.g. the present case is "like" People v. Harris 7. Moral reasoning a. Descriptive analogy b. Arguments from analogy versus counter analogy c. Example: Abortion debate i. Harming a fetus is "like" committing an assault ii. A fetus is a part of the mother's body, "like" a wart is part of one's hand iv. Causal reasoning 1. Causality a. Necessary conditions: e.g., clouds necessary for rain b. Sufficient conditions: e.g., fire sufficient- for/causes heat c. Necessary and sufficient conditions: e.g., bachelor and unmarried male 2. (John Stuart) Mill's Methods of identifying causal connections a. Method of agreement: identifies cause as necessary condition b. Method of disagreement: identifies cause as sufficient condition c. Method of residues: subtracting already-known casual connections from a causal claim d. Method of concomitant variation: matching variations in one condition with variations in another 3. Mill's methods and science a. Method of controlled experiment i. Experimental group ii. Control group iii. Distribution curves (graphs/data) iv. Longitudinal study b. Correlation i. Positive correlation: one variable tends to increase/decrease parallel with another ii. Negative correlation: one variable tends to increase/decrease in opposition with another iii. No correlation: random, haphazard, or accidental association iv. Perfect correlation v. Significant correlation vi. Spurious association: mistaking one variable for causing another, when they are merely associated, and a third factor is causing both; e.g., runny nose, watery eyes, (true cause of both: breathing pollen) c. Inference from correlation to causation 4. Contributing causes/partial causes v. Probability 1. Classical theory: number of favorable results relative to number of possible results: e.g. selecting cards from a standard (game) deck 2. (Betting) Odds: number of favorable results relative to number of unfavorable results: e.g., rolling dice 3. Relative frequency theory: e.g., mortality tables (insurance companies) 4. Subjectivist theory: probability based on beliefs of individual people: e.g., horse race or stock market 5. Game Theory: e.g. the Prisoner's Dilemma, (predictions based on conditional/hypothetical assumptions) vi. Statistics 1. Generalizing from a sample 2. Samples and populations a. Randomness: every member of a population has an equal chance of being selected b. Sample size i. Margin of error ii. Confidence level iii. Diversity 1. Heterogeneous group 2. Homogeneous group c. Stratified sampling of the value of a variable: e.g. testing for drunk drivers at peak/selected times, (and not at equally random times) 3. Statistical significance versus coincidental pattern 4. Designing tests and obstacles to collecting reliable data a. Sample bias and psychological influence b. Fallacy of hasty generalization: jumping to conclusions, (unwarranted by evidence) 5. The meaning of the term "average" a. Mean b. Median c. Mode 6. Dispersion (of data; how spread out data are in relation to numerical value) a. Range (difference between smallest and largest) b. Variance (a measure of how far data are from a mean value/central tendency) c. Standard deviation: a measure of how far data deviate from the mean value; the square root of the