Welcome to FYS: Critical Thinking
Until recently, I believed that groundhogs don't climb trees. It turns out that my belief was false: groundhogs do, in fact, climb trees. On what basis did I change my mind? Well, on what basis do any of us change our minds? On what basis should any of us change our minds? Do we have reasons for believing what we believe? If not, shouldn't we? What kind? Should we ground our beliefs in scientific evidence? And how do we sort out solid scientific evidence from pseudoscientific conjectures? How do others (notably politicians, pundits and marketing execs) seek to manipulate our beliefs and behavior for their own benefit? Critical thinking empowers students to recognize fallacious reasoning, manipulative rhetoric, and other dubious defenses of faulty beliefs. It encourages students to explore various methods of justification, explanation and argumentation in order to understand why we believe what we believe.
In this course, we consider reasoning - how we seek to influence other people's beliefs, and how our beliefs are influenced by others. We search for a good basis upon which to change our beliefs, and we analyze how those in the marketing and political worlds seek to manipulate us into buying their product or voting for their candidate. McDaniel Plan: TA
About
This course fulfills:
- Old Curriculum: BLAR Humanities
- New Curriculum: Textual Analysis
- Phil Major: required for all majors
This is a class about reasoning. We seek to understand both how people should reason, as well as how people actually do reason.
Because of the nature of this topic, we do not have a great deal of 'content' to consider. There are no study sheets, lists of terms to memorize, few formulae, and fewer still the kinds of things one can put on a note card. Instead, we consider the skills one takes a lifetime to develop: skills of persuasion and rhetoric, argumentation and authority, evidence and deduction.
The course is structured not around what I want to talk about (although I'm sure there will be a lot of that), but rather it is structured about what you, as the students, find and bring to me. Each week, you will be scouring the library, Internet, and anything else you can get your hands on for examples of forms of persuasion: both argumentative and non-argumentative. This will be the content of our course. The topics discussed will be yours for the choosing.
For the 2nd half of the course, we'll be playing two complex role-playing games called 'The Threshold of Democracy: Athens in 403BC' and 'Darwin, the Copley Medal and the Rise of Naturalism'. During that section of the course, you will run the classes entirely: from determining what will be discussed on a particular day to how the class will actually run. See the section called 'The Games' below for more detail.
Syllabus
Phil 1102 Section 1
BMC 100
MWF 10:20-11:20 / Th 10:20-11:20
Dates and Times
MWF 10:20-11:20 / Th 10:20-11:20,
BMC 100
Description
Until recently, I believed that groundhogs don't climb trees. It turns out that my belief was false: groundhogs do, in fact, climb trees. On what basis did I change my mind? Well, on what basis do any of us change our minds? On what basis should any of us change our minds? Do we have reasons for believing what we believe? If not, shouldn't we? What kind? Should we ground our beliefs in scientific evidence? And how do we sort out solid scientific evidence from pseudoscientific conjectures? How do others (notably politicians, pundits and marketing execs) seek to manipulate our beliefs and behavior for their own benefit? Critical thinking empowers students to recognize fallacious reasoning, manipulative rhetoric, and other dubious defenses of faulty beliefs. It encourages students to explore various methods of justification, explanation and argumentation in order to understand why we believe what we believe.
In this course, we consider reasoning - how we seek to influence other people's beliefs, and how our beliefs are influenced by others. We search for a good basis upon which to change our beliefs, and we analyze how those in the marketing and political worlds seek to manipulate us into buying their product or voting for their candidate. McDaniel Plan: TA
Structure
My approach to this class may be a little different than you have experienced in other classes. I believe that engaging with primary source material is at the heart of developing as a philosophy student. But these sources need not be a traditional textbook.
That means that the class will rarely be structured around the textbooks BUT that doesn't mean that the discussion is not informed by the text. In fact, the opposite is true.
The texts are your 'handbooks' for what goes on in the course. They will guide you in crafting your own arguments and interpreting the arguments of others. They are included to be used as resources for you when dealing with complicated topics.
The Games: Athens in 403BC and TBA
During 2nd half of the term, we will be playing two complicated academic games. In the first, you will make up the Athenian 'Assembly' responsible for constituting the new government of Athens after the fall of the 30 tyrants in 403 BCE. The second game isn't yet determined. The games will be run entirely by you. The peer mentor will act as 'preceptor', and will intervene only when it is crucially important. Which laws are brought before the assembly, which resolutions are passed, which votes are taken - it's all up to you.
A number of former students who have been through the Athens game have volunteered to help with strategy. I'll introduce you when the roles are distributed in the 3rd week.
With all this in mind, allow me to draw a rough outline of the course:
- Mondays are reserved for covering new material, either through lecture or discussion.
- For the middle part of the class, Wednesdays and Fridays will be Assembly or Royal Society meetings.
Honor Code
As members of the McDaniel college community, I expect that we are all committed to upholding and abiding by our honor system. That means that I will do everything I can to make possibly ambiguous assignments clear and that you are obligated to report any violations. I require that all written work be submitted with the signed honor pledge "I have neither given or received unauthorized aid on this piece of work, nor have I knowingly tolerated any violation of the Honor Code". I will not grade any assignment without such a signature.
Finally, when in doubt, ask. There will be cases, if not in this class, then in others, where the line between citation and plagiarism is vague. And there will be cases in which the line between helping a friend and doing their work will be crossed. Your best bet in finding the line is to ask me. If you ask before hand, you have nothing to worry about. If you wait until after, it might be too late.
As I mentioned before, following the practices of good writing (never quote from a secondary source, never use imagery you have seen before, or an example that has been used by someone else) will keep your writing away from any suggestion of plagiarism.
Objectives
- To develop the ability to analyze bad reasoning, produce instances of good reasoning, and recognize the difference.
- To become critical consumers and producers of knowledge.
- To develop analytic skills, both in the analysis of text, verbal presentations and written work.
- To develop a broader understanding of some of the basic assumptions at work in the on-going public dialog, including how we manipulate using and are manipulated by non-argumentative forms of persuasion.
- And most importantly: to question everything.
Materials
Access to the Inquiry website (http://inquiry.mcdaniel.edu/). See the registration label attached.
Weston, Anthony (2001) A Rulebook for Arguments 3rd Edition, Hackett. ISBN: 0872205525 List Price: $5.95
Aristotle, Kennedy, George (ed) (1977) The Art of Rhetoric, Penguin, ISBN: 0140445102
Plato, Republic, Penguin
Carnes and Ober, The Threshold of Demoncracy: Athens in 403 BC 2005 Pearson Longman ISBN: 0-321-3303-9
Optional
Bradley, Peter (ongoing) Inquiry: Critical Thinking Hardcopy of the Inquiry website, available in the bookstore.
Requirements
The college believes that "liberally educated men and women think and act critically, creatively and humanely." I expect nothing less. Whether it be in the classroom, in written assignments, and in your preparation for class, I expect you to think and act critically, creatively and humanely.
Late Work: I don't accept it. If you have some pressing engagement and simply cannot produce your work on time, you can tell me that before the date it is due, and we'll discuss an extension. Otherwise, turn your work in on time.
Attendance: Given the active nature of the course, regular attendance is mandatory. Attendance and participation are a major part of your overall grade (10-15%) and every absence counts. If you must miss a class, please inform me before the class begins so I can restructure the session if necessary. A quick email is sufficient. If you miss more three times, it will begin impact your grade significantly.
Classroom conduct: No cellphones! (or text messaging, pagers, blackberry, PDAs, etc. Using technology foreign to Ancient Athens (or 19th century London) is clearly a mark of insanity - and those who are insane should be ostracized or thrown out of the royal society.
The readings on the calendar below should be completed before the class begins. This is vital. As you will discover, how you perform in the debates is directly related to how much you read. If you want to get your agenda passed, you'd better be prepared.
Information Technology: I do use blackboard occasionally. There is a copy of this syllabus available, and I will be updating assignments over the course of the semester. I post lecture notes and other documents on my faculty website at http://www2.mcdaniel.edu/pbradley/. Just follow the menu to 'Courses->Current'. In case of conflict or confusion regarding due dates or scheduled readings between the website and this document, the website always takes precedence.
Special Accommodation: If you are in need of special accommodation, please see me at least 48 hours before the event for which you would need accommodation. I can be very flexible if approached in a timely manner. Making changes after the fact is difficult if not impossible.
Final Disclaimer: Assignments and Exams are subject to change, according to the flow of the course.
Assignments
Lab Book / Blogs: Over the course of the term, you will compile a 'lab book' on Critical Thinking. This will ultimately provide you with your research for your final paper. Each Friday, a new entry in the lab book is due.
How you maintain your lab book is up to you - but I have to be able to track your additions. I have found blogs to be a very effective way of tracking your progress through the semester. If you do not have one already, you can sign up for one at http://www.blogger.com/
Presentation: Everyone will present at least once in each game. This means speaking for sometime in front of the general assembly. You can speak either extemporaneously or from prepared remarks. But either way, you'll be turning in a paper on which your presentation will be based.
Papers: There will be three short (3-5 pages) papers related to your presentations in the Games. When you present in the game, you will turn in an accompanying paper. There are also longer papers at the end of each game.
There will also be an end-of-term paper. This will be a longer, original paper on a topic of your choice. I reserve the right to be involved in the process of refining topics.
One last note on academic honesty. It is good academic practice to quote only from primary sources. It is also good practice to use clear, original examples to illustrate your point. If you follow both of these rules, many of the so-called 'borderline' plagiarism cases will never arise.
Exams: There will be a final. The final, while cumulative, will be designed to allow you to showcase your philosophic talents, rather than your ability to memorize facts.
All papers are evaluated with respect to clarity, precision and sophistication of the argument / thesis presented. Oral presentations are evaluated with respect to many of the same criteria, but for the most part can be tailored to exposition, rather than criticism or analysis.
| Assignment | Value |
| Paper 1 (Athens final) | 10% |
| Paper 2 (2nd Game final) | 10% |
| Athens Presentations / Papers (2) | 10% |
| 2nd Game Presentation / Paper (1) | 10% |
| Final Paper | 20% |
| Lab Book | 15% |
| Final | 15% |
| Attendance and Participation | 10% |
Assignments are subject to change according to the flow of the class. In particular, I may replace a paper with a midterm, or a paper with a presentation, or vice versa. Ratios will, however, remain more or less the same: a majority of your grade depends on your final exam and final paper.
Tentative Calendar
| Week 0: Introduction |
| Aug 21 | Introduction |
| Week 1: Introduction |
| Aug 24 | READ: C.S. Peirce, 'The Fixation of Belief' |
| Aug 26 | READ: Dewey 'How We Think', Ch 2 |
| Aug 26 | FLEX: Writing Center |
| Aug 28 | Discussion / Lab 1 |
| Week 2: Basic argumentation & reasoning |
| Aug 31 | READ: Descartes selections from Methods (To be provided) |
| Sept 2 | READ:Bacon selections from Novum Organon (To be provided) |
| Sept 4 | READ: Inquiry: An Invitation to Critical Thinking: arguments and statements / Lab 2 |
| Week 3: Introduction to Athens |
| Sept 7 | Labor Day |
| Sept 9 | READ: Inquiry: Inference Tickets and Some Basic Valid Argument Forms |
| Sept 10 | FLEX: Library |
| Sept 11 | Introduction to Athens: Distributions of roles, elections of leaders, 1st factional meetings
READ: Richardson, Elenchus (http://www.ditext.com/robinson/dia2.html)
All of Athens Booklet except 'Documents', Ober's essay on war, esp. / Lab 3 |
| Week 4: Athens / Intro to Rhetoric |
| Sept 14 | READ: Plato Republic 1-3, Discussion of Books 1-3 of Republic (Come with written answers to discussion questions on pg 34-35) |
| Sept 16 | Introduction to Athens:
READ: Plato Republic 4&5 |
| Sept 17 | FLEX: Study Abroad |
| Sept 18 | Assembly 1: Reconciliation Agreement / Lab 4 (exempt if you write Reconciliation paper for your faction) |
| Week 5: Athens / Pathos |
| Sept 21 | READ:Inquiry: Ordinary Language: Rhetoric: Pathos
READ:Aristotle, Bk II S1-11 |
| Sept 23 | Assembly 2 |
| Sept 25 | Assembly 3 (Every member of assembly should have presenteted 1 paper so far). |
| Week 6: Athens / Ethos |
| Sep 28 | READ:Inquiry: Ordinary Language: Rhetoric: Ethos
READ:Aristotle, Bk II S12-17 |
| Sep 30 | Assembly 4 [Ostracism vote] |
| Oct 2 | Assembly 5 / Lab 6 |
| Week 7: Athens / Others |
| Oct 5 | READ Plato Republic Books 5-10 (complete by next wednesday) |
| Oct 7 | Assembly 6 (Every member of assembly should have presented 2nd paper by now) |
| Oct 9 | Assembly 7 / Lab 7 |
| Week 8: Athens |
| Oct 12 | Fall Break |
| Oct 14 | Final General Assembly [READ: Aristotle Bk I?] |
| Oct 16 | Final General Assembly [READ: Aristotle Bk I?] / Lab 8 |
| Week 9: Back to the 20th century - for a week. |
| Oct 19 | Post-Mortem: Paper on Republic due. |
| Oct 21 | READ: Inquiry: Ordinary Language: Rhetoric: Analogies -> Dirty tricks & fallacies
READ:Aristotle Bk II: S 18-26 |
| Oct 23 | [READ: Get started on Game 2 packet?] Lab 9 |
| Week 10: Causal Reasoning |
| Oct 26 | READ: Gam2e Packet |
| Oct 28 | Game2 Session 1 |
| Oct 30 | Game2 Session 2 / READ: Inquiry: Causation / Lab 10 |
| Week 11: Observation |
| Nov 2 | READ: Inquiry: Invitation to Scientific reasoning -> Understanding Scientific Reasoning |
| Nov 4 | Game2 Session 3 / READ: Inquiry: Observation |
| Nov 6 | Game2 Session 4 / Lab 11 |
| Week 12: Experimentation |
| Nov 9 | READ: Inquiry: Intervening to study variables |
| Nov 11 | Game2 Session 5 |
| Nov 13 | Game2 Session 6 / Lab 12 |
| Week 13: Ethics in experimentation |
| Nov 16 | Game2 Session 7 / READ: Inquiry: Ethical issues in experimentation (All topic papers should be in by now). |
| Nov 18 | Thanksgiving |
| Nov 20 | Thanksgiving |
| Week 14: Mechanisms & Modeling |
| Nov 23 | READ: Inquiry: Mechanism |
| Nov 25 | Game2 Session 8 |
| Nov 27 | Post-Mortem / Paper Due |
| Week 15: Mysteries, Paradoxes and Barriers to Inference |
| Nov 30 | READ: Inquiry: Mysteries, Paradoxes and Barriers to Inference |
| Dec 2 | |
| Dec 4 | Lab 15 (paper due) |
| Reading Days: Dec 5 & 6 |
Lab Book
Over the course of the term, you will become an expert on some topic of interest that is currently contentious in our society. A sample list is easy to generate: gay marriage, our foreign policy, the war on terror, the so-called 'culture wars', separation of church and state, animal rights & animal activism, euthanasia, the role of protesters in democracy, etc. A good topic will be one that has a great deal of coverage. Remember, you're not necessarily looking for good arguments. I'll be asking you to find fallacies quite regularity, so it might be easier to choose an area rife with fallacies (like, say, the creationist's attacks on evolution).
On the other hand, this lab book will ultimately lead to a paper, which you will present and defend at the end of the term. Your topic should be complex enough to not only hold your interest for a term, but also to allow for a sophisticated, nuanced thesis for which you can argue.
Note: unless otherwise noted, we're looking for arguments, not reports of arguments. This means that you're limited to primary sources: texts where the author is making a case and standing behind it. Outside of the editorial page, journalists are reporting on other people's arguments, not making their own.
- Lab 1: Introduction
Find a howler (an argument so bad that it makes you laugh) and bring it to the class to share. Write up a quick (1/2 page) explanation of why this argument is so terribly bad and post it to your blog. Make sure you bring both the example and your commentary to class.
Come with ideas on of topics or arguments that you will research over the course of the term. At the end of the term, you will have a full 10-15 page paper on this topic, so make sure it is a topic that you can find a number of different arguments on both sides to work from. It doesn't have to be something about which you have a firm opinion -in fact, that may prove to be a disadvantage. And it need not be political. Choose something about which you believe you ultimately will be able to argue.
- Lab 2: Argumentation, Statements and Inference
Make a decision about your topic. Use that decision to guide your search for:
1 example each of deductive and inductive reasoning (for a total of 2). Fallacies are fine. Again, write up an analysis of both arguments and blog it.
- Lab 3: Persuasion and Language
Find an example of abuse of language: equivocations, over general language, straw men and Orwellian language are all acceptable. Critique it. Post it, and your critique on your blog.
- Lab 4: First Factional Meetings
Read through the 'Reacting' booklet. Review your character information very, very carefully. Come to class with ideas on what strategy you should pursue, and how you will pursue it.
IN CHARACTER: Write up an argument for or against the reconciliation agreement.
- Lab 5: Ordinary Language: Pathos
IN CHARACTER: Find both an appeal to emotion from the Assembly discussions. Critique and Post.
- Lab 6: Ordinary Language: Ethos
IN CHARACTER: Find an appeal to character from the Assembly discussions. Critique and Post.
- Lab 7: Positioning
IN CHARACTER: Formulate your best argument for the next week's final general assemblies. Anticipate the arguments of other factions - do your homework and be ready.
- Lab 8: Ordinary Language: Enthymemes & Analogies
Find both a fallacious & legitimate appeal to authority or other enthymeme. Critique and Post, being especially careful to point out which premises are missing.
- Lab 10: Causal Reasoning
IN CHARACTER: TBA
- Lab 11: Variations of Scientific Reasoning
IN CHARACTER: TBA
- Lab 12: Scientific reasoning
IN CHARACTER: TBA
- Lab 13: Variations of Scientific Reasoning
Thanksgiving.
- Lab 14: Fallacies [of Scientific Reasoning and others]
Review your first draft: Remember: you'll need to have your own 'positive' argument as well as three arguments that you will criticize.
Have all these arguments written our in 'outline' form for me to review. Be charitable!
- Week 15: Mysteries, Paradoxes and Barriers to Inference
Clean up and organize your lab book / print out your blog and get ready to turn it in!
|
Dr. Peter Bradley