| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:38 pm Post subject: Should logic be a core course taught at all universities? |
 |
|
Has it ever been?
In so many ways, I think it would be so helpful if it were.
Or was it?
Did your uni require everyone to take logic?
I leave it at that. Look forward to responses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paji eh Wong
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Should logic be a core course taught at all universities? |
No.
After two years of trying to teach University aged potatoes how to speak English, I have come to the conclusion that mandatory education is a deeply flawed idea. You can not force someone to learn something. Believe me, I've tried. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How is that an answer to the question?[/b] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Under the title of Rhetoric, it was taught for a couple of thousand years, ever since the days of Socrates right up till the turn of the last century or so (in the US). Hmmm...I don't mean it was taught in the US for the last couple of thousand years.
Anyway, it was part of Classical Education. I'd like to see it as a Highly Recommended elective class. Like Paji eh Wong,
| Quote: |
| I have come to the conclusion that mandatory education is a deeply flawed idea. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:50 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| After two years of trying to teach University aged potatoes how to speak English, I have come to the conclusion that mandatory education is a deeply flawed idea. You can not force someone to learn something. Believe me, I've tried. |
Well, there is a substantial amount of research that concludes you won't ever "fully" acquire a second language after a certain age. I'm not judging whether that is true or not, but I think it's, at a base level, different from learning logic.
But that is a good point, which begs the question, "Why wait until university"?
Why not make it a part of secondary education?
Again, perhaps it is, but why not make it mandatory?
If you can handle algebra, then I think you can handle logic.
Furthermore, is it not putting the cart before the horse to head into advanced studies without a solid handle on logical foundations?
I believe that logic is the bridge, and perhaps the only one, between the social sciences and the hard sciences.
As such, if you want to study painting, then fine. Maybe logic isn't really necessary.
However, if you want to study just about anything that doesn't fall under the term "art", logic appears, at least to me, to be a fundamental, if not THE fundamental.
Other thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think we should start teaching it in high school. At my university, "informal logic" was a requirement. I really liked it and continued in it for several more years. Some of the best courses I took in university. Certainly the one I use the most today. It's rather amazing how with a few simple basic concepts of logic, you look at the world in a whole different manner.
I suspect in a largely religious America, there would be a great deal of resistance to teaching such a course at the public high school level. Of course, part of studying good/bad arguments is also picking apart advertising copy. The corporations wouldn't be pleased we're teaching kids about "weasel words" and how they're used in ads
Listening to Penn Radio, it's funny the number of people who are atheists but went to Catholic school. I figure it's because in the Catholic manner you get the religious instruction. And then you move on to science and math class and get taught science and math without religious content. Each is their own domain and that's generally fine for Catholics. Of course, eventually, you go "hmmm". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ella
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| In a consumer/capitalist society, statistics and critical thinking ought to be a requirement for graduating from high school. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Definitely. The extraordinary lack of critical thinking and muddle headed logic displayed on this forum alone persuades me of that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
Under the title of Rhetoric, it was taught for a couple of thousand years, ever since the days of Socrates right up till the turn of the last century or so (in the US). Hmmm...I don't mean it was taught in the US for the last couple of thousand years. |
Rhetoric is derived from Latin, and has nothing to do with logic.
It's "persuasive speech," according to the OED.
That is exactly what logic is not.
Logic comes from the Greek "Logos." Variants of the word are used in deductive examination - geometry books and so on, not persuasion as such.
They're very different terms. Most accounts portray Socrates as countering "rhetoric," which I understand as a relative of "sophistry." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Logic is one form of thinking and has its own domain but it's limited. I think it should taught, but so should other types of thinking such as critical and creative thinking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| "Critical thinking" and "Creative thinking" rely heavily on logic, when they're not bullshyte. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sincinnatislink wrote: |
| "Critical thinking" and "Creative thinking" rely heavily on logic, when they're not bullshyte. |
Actually, they don't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChuckECheese
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the_beaver wrote: |
| Sincinnatislink wrote: |
| "Critical thinking" and "Creative thinking" rely heavily on logic, when they're not bullshyte. |
Actually, they don't. |
It all depends on who's teaching it. A logical thinking or process for one can be illogical for others.
If you're talking about computer logic (switch on or off) and systems (problem) analysis and design, I highly recommend it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:55 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
Actually, I was also curious about Beav's differentiating between logic and critical thinking. Apparently, there is a difference. As Beav says, I think critical thinking being taught alongside logic makes sense.
However, one in the absence of the other seems rather like riding a bicycle with one wheel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
