Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI have no idea why this isn't done, when it could so easily be accomodated in the curricula, especially at the high school level. I begin every philosophy class I teach with a basic introduction to deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning. If I had the time (if I wasn't on the damn 10 wk quarter system) I would bust through propositional logic at the beginning of every term.
Bbarr writes elsewhere: "Out of curiousity, have any of the theists in this thread ever taken a class in formal logic?"
This has led me to an idea. Why don't we teach symbolic logic to students starting in the first grade? I think that would be a wonderful idea. I think it is totally feasible and worthwhile. If students that young can mas ...[text shortened]... te logic, being able to debate with the best among us here.
Why don't we do this?
Dr. S
Originally posted by WulebgrYeah, I remember the relaxed W.S.U. semester system. I lived for two years in Waller Hall, right across the street from the Rotunda. I took my very first philosophy class there (from Dr. Neville (?)) working slowly through Bertrand Russell's "Problems of Philosophy".
Your cross-state rivals are on the 15 wk semester system. Go work there.
Go Cougs!!
😀
Originally posted by bbarrI lived in Goldsworthy for three years; I'm still carrying some of the Rotunda's "food". The only philosophy class I took was Philosophy of Religion from Bishop.
Yeah, I remember the relaxed W.S.U. semester system. I lived for two years in Waller Hall, right across the street from the Rotunda. I took my very first philosophy class there (from Dr. Neville (?)) working slowly through Bertrand Russell's "Problems of Philosophy".
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesPray for the change that logic is taught in elementary school or that your thread is moved to the spiritual forums? Help me know how to pray.
I believe that my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ would want logic taught in elementary schools.
Can anybody here help me to pray for that change?
Originally posted by kirksey957As our Father in heaven has taught us...
Help me know how to pray.
Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be the Truth. May thy negation abide and thy disjunction reside on earth as they do in heaven. Give our children this day their logical nourishment. And forgive us our mistakes, as we employ reason to resolve them. And lead us not into contradiction, but deliver us from absurdity. For through the teachers, and the parents, and your guidance, the glory of rationality may reign for ever and ever. Amen.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 610667
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesSounds good, but if we teach everybody about universal and existential quantifiers, nobody is going to know how to keep the toilets unplugged. Maybe its better that the elite who were meant by natural selection to understand this do, and the rest of us just humbly trudge behind with our plungers.
Bbarr writes elsewhere: "Out of curiousity, have any of the theists in this thread ever taken a class in formal logic?"
This has led me to an idea. Why don't we teach symbolic logic to students starting in the first grade? I think that would be a wonderful idea. I think it is totally feasible and worthwhile. If students that young can mas ...[text shortened]... te logic, being able to debate with the best among us here.
Why don't we do this?
Dr. S
I second Dr. S's idea, but I don't think it's complete. It's important that students be armed with the ability to evaluate a wide variety of claims, to weigh evidence, to argue rigourously and to be intellectually curious. With this basis and a little bit of interest, much of the content taught in school will become redundant because people thusly armed are likely to pick up a lot of the things that are taught in school simply through cultural exposure. Furthermore, subjects like science, mathematics, literary criticism and history can be taught much more easily if such abilities can be expected from students. Ultimately, it's of extreme importance that people in a free society can detect bullshit, and the deductive tools Dr. S mentions, along with an awareness of what inductive and abductive reasoning are and a fundamental attitude of scepticism constitute a good arsenal for this purpose.
Last week, my mother (who teaches English in a junior high school) told me she'd been discussing philosophy with her class and asked me to teach. I'm not an expert on philosophy (or anything else) and I didn't think I had the knowledge to talk very specifically, especially to 11-year-olds (because explaining things in that context requires a lot of skill that I haven't got), so I decided to stress bullshit detection with them; I based my lesson on Richard Dawkins' open letter to his daughter, although I made a point of not specifically mentioning religion, because I didn't want my mother getting nasty phone calls from enraged suburban fundie nutters. The letter can be found here:
http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/dawkins2.html
I started by telling them what a 'claim' is and why understanding something is at least in part reducible to dividing claims about it into 'true' and 'false' categories, and then talked about evidence and how it can be used to see which claims are likely to be true and which are likely (or certain) to be false. This was mostly done through a few examples; the most-enjoyed being the assertion that the earth is round. The real goal was to discuss the reasons Dawkins lists as bad reasons for believing things, and I did this by telling the class lots of very credible lies and attempting to use my authority as the teacher to make them believe these lies. I was pleased when they very quickly picked up on this and concluded that my status as their teacher is insufficient to make me a credible source of information; we agreed that while much of what an authority figure says may be true, it is still important to apply the tools we discussed and maintain a skeptical attitude (if they care about the issue).
I observed some things that made Dr. S's idea seem like a feasible one in addition to being a good one. First, people of that age have learning curves that look like the Matterhorn, and if one proceeds clearly and with a lot of examples, they can be taught almost anything.
Second, they respond well to zealotry--I was worried about a lot of blank stares, but I made a conscious effort to teach like a Jesuit or something, and was rewarded with a lot of class participation.
Third, when people are introduced to things they haven't thought of a great deal, the newness can be exploited. For example, it would have been easy for any of the students to ask, in the spirit of my lesson, why they should believe anything at all about skepticism and reasoning inductively and everything else I was saying. However, I was confident that because this sort of thing is not taught in school, I didn't need to plan an answer to this because no one would ask it--I could use their natural acceptance of their teachers' words against them.
Therefore, I reject Bobla45's contention. Everyone can benefit by having such tools at their disposal, and it seems almost anyone can, to some degree, be given those tools, provided they're young enough when we start. I'm even willing to bet that a change in curriculum similar to the one Dr. S is advocating would improve many students' experience later on in school, which in turn could go a long way toward easing a whole host of social ills.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI think this is a fantastic idea. Possibly it could wait till middle school or high school though.
Bbarr writes elsewhere: "Out of curiousity, have any of the theists in this thread ever taken a class in formal logic?"
This has led me to an idea. Why don't we teach symbolic logic to students starting in the first grade? I think that would be a wonderful idea. I think it is totally feasible and worthwhile. If students that young can mas ...[text shortened]... te logic, being able to debate with the best among us here.
Why don't we do this?
Dr. S
Originally posted by royalchickenWhat a wonderful opportunity. Those kids are very fortunate. Hopefully you will be invited back to share the good word with others.
I second Dr. S's idea, but I don't think it's complete. It's important that students be armed with the ability to evaluate a wide variety of claims, to weigh evidence, to argue rigourously and to be intellectually curious. With t ...[text shortened]... urn could go a long way toward easing a whole host of social ills.
When people are taught to think, everybody wins. Maybe one of those 6th graders will choose mechanical engineering as a vocation and design a new style of toilet that does not clog. I'd rather have access to that than a dumb plumber with a plunger.
I'm assuming that your introductory example was named somthing like "On the Existence of God," or "Santa Claus, the Eater Bunny, the Holy Spirit, and your desk: one of these things is not like the others."
Well done on taking the first steps to reform.
Dr. S, Logical Extremist, Proponent of Truth
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesLOL
Bbarr writes elsewhere: "Out of curiousity, have any of the theists in this thread ever taken a class in formal logic?"
This has led me to an idea. Why don't we teach symbolic logic to students starting in the first grade? I think that would be a wonderful idea. I think it is totally feasible and worthwhile. If students that young can mas ...[text shortened]... te logic, being able to debate with the best among us here.
Why don't we do this?
Dr. S
I will support a "Required Course".
Each kid must be able to do the following:
Watch "Ms. Elaine" and be able to correctly identify "The queer" as the righteous reverend Mr. Rogers.
Watch "Survivors" and be able to tell that there is a big damned "supply" city for the three hundred "filmers" about a hundred yards off to the left of every camera shot.
Watch "Saddam" being mugged by his lovers and to correctly know that he killed 2 million people since "taking" power.