Course Syllabus

Philosophy 115

Critical Reasoning

Winter 2013
(posted 1/7/2013)

Course Description: Arguments permeate our lives. It is impossible to avoid them even if we wanted to – and we usually don’t. They are a deep component of the way that we relate to each other, ourselves, and the world. One doesn’t have to be a philosopher to appreciate this or to take up a study to understand them better, but because constructing good arguments is so essential to the practice of philosophy (and reason itself is a frequent topic of philosophical research), philosophers have in the course of history contributed much to our understanding of arguments and our engagement with them.

This course is designed around the premise that critical reasoning is first and foremost an activity in which one can be more or less skilled. Moreover, it is a skill that can be developed through training and practice. The hope is that satisfactory completion of the course will enable you to construct and evaluate arguments with greater understanding, comfort and productivity. Accomplishing this will of course require a familiarity with the concepts and theories behind what arguments are and how they function, but there will be a constant eye toward how such concepts apply to the activity of argumentative reasoning – most specifically within the context of dialogue and conversation.

There will be three main modules in this course: a section on language and how to identify arguments and their various purposes, a section on evaluating arguments for deductive validity and inductive strength, and a section on evaluating argumentative behavior in ways that extend beyond formal standards for arguments. The first concerns what arguments are and their structure, while the second two concern how to evaluate arguments formally and informally. The section on validity will involve a mini introduction to logic.

Instructor: Tim Linnemann

timlinnemann@gmail.com

206-919-6934

Office Hours: 12:30-1:30 daily B100A

Text: Fogelin & Sinnott-Armstrong, Understanding Arguments: An Introduction to Informal Logic

(Optional): Damer, Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments

Objectives & Outcomes: There will be a two step focus to this course. The first step is to gain a familiarity and competence with some concepts that help to elucidate various features of arguments and how to evaluate them. In this course you will probably find some concepts so simple to understand that they appear trivial, while other concepts you may bang your head against for a while with no success. Which concepts are which will be different from student to student. Don’t panic. Some of this just takes practice while others may be merely new and take some getting used to. I make myself very available as an instructor and I am always willing to talk over material for as long as it takes. If you are having trouble, it is your responsibility to let me know so I can fulfill my responsibility of assisting to the utmost of my ability.

The second step is learning how to apply these concepts to your way of engaging with arguments – either with yourself or other people. Forums for engaging with arguments can include everything from deciding what to think of something, to settling on a course of action, exploring an experience or topic with a friend, or responding to the beliefs and expectations of others. Perhaps most significantly, skill at engaging with arguments is a crucial tool for adjudicating and resolving conflicts. The skills involved in each of these contexts take a lot of practice to develop and I will be trying to make opportunities for you to gain some more experience with them as a part of the course.

Grading: Class Attendance 20%*(see summary)

Homework 15%

Writing Assignments 15%

Tests (3) 50% (~17% apiece)

Class Attendance: Attendance in this course is crucial for a variety of reasons. First, the material in this course is more modular and doesn’t always build directly on itself in a linear fashion. So it becomes harder to catch up on one topic once we have moved on to a separate topic. Second, there is just a lot of material packed into this class. We’ll be moving along at a quick pace and I won’t be able to manage bringing a chunk of the class up to speed constantly in the classroom. (Outside the classroom there is plenty of room to get help!) For these reasons, I’m devoting 20% of your total grade to your attendance record, so as to recognize this commitment of effort. In addition, (back by popular demand!) anyone who misses more than 8 sessions will automatically fail the course. This is not negotiable, so please respect it!

Homework: Homework will be assigned every week along with accompanying reading. Performance on these assignments will not be evaluated. I will be merely checking at the beginning of class to see if the homework was completed. We will go over the answers to the homework during class, so you will be able to see if you got any answers incorrect and why. This policy leaves it perfectly open that you could (possibly) be less then earnest in your efforts and still get credit for this portion of the course. Toward this possibility I merely offer this advice: more so then other classes, the material in this course takes practice, and insincere effort with homework will 9 times out of 10 be reflected in the test scores. There are no quizzes in this course, so the homework is your best preparation for the tests!

Writing Assignments: I have planned a number of writing projects that will, more or less, track the material we are working on in the class, but apply it to real world argumentation – both observed in public statements and media, and of your own original composition. While we are picking up the concepts and techniques that the class is introducing, most of the time this will happen under very ideal circumstances – like in textbook homework problems where examples are cherry-picked to be relevant. But the world isn’t so accommodating, so these assignments will help you in taking neat and orderly principles and categories and apply them to actually gain some real insight. I’ve decided to experiment with a different approach this quarter, but I need to see how the first couple assignments go before I can plan for the rest of them. More details will be provided when I assign the first project.

Tests: Tests will be a mix of fairly standard T/F, multiple choice, and short answer questions, but there will also be some special questions that will require more work depending on the section. For example, you may have to analyze a chunk of prose identifying the different parts of the argument embedded within it, or you may have to perform a rudimentary proof. I will always hold an informal study session before the test where anyone who wants to review the material more prior to the test can do so with other students who are like-minded. While class may see me directing conversation more (via lecturing), the informal study sessions put the control in your hands. Basically, I will hang out in a conference room for a couple hours and answer questions students put to me or explain material upon request. One-on-one appointments are also, as always, an option, but in my experience, learning together works better for these test preps (I recommend using both modes). Perhaps there is something that you think you get, but after hearing another student’s confusion over it and the explanation you realize that you didn’t have it down before (but then you will!).

Student academic conduct: The principle of academic honesty underlies all that we do and applies to all courses at Bellevue College.  One kind of academic dishonesty is plagiarism, which may take many forms, including, but not limited to, using a paper written by someone else, using printed sources word-for-word without proper documentation, and paraphrasing or summarizing the ideas of others without acknowledging the source.  Plagiarism can also occur when non-written ideas are taken without documentation--using someone else's design or performance idea, for example.  In short, plagiarism is passing off someone else's ideas, words, or images as your own; it amounts to intellectual theft--whether or not it was your intention to steal.  Bellevue College instructors have access to commercial plagiarism detection software, so please be advised that any work you submit may be tested for plagiarism.

Participating in academic dishonesty in any way, including writing a paper or taking a test for someone else, may result in severe penalties.  Dishonestly produced papers automatically receive a grade of "F" without the possibility of make-up.  The Dean of Student Services will also be notified of such conduct, and repetition of the behavior will result in progressively more serious disciplinary action (for example, an instructor may recommend that the student fail the course for a second offense or even that a student be expelled for a serious offense, such as stealing an exam).

Grades lowered for plagiarism or other forms of dishonesty may be appealed through the regular channels, and any further disciplinary action taken by the Dean may also be appealed through existing processes.

Information about Bellevue College's copyright guidelines can be found at: http://bellevuecollege.edu/lmc/links/copyright.html

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to make any changes to the course (content, grading, etc.). Further, I reserve the right to establish procedures for grading of students in exceptional cases. All and any modifications to this syllabus will be in accordance with the rules and regulations of Bellevue College. This syllabus does not constitute a contract between any combination of the student, the professor, or Bellevue College.

Topics and Reading Assignments

1	Introduction to the Course
2	The Language of Arguments Linguisitic, Speech, and Conversational Acts Grice’s Maxims of Conversational Implicature	Understanding Arguments Chapter 2
3	The Building Blocks of Arguments: Argument Markers Standard Form Guarding, Assuring and Discounting Moves Evaluative Language Writing Assignment #1 Assigned	Understanding Arguments Chapter 3; Chapter 8 pg. 215-218
4	8 Steps for Argumentative Analysis Fundamental Principles Writing Assignment #1 Due	Understanding Arguments Chapter 5
5	Review & Test #1
6	Formal Evaluations of Arguments Deductive Arguments: Primer in Propositional Logic Checking for Validity Writing Assignment #2 Assigned	Understanding Arguments Chapter 6
7	Inductive Arguments: Statistical Generalizations and Applications Causal Arguments Inference to the Best Explanation Argument from Analogy Writing Assignment #2 Due	Understanding Arguments Chapter 8, 9, 10
8	Review & Test #2
9	Informal Evaluations of Arguments Informal Fallacies Related to: Structural Principle Relevance Principle Acceptability Principle Writing Assignment #3 Assigned	Attacking Faulty Reasoning (handout) Selections from Chapters 5, 6, 7
10	Informal Fallacies Related to: Acceptability Principle (cont.) Sufficiency Principle Rebuttal Principle Writing Assignment #3 Due	Attacking Faulty Reasoning (handout) Selections from Chapters 7, 8, 9
11	Review & Test #3