= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Desrtopa comments on Help Reform A Philosophy Curriculum - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (24)
What's the content of the PHIL 102 course? I had a "Critical Thinking" course prerequisite in college, but I don't want to assume too much with respect to uniformity between schools.
I would suggest making the introductory level logic courses a prerequisite to the classes that actually deal with the works of various philosophers. In retrospect, I considered it an oversight of the curriculum back when I was doing a double major in Philosophy that students were expected to be able to jump right into discussions of philosophical questions without first being given proper training in logic.
Ideally students should be taught to recognize and dissolve confused questions before they start grappling with philosophers who actually entertain them, to better avoid wasted time.
The content is informal logic: discourse analysis, informal fallacies (like ad hominem, ad populum, etc.). Depending on who teaches it, there might be some simple syllogistic logic or some translation problems.
I like the idea of requiring logic along with the intro course. I'll keep that one in mind.