by Anastasia Anderson and Moira Kloster
What does critical thinking look like when it’s taught in philosophy? At UFV, that’s Philosophy 100, Reasoning, a course designed by Paul Herman in the 1980s and popular ever since. Naturally, students reason in all of their courses and in various aspects of their lives. The great benefit of Philosophy 100 is that it gives students the rare opportunity to slow down and reflect on reasoning itself, how it appears in different contexts, the rules they are applying, the assumptions that are being made, and standards used in the critical evaluation of reasoning.
Philosophy 100 focuses explicitly on why some reasoning counts as logical and good, and why some is not accepted because it is an uninformed opinion or an unwarranted claim. A common starting point in the course invites students to consider a piece of writing in terms of the possible goals of the author. Is the goal to establish a claim by giving reasons to support it? Is the goal to persuade you to believe something without giving reasons? Is the goal simply to describe a personal perspective? The course explains standards for good arguments, and gives students extensive practice in recognizing and tracing complex arguments, as well as practice in assessing reasoning. Examples used in Philosophy 100 often come from controversial topics in public life and current headlines, such as the Northern Gateway pipeline debate, and the legalization of physician assisted suicide. It is never purely a lecture course, because reasoning has to be practised, and students have to test themselves and one another by actively engaging with examples to see how the standards apply.
Critical thinking has deep roots in philosophy, going all the way back to the Socratic method of questioning and Socrates’ own practice of fearlessly questioning the reasoning of those who claim to have knowledge. Philosophers are particularly well-equipped to deal with some of the broader questions that come up in discussing reasoning in general and good reasoning in particular. Isn’t it all relative? Aren’t arguments about moral issues just opinion? Why do we care? What does it matter whether we have reasons to support our beliefs? Logical argument is the heart of philosophy, and philosophy follows logical arguments into deeper questions of the principles we bring to understanding the world and ourselves within it.
Just as reasoning encompass a broad range of skills, so do the exercises and assignments used in Philosophy 100. Below is a small sample of the variety of exercises used by Philosophy faculty members targeting different skills.
Some examples of exercises and assignments used in Philosophy 100.
SAMPLE 1:
Distinguishing between arguments and non-arguments can be a challenging task. In this low-stakes, group assignment, students are asked to read a Globe and Mail article and consider online comments posted in response to it. In this sample, the central claim of the article is that beautiful people are more successful and make more money than unattractive people. Students must state whether the comment contains an argument, and if so, give the premise(s) and conclusion.
- This can’t possibly be true as I’m currently broke.
- I respect this academic for finding a way to structure his career such that he can legitimately be paid for spending extended amounts of time checking out hot chicks.
- Of course this is real. A friend, a guy who turned restaurants around, would fire the two best looking servers, a male and a female. You can always find something to fire someone in the service industry, the first day.
It always had the desired effect – “If they got fired I better pick up the slack” thoughts were on all the survivors minds. They knew from their short years working that the better looking were treated better and given better shifts so if they could be fired everyone better be extra good or they will be kicking stones.
Discrimination because of appearance has existed since the first multi cell creature appeared. Skin colour, beauty or lack of, weight, height and smell are all primal factors in determining like and dislike in a quick (save yourself from being killed) kind of way. These traits and fears are most probably programmed into our DNA. - One can also be too good-looking and not be taken seriously. This is my tragedy.
- I think it probably works the other way, just as easily. People who make more money, usually do so because they are in professions which permit them leisure time. Because they make more money, they eat better, have time to exercise more, buy nicer clothes, and just generally look after themselves.
If you are the treadmill, pulling double shifts all the time, none of that applies. You eat pick up fast food. Work is the only exercise you get. Collapsing on the couch with a six pack and a pizza is a holiday.
So here comes a researcher who adds insult to injury by telling the treadmill squirrel that he/she isn’t as good looking as the lion. Issue is that if the squirrel had the lion’s lifestyle, he/she would be a lion too. Put the lion on the treadmill, and see what you get after a couple of months.
SAMPLE 2:
A deductively valid argument is one in which the conclusion is entailed by the premises. In other words, the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its conclusion. Students are often asked to distinguish between arguments that are deductively valid and invalid as part of learning the formal requirements for a strong argument. For example,
- All students are members of the gym. Ria is a member of the gym. Therefore, Ria is a student.
- If the contract was signed on Tuesday then the transfer will not come into effect before next month. However, we know that the transfer will come into effect before next month. Therefore, the contract was not signed on Tuesday.
- All citizens are voters. No voters are non-residents. So, no citizens are non-residents.