Alternatives to Art of Argument; talking about Metacognition

[Chrysalis Academy]

I bought Art of Argument a couple of years ago, and I've tried to read it several times.  I just tried again, as I was planning to use it this year . . . but I just hate it.  I think it's dull, I hate the tone, I just don't find anything about it interesting or engaging. 

 

So partly I'm wondering if I'm the only weirdo who feels this way?  But that doesn't actually really matter too much - what I really need to know is: 1) what else out there covers logical fallacies (and is secular), and 2) at what point in a student's career is an informal logic course critical? If ever?

 

I'm planning on studying Metacognition with my kids thoroughly - we'll study psychology, both individual and group, the ways our minds and others' can be deceived, how we think, perceive and judge . . . do we really need a specific class on informal logic?  And if so, what can we use that is secular, and engaging?  

 

I have Weston's Rulebook for Arguments and Workbook for Arguments, but the latter looks like a high school rhetoric class to me, not like something you would cover in middle school. 

[SkateLeft]

I didn't like Art of Argument at all, but my younger daughter did. In fact, she LOVED it. I stayed out of the way, and let her use the DVDs. She just came to me to share her work.

[mommymilkies]

I feel the same.  My oldest is ok with it, though.  I don't think the terms are necessary for most kids, though (said as a former Philosophy major!).

[Mrs Twain]

I am planning to do Fallacy Detective in 6th, as well as Workbook of Arguments slowly over 6th, 7th, 8th.  I don't know the answer to your main question, but it seems to me that the Workbook of Arguments material would be far more useful for life than doing additional courses about logical fallacies/informal fallacies.

 

Perhaps Workbook of Arguments will be too difficult for middle school, but maybe it won't.

[HRAAB]

I just ordered it today.  It's been so hard to find a secular logic program.  Hoping for the best.

[Momling]

I wasn't a fan of the tone, but my girls thought it was terrible. It's in a to-sell pile.

[SilverMoon]

Portions of Everything's an Argument would be accessible.

 

(Happy AoA user; that's all I have to add.)

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I considered buying it multiple times, but the samples always convinced me not to. (There might have also been some comments here that swayed my decision.)

 

We are doing a mix for metacognintion/logic/critical thinking. In my mind they all sort of fall under metacognition. I've seen different definitions, though. In my planner I only have a small space, so I write THINK. ;)  (Perhaps that's bad--only thinking during one slot of the day... ;) ).

 

We used Critical Thinking 1 from The Critical Thinking Company. We enjoyed it, but I know not everyone does. It was made for a classroom setting, so that is enough to turn people away. We found the even though we didn't have a roomful of people to discuss the topic, we were still able to make it work. I bought the second level, but didn't want to continue with that format.

 

We've just started this year, so I'm hesitant to recommend anything we have only used for a few weeks. Also, some of the resources we use aren't for the faint of heart, so I hesitate for that reason as well. (We just listened to The Psychopath Test during a drive. Not something I would recommend cart blanche to all pre-teens. Snapping is another we've worked with. Again, not a blanket recommendation, but it is one that we've referred back to multiple times. These were extras, not books during our formal studies.)

 

It sounds to me like you will probably end up covering informal logic at some point in your metacognition studies. They are mentioned in so many places, it would be quite shocking if during several years of studying thinking you never encounter them.

 

 

 

 

[Chrysalis Academy]

Great suggestions, guys! And thanks for the moral support, too.  :tongue_smilie:

 

I will look again at Workbook for Arguments - I definitely plan to weave that into our Metacognition studies at some point.  I"ll just have to decide when it feels appropriate.  And Everything's an Argument is on my Amazon wish list - maybe it's time to take the plunge!

 

I think I will let go of the idea of AoA, finally - I just dislike the tone so much I think I'd do a bad job teaching/discussing it.  I'd be too snarky and critical.  

[~Anna~]

I have this bookmarked, but haven't really looked through it, so not sure if it is at the level you want:

 

https://bookofbadarguments.com/?view=flipbook

 

I also have these two books, but again, I haven't really looked through them. Just throwing them out in case they help.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Harry-Stottlemeiers-Discovery-Matthew-Lipman/dp/0916834069

 

http://www.amazon.com/Logic-Rescue-Kris-Langman-ebook/dp/B001QTXLQ4/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1405605788&sr=1-1&keywords=Logic+to+the+rescue

[HRAAB]

Is this the Workbook for Arguments?

 

 

[redsquirrel]

We also used Critical Thinking 1&2 from Critical Thinking Press. We made it work, lol. I am planning to use it again with my younger boy. That said, being given the books etc for free certainly did a lot to make me like them. I wasn't going to pay to use something else unless I had no other choice.

 

FWIW, my son did like the books. It was something he felt like he used in his life. You know, unlike all that math and science and history and literature I try to cram in his head. That stuff is totally useless. :001_rolleyes:

[Woodland Mist Academy]

 

 

FWIW, my son did like the books. It was something he felt like he used in his life. You know, unlike all that math and science and history and literature I try to cram in his head. That stuff is totally useless. :001_rolleyes:

 

:lol:

 

 

I can relate! Lily loves to look through the ads in magazines and criticize them. She is quite horrified at the ads in some science magazines. She's become a little cynical in the process...better cynical than naive, I suppose...

 

[Chrysalis Academy]

Is this the Workbook for Arguments?

 

Yep, that's it.

[Chrysalis Academy]

I bought and sold the Critical Thinking books awhile ago - I also found them dry and the classroom-like setup wasn't appealing to me.  

 

I just put a bunch of logic/reasoning/critical thinking/argumentation books on hold at the library - I'll skim through them and see if there is anything good, and if so I'll post about it here. I'm starting to realize that in this area, I think we'll do better to just read and discuss some engaging trade books, rather than seek out a curriculum.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I just put a bunch of logic/reasoning/critical thinking/argumentation books on hold at the library - I'll skim through them and see if there is anything good, and if so I'll post about it here. I'm starting to realize that in this area, I think we'll do better to just read and discuss some engaging trade books, rather than seek out a curriculum.

 

I think this is an excellent plan. Unless something changes, it's what I plan to do once we finish the curriculum we are using now. I've not found any curriculum that looks remotely tempting.

 

FWIW, we are using James Madison Critical Thinking Course. It's not perfect by any means, but it's a great fit for right now. I disagree with some of the answers the authors give, but agree with enough to continue. It ties into the strong interest Lily has in forensics, which makes it extra engaging. Others might not find discussing crime scenes every afternoon a pleasant pastime....

 

[Chrysalis Academy]

I think this is an excellent plan. Unless something changes, it's what I plan to do once we finish the curriculum we are using now. I've not found any curriculum that looks remotely tempting.

 

FWIW, we are using James Madison Critical Thinking Course. It's not perfect by any means, but it's a great fit for right now. I disagree with some of the answers the authors give, but agree with enough to continue. It ties into the strong interest Lily has in forensics, which makes it extra engaging. Others might not find discussing crime scenes every afternoon a pleasant pastime....

 

 

:lol: Yeah, I don't think forensics is quite up Shannon's alley . . . she was watching Week 5 of The Horse Course yesterday, which was all about diseases and parasites.  I hear her every minute or two going, "Ew, gross! I can't look!  Disgusting!" and I'm thinking, well, at least vet/doctor/physiologist/pathologist is ruled out as a career option!  :lol:

[Alte Veste Academy]

I have this bookmarked, but haven't really looked through it, so not sure if it is at the level you want:

 

https://bookofbadarguments.com/?view=flipbook

 

 

Oh my gosh! How adorable is that!? 

 

It is coming out on Amazon too! Release date of August 26. http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Book-Bad-Arguments/dp/1615192255/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1405614728&sr=1-1&keywords=an+illustrated+book+of+bad+arguments

[Reefgazer]

tell me more about the tone.  We are scheduled to use it this coming year and now you all have me afraid to try it.

I wasn't a fan of the tone, but my girls thought it was terrible. It's in a to-sell pile.

 

[~Anna~]

tell me more about the tone. We are scheduled to use it this coming year and now you all have me afraid to try it.

We were going to do it this year too, but now I am rethinking. I already have it though, so I may just go ahead and try it.

[~Anna~]

Oh my gosh! How adorable is that!?

 

It is coming out on Amazon too! Release date of August 26. http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Book-Bad-Arguments/dp/1615192255/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1405614728&sr=1-1&keywords=an+illustrated+book+of+bad+arguments

I saw that. I thought I would look at the one online first, and then see if I wanted to buy a hard copy. It looks pretty cool.

[Mrs Twain]

Oh my gosh! How adorable is that!?

 

It is coming out on Amazon too! Release date of August 26. http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Book-Bad-Arguments/dp/1615192255/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1405614728&sr=1-1&keywords=an+illustrated+book+of+bad+arguments

Dang, you people make me spend so much money. LOL. That book looks perfect. Maybe it would be perfect for the library to buy, though...

[Alte Veste Academy]

Dang, you people make me spend so much money. LOL. That book looks perfect. Maybe it would be perfect for the library to buy, though...

 

I don't know. Looks like one I need to own and hand down to the grandkids. That book is too adorable to share with thousands of other library patrons. I see rocking my grandbabies, reading to them about logical fallacies as they drift off to sleep. :tongue_smilie:

 

I'm only kidding a tiny bit. 

 

ETA: And you and Anna have such similar avatars, at first I was like ???, YOU pointed it out to US. :lol:

[Chrysalis Academy]

tell me more about the tone.  We are scheduled to use it this coming year and now you all have me afraid to try it.

 

Well, there are all these snappy debates between Socrates, Tiffany, and her boyfriend Nate.  They are just very flip and chatty in a way that I find grating.  Yet the text is dry to me.  I don't know, it's hard to be more specific than that.  But when I sit down and try to read it, I just find my mind & eyes wandering.  It doesn't engage me.  And Tiffany and Nate really get on my nerves.

 

Look, a lot of people really love this curriculum, so don't be turned off just because of me - read some of the rave reviews too, and look at the sample and see how you feel.  I'm really not making a substantive or content-based criticism - it's just that, for the life of me, I don't find this book very readable or engaging.  YMMV.

[Chrysalis Academy]

I don't know. Looks like one I need to own and hand down to the grandkids. That book is too adorable to share with thousands of other library patrons. I see rocking my grandbabies, reading to them about logical fallacies as they drift off to sleep. :tongue_smilie:

 

I'm only kidding a tiny bit. 

 

ETA: And you and Anna have such similar avatars, at first I was like ???, YOU pointed it out to US. :lol:

 

Oh, I totally agree! That looks awesome.

[Alte Veste Academy]

Well, there are all these snappy debates between Socrates, Tiffany, and her boyfriend Nate.  They are just very flip and chatty in a way that I find grating.  Yet the text is dry to me.  I don't know, it's hard to be more specific than that.  But when I sit down and try to read it, I just find my mind & eyes wandering.  It doesn't engage me.  And Tiffany and Nate really get on my nerves.

 

Look, a lot of people really love this curriculum, so don't be turned off just because of me - read some of the rave reviews too, and look at the sample and see how you feel.  I'm really not making a substantive or content-based criticism - it's just that, for the life of me, I don't find this book very readable or engaging.  YMMV.

 

Aw, see, I think that kind of stuff is fun...if you like taking on different personas and affecting goofy, potentially offensive accents. :tongue_smilie: You could consider AoA a twofer, logic and drama taught side-by-side. ;)

 

For the love of Pete, I have to go to the store people! We have NO FOOD!

 

[Pen]

I have heard that in places like Sweden, understanding how to recognize propaganda and similar subjects to that is a standard part of their education, I am wondering what they use.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

 I was just flipping though Michael Shermer and Pat Linse's Baloney Detection Kit  (an expansion on Carl Sagan's list) trying to decide when to use it. It's just an over-sized booklet, but there are eight sample syllabi for teaching science and psuedoscience listed in the back, including booklists, magazine articles, etc. So, not logic, but it might be useful to someone.

http://shop.skeptic.com/merchant.mvc?&Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SS&Product_Code=b075PB

 

The little Soul of Science booklet looks nice too. (I've just flipped through it.) Classy. Even the texture of this little book is lovely.

http://www.michaelshermer.com/soul-of-science/

 

Hope this isn't too derailish...

 

 

[lewelma]

  And Everything's an Argument is on my Amazon wish list - maybe it's time to take the plunge! 

 

This is a tough book.  Definitely AP level. 

 

Also, just an FYI and it probably does not matter to you, but it is very American Centric.  The Language of Composition is better IMHO.

 

EaA: Being bilingual in the United States

LoC: how does the language we use reveal who we are

 

EaA: Still grappling with the Implications of Title IX

LoC: How do the values of sports affect the way we see ourselves

 

Just something I noticed that might be relevant to someone out there.

 

Ruth in NZ

 

[lewelma]

tell me more about the tone.  We are scheduled to use it this coming year and now you all have me afraid to try it.

 

We were fine with it.  We just skipped the parts that we did not like.  We did like all the made up ads that they used for examples, and it was nice to have examples of each fallacy all in one place.  We also appreciated the quizzes to keep us honest about not just understanding the material but actually memorizing it.

 

But as I said in the high school thread, you could just get a list of the fallacies, read and discuss them, and the look for ads, billboards, political shenanigans to represent each one.  You don't need a curriculum to study them.

 

Ruth in NZ

[Chrysalis Academy]

This is a tough book.  Definitely AP level. 

 

Also, just an FYI and it probably does not matter to you, but it is very American Centric.  The Language of Composition is better IMHO.

 

EaA: Being bilingual in the United States

LoC: how does the language we use reveal who we are

 

EaA: Still grappling with the Implications of Title IX

LoC: How do the values of sports affect the way we see ourselves

 

Just something I noticed that might be relevant to someone out there.

 

Ruth in NZ

 

 

Thanks, Ruth

[Woodland Mist Academy]

 there are eight sample syllabi for teaching science and psuedoscience listed in the back, including booklists, magazine articles, etc. So, not logic, but it might be useful to someone.

 

To clarify:

 

The books are about rational and critical thinking. My wording was poorly chosen. The syllabi aren't for teaching pseudoscience.... ;)   I always save teaching the intricacies of UFO technology and where to look for Sasquatch for ninth grade when students are a bit more mature and can use care when handling all the delicate ghost hunting instruments. 

 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

;)  :lol:

[Chrysalis Academy]

:smilielol5:

[lewelma]

I always save teaching the intricacies of UFO technology and where to look for Sasquatch for ninth grade when students are a bit more mature and can use care when handling all the delicate ghost hunting instruments. 

 

Hold your hat, I have written about that!  Post 21 on: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/445902-so-if-i-were-getting-panicky-about-logic-stage-science-and/

 

[wapiti]

Rose, just throwing this out there FWIW, but there's a nice logic chapter in... Frank Allen's Algebra (LOL; this, in case you're wondering; I now have three annotated teacher editions but no student edition - I kept ordering from Amazon hoping it was not the annotated one :tongue_smilie:).  It includes sections on implication and syllogism demonstrated using language and, of course, ultimately leads to discussion of proof.  I'm sure it's not what you're after; I just like coming at logic from the basis of a math angle first - the bones of the thinking, if you will - and then adding the language angle later would hopefully be easy.

[Kendall]

I used Art of Argument a few years ago and then sold it because I didn't really like it.  But I wish I had kept it.  It is really nice to have a lot of fallacies in one place with examples.  I liked it better than the Fallacy Detective for that.  Aof A just had a more thorough list then all of the other sources I have.  My goal was to review them this year, but even though I had lots of sources, it didn't get done.  I think had I kept AofA it would have been my guide and I could have gone to the other sources when I wanted more or different examples.  

 

I did this book aloud with a 9th grader down to preschooler(she wasn't listening much).  I ended up just summarizing a lot of it as I found it wordy and some of the words unnecessary.  So it worked well for us because I condensed it.  We also didn't stress the category names or even the fallacy names too much, though I was going to do that more in the review year;I'm going to try again this year.

 

Kendall 

 

 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

Hold your hat, I have written about that!  Post 21 on: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/445902-so-if-i-were-getting-panicky-about-logic-stage-science-and/

 

 

  :hat:   ;)

 

Interesting. We approach the issues a bit differently here. For example, I think it's important to teach questioning even scientists and their findings waaaaayyy before 14! PhD does not equal god. (Nor does any other degree, for that matter.)  Perhaps our situation is unusual, but from a young age Lily was exposed to scientists, physicians, attorneys, etc. in our inner circle who had a fondness for one pseudoscience or another, so it was important to teach her to be critical of what people say regardless of initials following the name. This may be obvious for subjects outside the specialty, but we were encountering them teaching pseudoscience within the specialties! This included scientists, mind you. Although, it is just as important to keep an eye out for it elsewhere.

 

Maybe because the real life examples seemed too good to pass up--they were so close to home (in our home!)--I don't know.....it's just hard for me to imagine a child needing to be 14......

 

Even research.... I have vivid memories of poring over studies at one point in Lily's elementary school years. I started just muttering to myself, but ended up critiquing some of them with her.

 

After our move, I needed to choose a new physician, and I decided to take Lily with me to my appointments.. After the first one I asked what she thought. She recommended I keep looking and backed up her recommendation with solid reasons. Good call, little one. Conversely, when she went to meet the first candidate when choosing her own physician, she was quite happy. So was I. (So far, of course. We always stress that it's OK to decide you want a second opinion or a even new physician if suddenly something seems off.)

 

While it's true that the media often distorts findings and misrepresents scientists, it's also true that EXPERTS can be mistaken. The more time Lily spends with scientists the more respect she has, but she also sees their humanness and faults as well. Both are important. Personally I believe they are important from an early age.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Wow, guys, our thread has only one star. . . . :eek: guess somebody out there really loves AoA.  Sorry, whoever you are!  ;)

[NittanyJen]

I bought and sold the Critical Thinking books awhile ago - I also found them dry and the classroom-like setup wasn't appealing to me.  

 

I just put a bunch of logic/reasoning/critical thinking/argumentation books on hold at the library - I'll skim through them and see if there is anything good, and if so I'll post about it here. I'm starting to realize that in this area, I think we'll do better to just read and discuss some engaging trade books, rather than seek out a curriculum.

 

Have you gone through Smullyan's "What is the Name of This Book?"  The writing can be a tad old-fashioned here and there, but the puzzles are still fun.  My kids love working out the issues from the Isle of  Knights and Knaves :)

[mommymilkies]

Wow, guys, our thread has only one star. . . . :eek: guess somebody out there really loves AoA.  Sorry, whoever you are!  ;)

I hate the rating system.  It's like an anonymous way for people to be jerks (you'll see my 4-star rating on my profile may drop for saying so). 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I hate the rating system.  It's like an anonymous way for people to be jerks (you'll see my 4-star rating on my profile may drop for saying so). 

 

I like to think (hope) it was just an accident on a cell phone, but either way I don't like the star ratings.

[lewelma]

Interesting. We approach the issues a bit differently here. For example, I think it's important to teach questioning even scientists and their findings waaaaayyy before 14! PhD does not equal god. (Nor does any other degree, for that matter.)  Perhaps our situation is unusual, but from a young age Lily was exposed to scientists, physicians, attorneys, etc. in our inner circle who had a fondness for one pseudoscience or another, so it was important to teach her to be critical of what people say regardless of initials following the name. This may be obvious for subjects outside the specialty, but we were encountering them teaching pseudoscience within the specialties! This included scientists, mind you. Although, it is just as important to keep an eye out for it elsewhere.

 

Maybe because the real life examples seemed too good to pass up--they were so close to home (in our home!)--I don't know.....it's just hard for me to imagine a child needing to be 14......

 

Even research.... I have vivid memories of poring over studies at one point in Lily's elementary school years. I started just muttering to myself, but ended up critiquing some of them with her.

 

{snip}

While it's true that the media often distorts findings and misrepresents scientists, it's also true that EXPERTS can be mistaken. The more time Lily spends with scientists the more respect she has, but she also sees their humanness and faults as well. Both are important. Personally I believe they are important from an early age.

 

 

Ah, Woodland Mist, I think that your approach is quite wonderful.  Interacting with scientists I think would be key to being able to see them as both human and expert. I do things in a very similar way from an early age. In the other thread I was responding to idea that very young kids should be able to evaluate scientific claims (although I did misread her intent). And there are some people who either purposely or accidentally teach kids to mistrust scientists by knocking down research that is only described in sound bites. I think that your approach sounds very nuanced and very effective.

 

She asked "How do we evaluate scientific claims?" and her son was 9 at the time.

 

But I think that you are a few years too early. Personally, I would not address these issues intensively until a student is about 14. I think that students need to understand the complexity of science through detailed study before they can evaluate scientific claims or can have an opinion about whether a scientist is biased. Scientists are experts in their fields - EXPERTS. Yes, the media often reduces very complex issues into sound bites that can be picked apart by the lay public, but if you get into the details, scientific claims are not so easily dismissed. Scientists spend decades studying a single small topic. They are not idiots. They disagree because of the probabilistic nature of most things under study. And to think that a middle schooler has the ability to evaluate scientific claims is a bit absurd. I don't mean this in a mean way, but I think that in the logic stage you must be very careful to not undermine scientists. I see this a lot in the general media, and it really makes me mad. My personal goal is definitely scientific literacy and that means cold hard study of concepts in Biology, Earth Science, Chemistry, and Physics. Not nearly as much fun as picking apart a sound bite, but in the end much much more useful. Sorry if that was too harsh!! I think that you can definitely compare pseudoscience with science and talk about the difference. But just be very careful to make sure that your ds realizes that the media is simplifying scientists' research, and that the original research is very complete if it is going to pass peer review (ask me how I know!)

 

And so people don't have to go digging, and because I think it is relevant to a thread on metacognition and fallacies, I will x-post my bigfoot post. Her son was very into bigfoot but did not view the docos with a critical eye:

 

 

 

My goals were predicated on some issues specific to our family. Ds, as I mentioned, has become interested in cryptozoology, specifically Bigfoot. He is watching "mystery" type documentaries, full of Bigfoot "experts" who claim to be able to discuss the family structures and societal norms of Bigfoots, and I can see that Ds is not critically examining the claims of these experts. This is one reason that I feel we need to start looking into the methods and processes of real scientists--to build a picture of what real science is.

1. What is science? What are the limits, if any, of science. What questions can it answer and which can it not? Why? Ds has begun to be interested in cryptozoology, which is leading to discussions about what science can and cannot do, for example.

 

2. What is a scientist? How do they work? What are their goals? (Yes I realize that question is huge and each scientist will answer it differently!). What is their context--why do they choose the questions they do, and not others? I'm thinking lots of scientist biographies, and series like Scientists in the Field. What are their biases and presuppositions? How might these things influence the scientist? Why do scientists in the same field disagree on topics?

 

3. How do we evaluate scientific claims? (Logic, understanding methods, critical thinking, etc.)

I think that it is easier to discuss these esoteric issues with a specific example, which is why I use newspapers and magazines. But I think that you could very effectively use the Bigfoot documentaries. I would suggest that you record a few, and tell your ds that you want to study it from the point of view of a scientist, not just from the point of view of entertainment. Have him watch it all the way through once to satisfy the “fun†and curious factor that these docos promote. Then, for the second viewing on a different day, set his expectations that you will be stopping the documentary every 5 minutes or so and spending 10 minutes analyzing the “science.†Keep a notebook and write down the scientific methodological issues that you discuss, and give examples from the documentary. Put different issues on different pages, so that you can add to each issue later. Make it a cold hard study. Plan to cover a documentary in 2 to 4 sittings depending on how far it leads you to discuss issues. Go look something up on the Internet in the middle of watching the doco. At the end of the study of the doco, have him do a presentation about the errors in science that you and he uncovered. Make it a “skeptics†thing. Make it a real “win†to uncover 3 or even 4 logical fallacies. Make finding errors in the doco what becomes “cool†rather than the belief in bigfoot. Indoctrinate him into the wonderful club of scientists who are skeptical of pseudoscience. You can do this same kind of study with the aliens documentaries.

 

You can also discuss the scientific issues about bigfoot. Discuss “Occam's razor.†Discuss small population sizes and inbreeding (he like gorillas so should know about this.) Discuss that there has only been 1 unknown large mammal “discovered†in the last 30 years (or some such), and the likelihood of one living in population areas is basically zero. Discuss where on the evolutionary tree this organism is. Is it human? If so, which one? Research, dig, and study. Don't take an entertainment “doco†at face value.

 

Next, watch some scientific documentaries, like David Attenborough. Go and verify the material in the middle of the doco. Study, analyze, and compare the difference between a real scientific doco and a edutainment doco. Note the difference in language. You will find hype language in the bigfoot and alien docos, but not in the Attenborough one. Write down the language in your notebook, actual examples in quotations. Do a “hunt†for exaggeration and hype. Compare. This would be like literary analysis. How do the writers of the bigfoot docos create the excitement and hype? Specifically, how?

 

For both types of docos, write down the names of the “scientists†and afterwards go look them up on the Internet. Real scientists publish in peer-reviewed journals, pseudo-scientists don't. Look up which journals are peer reviewed. Study what it means to be peer reviewed. Talk about how pseudo-scientists might publish in pseudoscience magazines, but could not get their work into a true scientific peer reviewed journal, because they would not get accepted. Discuss the scientific societies and how you gain entrance.

 

What is pseudoscience vs science? You need to explain why it is so important to differentiate between the two. One is only masquerading as science the other is real. Science is based on evidence – data collection, replication, controls, analysis, identifying assumptions, and finally conclusions. Pseudoscience is myth and belief dressed up in scientific terminology without the objective data collection with replications and control. Pick a pseudoscience he is not wedded to and study it. Do magnets in water make it healthier? Do wearing crystals around your neck protect you from evil? Go on the Internet and study it. Where is the evidence? What is the scientific concepts and language that it is cloaked in? What words do they use to make it seem like science? Why is it not science? How would you design a scientific study to prove it? Have these studies been done?

 

Use medicine as a great example. Talk about the fact that most medicines come from plant based compounds that have been isolated. Discuss aspirin. But then discuss the placebo effect. Go to a natural food store and into the alternative medicine section. Read the ingredients and write down the active ingredients. Go and look them up on the Internet. Are they proved effective or are they more likely placebo effects? How to scientists choose which possible plant or alternative medicine to research. They want the one that is most likely to actually be effective when studyied with objective experimentation. They don't want to waste their time or money. Discuss how bringing a medicine to market takes a decade and a few million dollars. They would not waste their time on something that is not likely to work! How do they choose? They choose the compound most likely to have a demonstrate-able effect. Discuss that if he cannot discern the difference between real and fake, he is likely to waste a LOT of money. You could even go back historically and research some of the old “medicines†that we now know were hoaxes. Why were people taken in? Radium was very popular during the atomic age to put in all sorts of things. Why did people buy stuff that was actually really bad for them? How were they fooled? In hindsight it is obvious, but at the time it was not. How can you extrapolate this to current products and their claims?

 

Well, this has been a bit of a stream of consciousness, and now I am off for dinner.

 

Hope this is helpful,

 

Hope I have not completely derailed your thread, Rose, but this does seem to be quite relevant to teaching kids about evaluating claims. Certainly don't need AoA if you just have some bigfoot videos!

[Woodland Mist Academy]

For those who prefer print, I would recommend Skeptic Magazine. They even have a Skeptic Junior section in the back for the younger crowd. There are also quite a few books geared toward elementary/middle school regarding pseudoscience.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Ok, I think I found a great alternative!  I only just started reading it, but it's totally entertaining and covers skepticism more broadly, rather than focusing specifically on logical fallacies ( I think they are in there, but in English, not Latin).

 

Think: Why You Should Question Everything - Guy Harrison

 

http://www.amazon.com/Think-Why-Should-Question-Everything/dp/1616148071/ref=lh_ni_t?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

[Nicholas_mom]

 

Ok, I think I found a great alternative! I only just started reading it, but it's totally entertaining and covers skepticism more broadly, rather than focusing specifically on logical fallacies ( I think they are in there, but in English, not Latin).

 

Think: Why You Should Question Everything - Guy Harrison

 

http://www.amazon.co...d=ATVPDKIKX0DER

 

 

Oh Rose, this looked so good until I read the chapter on "A Thinker's Guide to Unusual Claims and Weird Beliefs" has things like UFOs, bigfoot, and alien abductions with Alternative Medicine ????  Really??? It is presented almost as quakery and seems biased and based on limited facts.......Or is that to help with discussions??

 

There is tons of research alternative medicince that was considered quackery in the past and has become more mainstream.  Hence, insurance will pay for some of these therapies (acupuncture, massage, chiropractor).  Since every's "body" is different, each alternative medicine will have different effects for different bodies.

 

Of course I haven't read the book and it might be set up this way on purpose for discussion.  It which case I fell for it!  :)

[Chrysalis Academy]

No, you are right, he's definitely anti-alternative medicine and does consider it right up there with UFOs and alien abduction.  Now, one of the major points he is making is to think critically about people who make big claims/promises without evidence with the intent of ripping off the guillable, and I would argue that some alternative medicine salespeople  fall into this category.  He is specifically ripping on homeopathy and flower essences. But yeah, he does throw the baby out with the bathwater, for sure.

 

I think this will be a great opportunity to discuss biases . . . of all sorts.  And evidence of different kinds, and how research is often funded by drug companies who are only interested in testing things they can patent . . . and lots of other issues that come up when you consider alternative/complementary medicine.  He is making the argument that it's only alternative/complementary until it's been proven effective, and after that it's just . . . medicine.  So by that argument he wouldn't classify those things you mentioned as alternative.  But I don't think that's the way most people think of alternative medicine . . . so here is an example of a fallacy of definition!  Ah, meaty.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

:lurk5:

 

I was hoping for a good conversation to distract me from what I really need to be doing. This might be it! ;)

[Nicholas_mom]

Cool :coolgleamA:   Makes sense.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

I do think it's a good time to point out the benefits of never letting one's guard down. It's good to be skeptic even of the skeptics. :ph34r: