Logic-For those using Critical Thinking Books 1 and 2-How's it going??

[Catherine]

I did do book 1 with my eldest, and mostly got it, though we ran out of time and interest for book 2. I don't remember how much we did, maybe the first three chapters? I understood book 1 better the second time around, and managed to do it in a little more than half a year. My son loves this subject, so we probably spend more time than it merits. And I am the worst teacher for it...

 

So I think we will skip over chapter 2 in book 2 and move on-we've been struggling with it for a couple of weeks. Colleen, it gets easier after chapter 2? Thanks for permission to move on!

[Colleen in NS]

I did do book 1 with my eldest, and mostly got it, though we ran out of time and interest for book 2. I don't remember how much we did, maybe the first three chapters? I understood book 1 better the second time around, and managed to do it in a little more than half a year. My son loves this subject, so we probably spend more time than it merits. And I am the worst teacher for it...

 

So I think we will skip over chapter 2 in book 2 and move on-we've been struggling with it for a couple of weeks. Colleen, it gets easier after chapter 2? Thanks for permission to move on!

 

I'm pretty sure it was you, because I remember thinking, "Cool! A highly trained doctor is doing these books!" :lol: (I'm in awe of the medical professions) Maybe it's that you mentioned elsewhere, too, that you understood book 1 better the second time around - maybe that's what stuck in my mind - yes, that's what it was - you were the rare poster who "got" and were enthused by these books (or at least book 1) and that encouraged me onward. As for book 2 getting easier.....well....I wouldn't say easier so much as some of the rest of it isn't so symbolic? I haven't been working hard at mastering the rest of the chapters (we're through ch. 5 so far), but they aren't as hard to understand as ch. 2. My mind is sorting chapters as symbolic vs. wordy.

 

I think I need to go back through them myself and apply myself a little more to learning the material in the wordy chapters. This thread has helped me to want to get a little more out of them.

[Friederike in Persia]

It's been said a few times, but I'm so excited, let me say it again," Thanks soooo much for permission to skip chapter 2!!!!"

Dd loves logic, but I got so confused in chapter 2 that we stopped altogether. We'll start up again on Monday :auto:.

 

Could we have more logic threads ever so often?! I love not feeling the dumbest kid around the block any more (might not be the best expression, don't mean to imply that any of you are dumb ).

[Catherine]

I prefer secular materials, so I don't think Traditional Logic would work for us. But I've not heard of much else that might be useful-has anyone used The Art of Argument after CT? Does it follow...logically??

[lovemykids]

I prefer secular materials, so I don't think Traditional Logic would work for us. But I've not heard of much else that might be useful-has anyone used The Art of Argument after CT? Does it follow...logically??

:lurk5:

[lovemykids]

If we decide to continue with logic at all (most likely we will)….I may go with something fun for the earlier years, like Philosophy for Kids or KOGS, not really logic, but an Intro to Philosophy in general. My dd is reading The Story of Science, which does introduce the great philosophers, so that could be enough in that area.

 

For logic and critical thinking, we may use Fallacy Detective and then move on to Critical Thinking 1 and 2. CT’s description starts in seventh grade and goes to grade twelve, so I do not see a need to start something that is so difficult a year early in sixth grade.

 

I am curious as to whether LOF will have symbolic logic or not, does anyone know?

[Matryoshka]

I prefer secular materials, so I don't think Traditional Logic would work for us. But I've not heard of much else that might be useful-has anyone used The Art of Argument after CT? Does it follow...logically??

 

I've been wanting to know the exact same thing about the Traditional Logic (although I thought I'd heard Art of Argument was religious). I posted this farther up the thread, but no one responded - since it has a link to a text that may or may not answer that, thought I'd copy it again below:

 

as for Traditional Logic, everything I've seen has been rumored to have a particular religous bent which would make it not work for me. Someone in another thread mentioned An Introduction To Traditional Logic: Classical Reasoning For Contemporary Minds - anyone know if it's usable secularly? And usable with 7th graders? (and I know religious isn't the only bias that can creep in - while at Amazon I clicked over to another text that is rumored to have a strong objectivist bias - don't want that either!) If no one knows, I may be forced to buy it myself... annoyingly, the library doesn't have that one...

[Matryoshka]

If we decide to continue with logic at all (most likely we will)….I may go with something fun for the earlier years, like Philosophy for Kids or KOGS,

 

I have Philosophy for Kids, but not the time to get to it... hmm... maybe a summer project!

 

As for KOGS, my kids hated hated hated those. Most of them are a waste of ink, imho. The history one was somewhat useful, but the Critical Thinking one was some form of torture. And they are waaaaaay overpriced for what you get.

[lovemykids]

I have Philosophy for Kids, but not the time to get to it... hmm... maybe a summer project!

 

As for KOGS, my kids hated hated hated those. Most of them are a waste of ink, imho. The history one was somewhat useful, but the Critical Thinking one was some form of torture. And they are waaaaaay overpriced for what you get.

 

Oh, I see. LOL. Okay, no KOGS then, thanks.

The Art of Argument is put out by a religious company but I hear that it is secular friendly.

:lurk5:

[Sunshine State Sue]

I prefer secular materials, so I don't think Traditional Logic would work for us. But I've not heard of much else that might be useful-has anyone used The Art of Argument after CT? Does it follow...logically??

We used the 1st half of AoA. It covered fallacies that are covered in CT. I couldn't hack the political and controversial topics, so we abandoned it. You may read some about it in this thread.

[Colleen in NS]

UPDATE: I just gave up on ch. 6 of book 2. It's more symbol work. We'll do ch. 7, then lightly review some techniques from both CT books for the rest of the year, just for familiarity's sake.

[Brenda in FL]

UPDATE: I just gave up on ch. 6 of book 2. It's more symbol work. We'll do ch. 7, then lightly review some techniques from both CT books for the rest of the year, just for familiarity's sake.

 

YEah!!! Less for me to have to try to get through before the beginning of our new year in July!

[Colleen in NS]

YEah!!! Less for me to have to try to get through before the beginning of our new year in July!

 

:lol:

[RootAnn]

Bumping to see if there are any other survivors from CT & to bring up the "logic" thread again.

 

... So, does anyone know if TL has a religious/political bent like FD?

[dands]

I am so glad i found this thread. I was beginning to think there was something wrong with me by not getting chp 2. The impressive thing was that my 12 year old understood it. This chapter would put me to sleep and dd would just continue on.