Is it too much to do Traditional Logic I and II

[Jean in Newcastle]

Ds14 will be starting 9th grade next week. We tried Discovery of Deduction last year and he hit a wall. So this year we got Traditional Logic I and II. I could do both one after another. Or I could just do Traditional Logic I this year and do Traditional Logic II next. Any thoughts on the pros and cons of doing both or splitting them up?

[bugs]

We did TL I followed by TL II in the same year. It was fine. You could spread it out as well if you'd rather.

[MommyThrice]

We did them both in the same year. Ds was glad when it was over.

[Jean in Newcastle]

We did them both in the same year. Ds was glad when it was over.

 

Why? Was it the curriculum itself? the subject? the pace?

[Tullia]

Why? Was it the curriculum itself? the subject? the pace?

 

I'll look forward to hearing from Mommy Thrice about her experience. Here's ours, fwiw.

 

Doing both in one year was very doable for my co-op classes. Some people do find the basics of formal logic dry--and some find it unendurable. That's why so many people spice things up during TL I with a study of fallacies or reading some of the Peter Kreeft Socrates meets______ books. TL II is more interesting but also more challenging. There are analysis assignments, and the chapter on translating ordinary writing into standard logical form is especially challenging for many students.

 

Techwife, in another recent thread, reminded me that Classical Academic Press has some excellent logic resources which were published after my son's co-op studied logic. We used Memoria Press materials plus Fallacy Detective and Thinking Toolbox. If you search for posts by Tina in Ouray you might find some other suggestions for supplementation and application if you want to do more than just the TL books alone.

 

IMO, the basic principles of formal logic in and of itself are not terribly useful or interesting--the fun and utility come with application. My son outran the Classical Writing publishing schedule, but I know that Lene's plan was to integrate TL into later volumes once grammar had been covered. (We stopped with CW Maxim so we didn't get that far.) I wish we'd been able to track with the CW schedule because my application of both logic and rhetoric was more "hit and miss" than I'd have liked.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Thank you, Martha. We've already done The Fallacy Detective and Thinking Toolbox but I can see how formal logic can be dry! That was why we first used Discovery of Deduction last year. He liked the tone but found that it wasn't quite step by step enough for him. We thought that Traditional Logic I & II might be more step by step.

[Tullia]

Thank you, Martha. We've already done The Fallacy Detective and Thinking Toolbox but I can see how formal logic can be dry! That was why we first used Discovery of Deduction last year. He liked the tone but found that it wasn't quite step by step enough for him. We thought that Traditional Logic I & II might be more step by step.

 

I think the step-by-step approach is one of TL's best features, so I'm hoping it will work for you. :) Since your son has done FD and TT he has the tools to analyze letters to the editor if you'd like to do some of that alongside TL I if you feel a need to do do something extra (it's not at all necessary, though). TL I is pretty straightforward, and can easily be done in a semester.

 

Some of my co-op students did need to slow down with Ch. 5 in TL II, but Tina had warned me it might be necessary, so I'd built that into our schedule. The later chapters of TL II which incorporate case studies were big hits with all the students. My favorite parts of TL are Chapters 3 &4 in book II dealing with techniques for reducing syllogisms into the most frequently used form. :D

[MommyThrice]

Why? Was it the curriculum itself? the subject? the pace?

 

I think it was the subject. We had already covered The Thinking Toolbox and The Fallacy Detective - both of those were very interesting and provided immediate real-life applications. TL, however, was much more theoretical. It became very, very detailed in book two and my son could find very little real-life application. We still go back to TTT and TFD in our daily conversations and speech & debate, but only the beginning of TL is every referenced.

 

I did not go through all the material with my son and that made grading nearly impossible for me. Many assignments are to write several examples of what was being taught, and it was all I could do to go back and try to make sense of the chapter so I could see if my sons examples were correct or not. I'm sure that if I went though the course with him, we could have discussed it and that would have helped tremendously.

 

Good luck.

[Jean in Newcastle]

 

I did not go through all the material with my son and that made grading nearly impossible for me. Many assignments are to write several examples of what was being taught, and it was all I could do to go back and try to make sense of the chapter so I could see if my sons examples were correct or not. I'm sure that if I went though the course with him, we could have discussed it and that would have helped tremendously.

 

Good luck.

 

Thank you. This feedback is very helpful. At this point it is easy for me to say "I'll do it with him" but reality means that might only last for one week!;)

[bugs]

If you want to grade the work, I believe you have no choice but to keep up. I did think that TL II was more interesting than the first.