Logic Confusion

[Country Girl]

Yes, I am confused by the subject of logic:D.

 

I'm not quite sure I understand why I am "supposed" to teach logic as a subject. I do want my kids to be able to think critically and discern truth from fallacy, but does a logic curriculum actually help them with that? I like the puzzles and games that we have done in the grammar stage because it seems like it gives them actual practice of thinking outside the box. But looking at my choices for formal logic curricula, I'm left wondering if they really help a student think more logically or if they just help them give a name to their process of thought. I'm truly wondering if you have found these programs to help with logical thinking in your kids, or if the ability to analyze information critically comes from everyday life, experiences, and discussion.

 

I live in a culture where critical thinking, problem solving, etc. has not been traditionally encouraged. Therefore, I am very aware of the importance of developing these traits in my children. However, I'm just not sure if a formal logic curriculum is really what is going to get the job done. I would really like to here from those who have BTDT and can help me understand how these programs have benfited your child. Also, if you have found the logic curricula to be unnecessary in your home, how have you fostered critical thinking and problem solving skills in your kids?

 

Thanks!

[HappyCamper]

:bigear: I think critical thinking and problem solving are a weak area for many US schools. I would also love to hear the voice of experience on the benefits of logic.

[elegantlion]

Here's my non-expert opinion: Logic, at least informal logic instruction, should be standard in all classrooms. Okay, this is ds's opinion too. He told me that the other day, then today's form of advertising would become obsolete. :D

 

Can you develop critical thinking skills without formal logic, yes. Math is good and there are other subjects where you can use the skills.

 

Informal logic (fallicies) should be taught to everyone, even adults, imo. We use Art of Argument as our curriculum and enjoyed it.

 

We did formal logic (Discovery of Deduction) this year. Ds loved it and found it very easy, easier than I did. Should everyone do that? I don't think so. It was tough, but ds liked it. If you plan on teaching rhetoric, I think you should do formal logic. If you plan on teaching philosophy, you should do formal logic.

 

It's never been optional to me, because ds is a born negotiator and he needs to know how to form an oral argument well.

 

Just my .02, but it's been very helpful to us.

[LittleIzumi]

Plus it helps with those standardized tests--if a is b, then c is turtle! :tongue_smilie:

[Country Girl]

Here's my non-expert opinion: Logic, at least informal logic instruction, should be standard in all classrooms. Okay, this is ds's opinion too. He told me that the other day, then today's form of advertising would become obsolete. :D

 

Can you develop critical thinking skills without formal logic, yes. Math is good and there are other subjects where you can use the skills.

 

Informal logic (fallicies) should be taught to everyone, even adults, imo. We use Art of Argument as our curriculum and enjoyed it.

 

We did formal logic (Discovery of Deduction) this year. Ds loved it and found it very easy, easier than I did. Should everyone do that? I don't think so. It was tough, but ds liked it. If you plan on teaching rhetoric, I think you should do formal logic. If you plan on teaching philosophy, you should do formal logic.

 

It's never been optional to me, because ds is a born negotiator and he needs to know how to form an oral argument well.

 

Just my .02, but it's been very helpful to us.

 

Paula,

 

Thanks for chiming in. Hope you don't mind if I ask a few more questions, I'm still trying to wrap my brain around this.:001_unsure: Would you say that logic was a strong suit of your ds to begin with? You mentioned that your son is a born negotiator...... so was forming and identifying logical arguments something he was already naturally good at? How did doing a logic curricula help strengthen that area for him?

 

Thanks!

[Country Girl]

Plus it helps with those standardized tests--if a is b, then c is turtle! :tongue_smilie:

 

:D

[MomatHWTK]

I did not have formal logic training but was able to argue "logically" with others just because of my natural bent in that direction. Looking at the materials on studying logic, I can see that it would have helped me to have knowledge of the different types of fallacies simply to help me crystalize my own arguments.

 

I could often hear an argument and know that it wasn't logical, but I could not communicate why it was not logical in a concise way. The fallacies are almost like a translator between the naturally "makes sense" person and the person who is not making sense. ;) Not that someone not making sense always appreciates being told that, even if you do use a special name for it. :glare:

 

Basically, I read the list of fallacies and their definitions and thought "Wow, wish I'd know this when I was working and writing for a living!" I can't believe I didn't know this stuff.

[elegantlion]

Paula,

 

Thanks for chiming in. Hope you don't mind if I ask a few more questions, I'm still trying to wrap my brain around this.:001_unsure: Would you say that logic was a strong suit of your ds to begin with? You mentioned that your son is a born negotiator...... so was forming and identifying logical arguments something he was already naturally good at? How did doing a logic curricula help strengthen that area for him?

 

Thanks!

 

I did not have formal logic training but was able to argue "logically" with others just because of my natural bent in that direction. Looking at the materials on studying logic, I can see that it would have helped me to have knowledge of the different types of fallacies simply to help me crystalize my own arguments.

 

I could often hear an argument and know that it wasn't logical, but I could not communicate why it was not logical in a concise way. The fallacies are almost like a translator between the naturally "makes sense" person and the person who is not making sense. ;) Not that someone not making sense always appreciates being told that, even if you do use a special name for it. :glare:

 

Basically, I read the list of fallacies and their definitions and thought "Wow, wish I'd know this when I was working and writing for a living!" I can't believe I didn't know this stuff.

 

The above was kind of my thinking. My dh is very much a logic, negotiator, but he can't always articulate why something seems off.

 

Ds can now reason through an argument. We don't always use the correct terminology, but he's can move deeper than the "Well I'm right and you're wrong" argument. He's always had good common sense, adding the logic training is a like super charging it. We plan on continuing to cover terminology.

 

One more thought on my suggestion to cover at least fallacies. The information world is much different than it was when I was a kid (eons ago). The Internet has made information available at the touch of a mouse. The Internet, being what it is, is not always filled with correct information. I believe my son's generation will be better skills of discernment simply because of the technological age we are in.