What after Fallacy Detective, Thinking Toolbox? Intro. Logic or Tradit. Logic?

[Kris in Wis]

My son has done Fallacy Detective and Thinking Toolbox. I want to give him something to build on that.

 

Oldest son did Introductory and Intermediate Logic and actually liked them. Two middle children (girls) could not get either Intro. or Tradit., so I just dropped them with the girls.

 

Last child needs SOMEthing, I think, and since I own both the above-mentioned curricula, I thought I'd do one of those. But I have read of other, newer programs out there that might be a better fit.

 

Can anyone advise? FWIW, this child is totally different than son #1. High energy, verbal, but not very logical. :confused:

 

Please help! And if you have other ideas, please link me! Thanks so much in advance!

[laughing lioness]

Oldest son did Introductory and Intermediate Logic and actually liked them. Two middle children (girls) could not get either Intro. or Tradit., so I just dropped them with the girls.

!

 

Intro and Intermed Logic are symbolic logic and Trad Logic is linguistic Logic. Does this particular child have a certain "bent?" My now 17 yo did Intro and Intermed Logic in 8th grade and really struggled with it. Then he did Trad and, while he thought Cothran was boring he loved the logic ;).

 

for my now 12 yo, I'm going to start with Trad (but probably not till next year) because he is clearly more linguistically orieneted and symbolic logic (i.e. math) cooks his grits. Plus, he's clearly still in concrete operations!

[Kris in Wis]

I'm logically challenged, but would you say "symbolic" logic is sort of math-oriented, while "linguistic" logic would be for more language/communication oriented people?

 

Thanks for the help!

[Kathleen in VA]

These reviews might help:

 

http://www.fallacydetective.com/articles/read/traditional-logic-1-by-martin-cothran/

 

http://www.fallacydetective.com/articles/read/introductory-logic-by-james-nance-and-douglas-wilson

 

Here's a different kind of logic course that I used with one of mine:

 

http://www.artoflogic.org/watts/index.php/site/about/

 

And here's something I saw in the Timberdoodle catalog that looked like a fun approach to logic:

 

http://www.timberdoodle.com/James_Madison_Critical_Thinking_Course_p/410-401.htm

[FloridaLisa]

I'm logically challenged, but would you say "symbolic" logic is sort of math-oriented, while "linguistic" logic would be for more language/communication oriented people?

 

Thanks for the help!

 

Yes. Also, I didn't consider whether my child was suited to either logic but rather determined how I wanted logic taught. I wanted logic taught in the form of language and written work, rather than symbolism so I changed to Traditional Logic after buying and comparing both programs. Both programs cover much of the same material.

 

Lisa

[laughing lioness]

Yes. Also, I didn't consider whether my child was suited to either logic but rather determined how I wanted logic taught. I wanted logic taught in the form of language and written work, rather than symbolism so I changed to Traditional Logic after buying and comparing both programs. Both programs cover much of the same material.

 

Lisa

 

:iagree:Ds 17 finished Intro and INtermed Logic but had an easier time with Traditional.

MP has some good articles on "thinking skills" vs. "learning logic." It's worth checking them out. Here's one to start with..