Fallacy Detective vs Art of Argument

[Lisa TX]

I've already asked several questions about logic, and you all have been so helpful.  

 

Here is my plan:  We will be doing Traditional Logic with Cothran in the spring.  I want to use something fun in the fall to get the wheels turning and whet appetites.  

 

I'm leaning toward Fallacy Detective, but can't seem to lay down the idea of Art of Argument --- even though I know NOTHING about it.  

 

We will be doing the "fun" part of the year during the 10-week session of the fall.  I want the homework to be reasonable but challenging.  I want the class room discussions to be a natural result of the homework.  My teacher for this class is VERY smart and capable, but this is his first round of fallacies and formal logic.  I want his prep to be easy --- for him to just learn alongside the kids and enjoy yapping it up as the explore and appreciate both the informal and formal logic.  

 

What do your recommend for the "fun" fall????  Fallacy Detective or Art of Argument????

 

[Lisa TX]

This is for high school.

[HSinNH]

:bigear:

[Lisa TX]

Okay, I'm changing my query a bit:

 

Tell me about either.

 

I do care that it is not JUST FUN ---- but very educational and does some prep work for Traditional Logic.

 

[Lisa TX]

Okay, I'm changing my query a bit:

 

Tell me about either.

 

I do care that it is not JUST FUN ---- but very educational and does some prep work for Traditional Logic.

 

[Pamela in VA]

We used both of these together last year.  The FD book is a bit lighter, but it does have a lot of examples in the exercises. We didn't always agree with the answer key, but as long as dc could give good reasons for their argument, then I felt it was successful.

 

The AA book takes a little more serious tone for part of the material, but the explanations are better than FD.  We all liked their advertising examples and they were fun to discuss.  There is also an ongoing drama with Socrates and several young people that is lightly humorous and helps to clarify concepts.  There are good written exercises and the TM contains Chapter and Unit tests.  This book also clearly classifies all the types of fallacies into a nice outline found on the inside covers of the book.

 

If I could use just one, it would be AA.

 

HTH,

Pamela F.

[Tammi K]

Personally, I hate Fallacy Detective. I find the tone condescending and examples contrived. Inmy opinion, it's juvenile. It's written by two kids and it 'reads' that way. It seems to be very popular and I keep re-reading it trying to like it, but I just can't.

[rwjx2khsmj]

In early logic stage I use Thinking Toolbox (6th) then Fallacy Detective (7th). These are not designed with grown ups in mind.  My children have enjoyed them and finish the books with solid understanding of the concepts.   I follow that with Discovery of Deduction (8th) and Art of the Argument (9th).  We finish up with Traditional Logic (10th).   During 6th and 7th especially, it doesn't take us the full school year to finish the text.  Once the "text books" are complete we use MENSA puzzle books and a variety of fun logic puzzles.

 

In my experience, Traditional Logic requires a rhetoric ready brain to be successful.  Formal logic is much more difficult to navigate and, with my children, I've found that time and experience help them prepare for success.

[dhudson]

We do both. Fallacy Detective for " fun" and then formal Logic and we are using Art of Argument this year for a more thorough grounding in informal logic.

[wingedradical]

I don't like Fallacy Detective. I think some of their conclusions are based on religious opinion and not logic. Please note that I am a Christian and I agree with most of their conclusions -- I just don't think they rigorously arrive at them by logic. That is okay, too -- if you are not writing a logic book.

 

But I tend to be easily suspicious of such things.

 

AoA is fun, as Tammi said, but does expect things of you. 

[wingedradical]

I don't like Fallacy Detective. I think some of their conclusions are based on religious opinion and not logic. Please note that I am a Christian and I agree with most of their conclusions -- I just don't think they rigorously arrive at them by logic. That is okay, too -- if you are not writing a logic book.

 

But I tend to be easily suspicious of such things.

 

AoA is fun, as Tammi said, but does expect things of you. 

[HS Mom in NC]

Another thumbs down on Fallacy Detective here. I didn't think their conclusions were logical either and I'm a conservative Christian too.

We used Cothran with our older two and overall it was worth doing, but I had a lot of objections to how they handled Scripture and political issues. It was very solid in teaching the structure of logic, but don't go blindly accepting the method or conclusions.  You may have to skip or adapt some things not matter what you use. If you're using it with a group be prepared for objections. We used them at the same time we introduced Geometry (which teaches proofs) and the older girls said it was helpful and reinforcing to do them together.

There are lots of logic games and puzzles out there. Zendo, Ken Ken, and Sudoku are favorites with our kids.  Critical Think Co. has a handful of different types of logic workbooks if you're interested in that type of thing. They alow copying for a homeschool or classroom. Bonnie Risby has a logic series too. Logic is a very broad category.