Logic texts: Cothran, Wilson, other?

[dangermom]

My daughter isn't old enough yet to start studying logic, but I want to go through it myself before she is, so I know what we're doing, and I'd like to do it this summer maybe. I'm having a hard time choosing, though; WTM recommends "Introductory Logic" by Wilson, but I'm not thrilled by the Calvinist flavor (since we're not Calvinists) that I've read in the few pages I've been able to preview online. Cothran's "Traditional Logic" looks too difficult for a junior-high student.

 

Can anyone either reassure me about one of these, or recommend a solid logic text for 6-8th graders? Does the new edition of WTM maybe have a new title to look at?

[Spy Car]

My daughter isn't old enough yet to start studying logic, but I want to go through it myself before she is, so I know what we're doing, and I'd like to do it this summer maybe. I'm having a hard time choosing, though; WTM recommends "Introductory Logic" by Wilson, but I'm not thrilled by the Calvinist flavor (since we're not Calvinists) that I've read in the few pages I've been able to preview online. Cothran's "Traditional Logic" looks too difficult for a junior-high student.

 

Can anyone either reassure me about one of these, or recommend a solid logic text for 6-8th graders? Does the new edition of WTM maybe have a new title to look at?

 

I'd reassure you that your judgement is correct on Introductory Logic by Nance/Wilson. The authors throughly mix their own theological beliefs into the materials in ways that have nothing to do with Logic, and are not logical.

 

From my understanding of those posting early reviews, SWB has dropped her recommendation of Introductory Logic in the latest edition of TWTM. Bravo Susan!

 

It's tough when there really doesn't seem to be a great Logic program out there that teaches Logic "from the perspective of Logic" that we could all happily use with or children, especially as the subject is so fundamental to a classical education. Sigh.

 

Bill

[dangermom]

Thanks, Bill. *sigh* Maybe I'll start reading rhetoric texts and hope someone writes a good non-sectarian logic text in the next 3 years! Anyone?

 

Should I get Traditional Logic and do it myself so I can teach it some, maybe? I've never had any formal logic training obviously, though I'm not bad at those puzzles. :p

[clwcain]

Peter Kreeft's Socratic Logic 3rd edition -- there is nothing else better out there. Period.

 

A possible good supplement is Kreeft's Philosophy 101.

 

It's appropriate for an adult or advanced high schooler and will give you the logical background you need to teach it correctly regardless of what program you elect to use with your child.

[dangermom]

Hm. That does look interesting (if very intimidating indeed). Now if only my library had it... Thanks very much for the recommendation, it's on my wishlist now. Is it a Catholic text or what?

[Spy Car]

Peter Kreeft's Socratic Logic 3rd edition -- there is nothing else better out there. Period.

 

A possible good supplement is Kreeft's Philosophy 101.

 

It's appropriate for an adult or advanced high schooler and will give you the logical background you need to teach it correctly regardless of what program you elect to use with your child.

 

Hey Chris, the Wikipedia article on the author reefers to Peter Kreeft as a "Catholic apologist."

 

So my question for you is does Kreeft stick to "Logic" in this work, or does he engage in Apologetics?

 

Bill

[clwcain]

Hey Chris, the Wikipedia article on the author reefers to Peter Kreeft as a "Catholic apologist."

 

So my question for you is does Kreeft stick to "Logic" in this work, or does he engage in Apologetics?

 

Bill

Kreeft is the among the foremost philosophers working in English today.

 

In his apologetical works, he defends the faith using reason and evidence.

 

He'll teach you logic, even if that includes instructing the reader in his own errors of thought.

 

Why would apologetics be at odds with logic?

[Spy Car]

Kreeft is the among the foremost philosophers working in English today.

 

In his apologetical works, he defends the faith using reason and evidence.

 

He'll teach you logic, even if that includes instructing the reader in his own errors of thought.

 

Why would apologetics be at odds with logic?

 

I'm not entering the debate of whether apologetics is at odds with logic, I just want to know if Kreeft engages in apologetics in this work, either overtly or by stealth?

 

I only ask because this is a road I've walked too many times. Help me out :001_smile:

 

Bill

[clwcain]

Bill,

 

I really don't know what stealth apologetics is. Honestly. I've read lots of Kreeft's apologetical work and I don't recall any of it starting with "This is so because the Bah-bul tells me so." I don't recall it ending there, either.

 

I don't recall anything specifically apologetical in the Socratic Logic text. But, if you have doubts, check it out of the library before you buy it.

 

Now, his Handbook of Apologetics, that's clearly apologetics for all that it is rigorously logical. His excellent book Catholic Christianity is too, picking up where C.S. Lewis stopped in working from Mere Christianity to the fullness of the Faith found only in the Catholic Church.

 

If you want to understand pre-Cartesian logic, the investigative tool used from Socrates until the so-called Enlightenment and still necessary (although often debased) for textual analysis in the humanities, this is the place to go. He wrote it because there were no other treatments of the subject.

 

He won't cover mathematical or symbolic logic, so if that's your criteria, you'll be disappointed.

 

Check out his website. He puts many of his lectures on there for free, along with some of his articles. You can get a feel for his work that way, too.

 

Oh, and by-the-bye, the use of "you" here is not directed directly at Bill but at any reader trying to sort through the seeming wealth of options.

 

HTH

[dangermom]

Thanks, that's very helpful. Since we're not Catholic either, I'm not really looking for a text that uses a lot of Catholic theology as examples in logic exercises. I do need a non-sectarian book. Now if only I could get it from the library! (I checked the ILL catalog, and...well, I can't get there from here. Wonder if Sacramento has it?)

[FloridaLisa]

Hmmm. . . I have Copi's Introduction to Logic sitting on my shelf, but haven't used it. Perhaps that would fit the bill for some that want a *secular* logic text? It covers informal fallacies, formal logic and some symbolic logic. There are some, but not all, answers in the back of the book. I picked this up used.

 

HTH,

Lisa

[clwcain]

Thanks, that's very helpful. Since we're not Catholic either, I'm not really looking for a text that uses a lot of Catholic theology as examples in logic exercises. I do need a non-sectarian book. Now if only I could get it from the library! (I checked the ILL catalog, and...well, I can't get there from here. Wonder if Sacramento has it?)

 

I don't recall any theology used as examples. I recall lots of excerpts from great literature, speeches, etc. throughout history that demonstrate either logical thought or logical fallacies.

 

But even if there are some theological assertions used for illustrative purposes, I don't see that as a bar to using a logic text. Should one reject a logical conclusion simply because one doesn't care for it? That is madness, not sanity.

 

I know it is available in the US through ILL, since it is in at least a few college libraries. No idea how you'd preview it in foreign countries.

 

His "Socrates Meets..." series is also excellent in this vein.

[Mama Lynx]

I haven't looked at Kreeft yet myself, but he is the top recommendation from my agnostic friend with a BA in philosophy from a state college.

 

:D

[Guest]

Peter Kreeft's Socratic Logic 3rd edition -- there is nothing else better out there. Period.

 

A possible good supplement is Kreeft's Philosophy 101.

 

It's appropriate for an adult or advanced high schooler and will give you the logical background you need to teach it correctly regardless of what program you elect to use with your child.

 

Thanks for this rec, Chris. I think I'm going to check it out.

[dangermom]

I'm fine with some theology, or with historical/literary examples. But a heavily Catholic or other denominational book is simply not going to be all that useful to our school; although I have the greatest respect for their faith and theology, I belong to a different church, I have different assumptions, and I'm looking for a book I can use with an 11-yo without constantly getting sidetracked (as much as I enjoy discussing theology at other times). All that being said, this looks like a good book and I'm going to try to get a copy to review, though how I do not know. Sac doesn't have it either.

 

As for ILL's, our broke county library has had to restrict them to libraries in our area of Northern CA--and we're about the largest library in the group. No more books from Iowa for me. Pretty soon there will be no ILL's at all, probably not even requests from other county branches. It's extremely depressing to contemplate, esp. since they just laid me off as well; until last week I worked there as an extra help librarian. :(

[Guest]

I'm fine with some theology, or with historical/literary examples. But a heavily Catholic or other denominational book is simply not going to be all that useful to our school; although I have the greatest respect for their faith and theology, I belong to a different church, I have different assumptions, and I'm looking for a book I can use with an 11-yo without constantly getting sidetracked (as much as I enjoy discussing theology at other times). All that being said, this looks like a good book and I'm going to try to get a copy to review, though how I do not know. Sac doesn't have it either.

 

As for ILL's, our broke county library has had to restrict them to libraries in our area of Northern CA--and we're about the largest library in the group. No more books from Iowa for me. Pretty soon there will be no ILL's at all, probably not even requests from other county branches. It's extremely depressing to contemplate, esp. since they just laid me off as well; until last week I worked there as an extra help librarian. :(

 

You can see some samples and the table of contents here. (Don't buy it here, though, it's too pricey)

[Spy Car]

Bill,

 

I really don't know what stealth apologetics is.

 

Well, apologetics by stealth would include things like what C.S. Lewis does in the Chronicles of Narnia where you don't mention subjects directly, but you don't need to be a rocket scientist to get the picture.

 

I don't recall anything specifically apologetical in the Socratic Logic text. But, if you have doubts, check it out of the library before you buy it.

 

Allright, I was hoping you might same me some time if you knew this would be a "no go" for someone like myself who was looking for a secular text.

 

Check out his website. He puts many of his lectures on there for free, along with some of his articles. You can get a feel for his work that way, too.

 

Oh, and by-the-bye, the use of "you" here is not directed directly at Bill but at any reader trying to sort through the seeming wealth of options.

HTH

 

I'll check it out. Thanks mate :001_smile:

 

Bill

[clwcain]

Well, apologetics by stealth would include things like what C.S. Lewis does in the Chronicles of Narnia where you don't mention subjects directly, but you don't need to be a rocket scientist to get the picture.

 

Lewis as stealth apologetics? If that's your example, then I can assure you that, no, you won't find "stealth apologetics" in Kreeft's logic text.

 

I wouldn't consider Lewis an apologist, though, so YMMV. He wrote some apologetic materials, but the tales set in Narnia are not among them. Christian allegory, sure, but not apologetics if that word has any meaning aside from "Christian content".

[clwcain]

You can see some samples and the table of contents here. (Don't buy it here, though, it's too pricey)

 

I think Amazon has the best price I've seen. That's who we bought our copy through.

[Spy Car]

Lewis as stealth apologetics? If that's your example, then I can assure you that, no, you won't find "stealth apologetics" in Kreeft's logic text.

 

I wouldn't consider Lewis an apologist, though, so YMMV. He wrote some apologetic materials, but the tales set in Narnia are not among them. Christian allegory, sure, but not apologetics if that word has any meaning aside from "Christian content".

 

I did use the term too loosely. Mea culpa. But either way there is an author's intention to promote the faith, and this can be done in a straight forward fashion, or not so much.

 

It's easy when materials scream their intentions, but when it's hidden away, and you end up with a work on a subject that's different than you expected, then one can waste a lot of time in review.

 

Bill (who's lost a lot of time)

[clwcain]

By that criterion, Bill, I don't think you have anything to worry about.

 

Kreeft is confident enough in the logical coherence of the Catholic Faith that he doesn't attempt to sneak anything in "through a back door".

 

He started out a Calvinist, IIRC, and it was his pursuit of philosophy on the model of Socrates and his study of Aristotle that led him to Aquinas and submission to the Faith. That and surfing. :D

 

He, like many Catholics, doesn't think the Faith needs to be "promoted" because we all by nature desire the True, the Good, and the Beautiful. But this is getting way off topic.

 

Apologies for the threadjack. Bill, PM me if you want to continue this particular discussion.