Here are some questions we have received. If you have any questions about our books, The Fallacy Detective and The Thinking Toolbox, or about anything else vaguely related to logic, critical thinking, or even just thinking, reply to this email.
This is our first full year of homeschooling. We have a 4-year-old son, a 6-year-old son, a 7.5-year-old daughter and a 9-year-old daughter. We are following the Trivium Pursuit classical style. Recently I read that young children are lacking logic. I noticed on your site the recommended ages are 13 +. In your opinion, would it be helpful (or harmful) to play "logic" games, or read one of your books to our children?
Also, a friend of mine is visiting and she is interested in your books. Could you offer us some suggestions? They have a 13 yo son, 15 yo son, 10 yo daughter, and 7 yo daughter. They will begin their first year of homeschooling all four children next month. Mrs. Teschendorf is wondering what logic program/book you would recommend for them. Would it be best to use The Fallacy Detective or The Thinking Toolbox with the boys and 10 yo daughter, or use it together as a family and allow the 7 yo to learn as her mind is capable? Sincerely, Julie
As a general rule, we recommend not starting logic until around age 12 or 13. This is because we think at that age children are best able to handle the abstract concepts. This isn’t to say that some 10 or 11-year-olds won’t get a lot out of studying it. We just offer 12 or 13 as a general rule.
Before age 13 we recommend using the Building Thinking Skills books put out by Critical Thinking Press. These books are good for developing good pre-logic stage spatial and verbal thinking skills.
I’d recommend reading The Fallacy Detective as a family. Younger children can learn better if they’re in a family setting where everyone is discussing what they’re learning. When you’re done with The Fallacy Detective, you might take a look at The Thinking Toolbox.
What logic text would you recommend for an eclectic group of six to ten high school homeschoolers in our Christian homeschool co-op? I've downloaded info & Lesson 12 from The Thinking Toolbox. I like that it has pictures, plain understandable text, & relevant examples. The Table of Contents looks organized into an easily useable plan.
I'm a little biased, but I'd recommend The Fallacy Detective to start kids off.
I was planning to use The Fallacy Detective with a co-op class of 13-15-year-olds. Based on an opinion I read on a homeschool chat board, I wonder if I should begin with The Thinking Toolbox first and then follow-up with The Fallacy Detective? I would appreciate any advice you can give me
We think The Fallacy Detective is easier and the principles are more basic. So, we vote for doing it first.
I am planning on introducing our 12-year-old daughter to logic more formally. I have read through your booklet, "Learning Logic at Home" and have purchased the following:
1. Building Thinking Skills 3, Figural.
2. Building Thinking Skills 3, Verbal.
3. The Fallacy Detective.
4. The Thinking Toolbox.
I am planning on working through these in this order. My questions are:
1. Any concerns about this ordering and the pacing? (e.g., is this 1 year/2years worth of material?)
2. I have the teaching manuals with the "Building Thinking Skills Books" but was wondering about some articles or suggestions for using your two books.
Do Building Thinking Skills 3, Verbal for one year, and then do The
Fallacy Detective the next year. If you have time the second year, do The
Thinking Toolbox also. There's no hurry. It's more important that your daughter
understand fully and enjoy the process than it is to get though the books.
You've got many years to work though these books and other books.
Hi, Bluedorn!!! I am very excited in learning Logic this way. I am interested to understand logic how to answer the student's questions logically, and I want to know nowadays students' mind. My question is, if the person is like me, isn't smart in math and logic (I failed it when I was in the university), is possible to teach it?
The logic in our books The Fallacy Detective and The Thinking Toolbox is not mathematical logic. It is verbal logic. It deals with language and how people use language. If you had trouble with math or formal "math" logic, you actually might find informal logic much more fun.
Hello! My name is Sherry Joslin and I am now a 3rd year teacher of logic at Covenant Academy in Houston. I frequently read your logic site and incorporate your books into my 7th and 8th grade classes. My simple question is this: Is Material Logic the same as Informal Logic? And are jr high students encouraged to use the discussion board? Thank you,
Anyone is encouraged to use the discussion board.
Material logic is not the same as informal logic. Material logic is similar to epistemology, which is a branch of philosophy dealing with how people know what they know, how they sense the world, how they view divine revelation, etc. Informal logic deals more with practical logic, how to diagram an argument, detecting logical fallacies, etc. Our two books fall into the category of informal logic.
I am teaching an upper grade Speech class within a Home Schooling setting. I'll have between 5 & 9 students. My background is 20+ years teaching in Christian schools, mostly in the elementary classrooms.
Is logic to thinking and speaking like phonics is to reading or grammar is to writing? Often phonics and grammar are taught in isolated settings but really their only purpose is within the field of applied language arts.
This is a poor analogy, but I'm thinking that as I set up my Speech class I want the learning of Logic and even apologetics to be included. Can this be woven together?
Help. What ideas do you have regarding this? Could be I'm all wet in my thinking. What is your opinion?
All school subjects are interrelated. The reason school is divided into subjects, instead of just having one giant amorphous "subject," is to make teaching more manageable. Speech and apologetics and logic are separate subjects, but they are related.
Isn’t logic just about people with a lot of opinions arguing with each other?
One of the most important parts of learning logic, and critical thinking skills, is knowing when you don’t have enough information to form an opinion on a particular subject. This condition occurs much more often than some people seem to think.
During such times, it is probably a good idea to shut up and not let your ignorance be known.
What fallacy is in the following article? The 15th person to guess what it is will receive a free Fallacy Detective T-shirt (http://www.christianlogic.com/products/). Just reply back naming the fallacy, or fallacies, with definitions.
September 27, 2005
Societies worse off 'when they have God on their side'
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent
RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today.
According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems.
It compares the social performance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution.
Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, . . .But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.
The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.
“The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.”
Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions. He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy.
The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional.
Mr. Paul said: “The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America.”
“The non-religious, pro-evolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator.
“The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.”
To read the entire article, go to: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C2-1798944%2C00.html
Copyright October 04, 2005, all rights reserved. 3286 views