Critical Thinking – Philosophy 1103 Section 3 – Fall 2004

Instructor: David “Deeg” Garrison Office: FAO 216 Phone: 974-5915

E-mail: dgarriso@mail.usf.edu Office Hours: Tuesday 2-4pm or by appointment

Text: Attacking Faulty Reasoning by T. Edward Damer

Morality in Practice by James P. Sterba

Writing Philosophy Papers by Zachary Seech

Course Objectives: As the name of the course implies, our goals shall be to help you become a better, more careful, and more critical thinker. To this end, we will pay specific attention to the logic of argument, critical analysis of persuasive essays, and the application of critical analysis and logic in our own decision making and composition.

Course Requirements: 90% of your grade for this course will be based on one objective exam and three papers. The exam will be conducted in class and will cover class readings and discussions on the structure of argument, induction, deduction, fallacies, and technical aspects of writing argumentative essays. This exam will compose 20% of the total final grade. The first paper, which will also be worth 20% of your grade will be a three-to-five page analysis of an argument from Morality in Practice.

The second and third papers (25% each) will present an independent argument on some problem or issue and will require research external to this class. These two papers will consist of an issue of current social, political, and/or philosophical interest and must be chosen from the list of topics in James Sterba’s Morality in Practice. These papers will argue opposite or differing sides of the same argument. Thus, if you choose to write about the justification of the current war in Iraq, one paper should provide a substantial argument why the U.S. was justified in prosecuting the war, while the other should provide an argument to the contrary. These papers should be five-to-seven pages in length. The second paper will be due on the discussion date for your topic. The third paper will be due on 2 December.

10% of your grade will be based on informal class assignments (quizzes) and class participation. This will require you to be prepared for the day’s discussion before class. I like to lecture, but I prefer to conduct this course according to a Socratic method of participatory learning. It is likely that I will know more about every topic discussed in this class than any individual in this class, but it is impossible that I will have more knowledge on any of these topics than that of the class combined. I therefore assert that we shall learn more through less formal intellectual discussion than could possibly be learned from one person standing in from of the classroom. I hope to act as more of a moderator of a lively discussion group than as an lecturer, but I reserve the right to lecture at a moment’s notice.

Attendance is mandatory. I expect all students to attend each class period. I will duly consider reasonable pleas for exemption from a particular day’s meeting. An appropriate doctor, judge, or religious or school official must document any reasonable plea. Unexcused absences will count against your participation grade.

Grade Scale: I will give only whole grades for this class (i.e. A, B, C, D, F). You will receive a letter grade for each assignment; this grade will be weighted and then each of these will be added together to give the final grade. Thus if you should receive an ‘A’ for class participation, a ‘B’ for your mid-term examination, a ‘B’ for your first paper, a ‘C’ for your second paper, and an ‘A’ for your final paper, your final grade point average would be 3.1 and you would receive a ‘B’ for the course.

Disability Accommodation: Students with disabilities should consult me as soon as possible. If accommodations are needed, a letter from the Office of Student Disability Services (SVC 1133) will be required. Please inform me if there is a need for alternate format documents or a note taker.

Academic Dishonesty: The University of South Florida has an account with an automated plagiarism detection service that allows instructors to submit student assignments to be checked for plagiarism. I reserve the right to submit assignments to this detection service. Assignments are compared automatically with a huge database of journal articles, web articles, and previously submitted papers. The instructor receives a report showing exactly how a student’s paper was plagiarized. Plagiarism is a serious issue and must be dealt with seriously if we are to maintain any form of academic credibility and decorum. If you have any questions regarding plagiarism or with the University’s policy, please ask; however, the minimum penalty for gross plagiarism is an ‘F’ for the submitted work, and the maximum penalty is a ‘FF’ for the course.

This syllabus and schedule are subject to change; however, I will make no change without due consideration of and discussion with the class.

Week	Day	Subject	Assignment
1	T	An introduction to a Liberal Education	Syllabus and Handout
	R	Code of Intellectual Conduct	Damer Ch 1
2	T	Arguments and Deductive Reasoning	Seech Appendix C & Damer Ch 2
	R	Arguments and Deductive Reasoning
3	T	Nature of Good Arguments	Damer Ch 3 & Handout
	R	Critical Reading	Hardin’s “Lifeboat Ethics” in Sterba
4	T	Writing 101	Seech Ch 1 & 2
	R	Resources and Documentations	Seech Ch 4 & 5 (Essay 1 Assigned)
5	T	Introduction to Fallacies	Damer Ch 4 (Vote for Semester Topics)
	R	Structural Fallacies	Damer Ch 5 (Essay 1 Due)
6	T	Fallacies of Relevance	Damer Ch 6 (Sign up for Semester Topics)
	R	Fallacies of Acceptability	Damer Ch 7
7	T	Fallacies of Sufficiency	Damer Ch 8
	R	Fallacies of Rebuttal	Damer Ch 9
8	T	Review for Mid-Term
	R	Mid-Term Exam
9	T	Topic 1 Critical Reading	TBD
	R	Topic 1 Discussion
10	T	Topic 2 Critical Reading	TBD
	R	Topic 2 Discussion
11	T	Topic 3 Critical Reading	TBD
	R	Veteran’s Day
12	T	Topic 3 Discussion
	R	Topic 4 Critical Reading	TBD
13	T	Topic 4 Discussion
	R	Topic 5 Critical Reading	TBD
14	T	Topic 5 Discussion
	R	Thanksgiving
15	T	Catch-up Day
	R		Essay 3 Due