Critical Thinking

Discussion and Development

PHI 1103, Sections 011, 012, and 234

Spring 2004

 

Mrs. Styles

Office: FAO 232

Office Hours: Thursdays 2-4pm

                        *or by scheduled appointment

Phone: 813-974-5896

Email:  nickandmick@verizon.net

 

Course Description and Objectives

 

This is the discussion portion of PHI 1103 and constitutes 30% of your total grade for the course. The purpose of this section is to attain knowledge of what it means to think critically and to put those practices to work through discussions, thought exercises, and class assignments. We will further develop ideas regarding the primary texts covered in lectures, as well as utilize the Chaffee text to enhance our understanding of the material.

 

Texts

Please refer to the syllabus given to you by Mr. Silver

 

Grading

Scale: 100-90 = A, 89-80 = B, 79-70 = C, 69-60 = D, 59 and below = F

 

Your grade in discussion will be based on the number of points you earn out of a possible 200. Points are awarded as follows:

 

Question sets: 80 pts

Quizzes/in-class assignments: 40 pts

Attendance: 40 pts

Discussion Participation: 40 points

 

**Remember: The grade explained above constitutes 30% of your total grade for PHI 1103. The midterm is 20%, the paper is 25%, and the final exam is 25%.**

 

Question Sets

Attached to the syllabus are the question sets and the dates they are due. There are five sets, but you are required to complete only four (@ 20 pts each = 80 pts total).

Question sets are due on or before the date listed. No late work is accepted!

 

 

 

 

Quizzes/Assignments

There will be several quizzes and/or short writing assignments during discussion meetings (Probably four @ 10 pts each). There are not yet specific dates for these assignments, but I will let you know the meeting prior to a quiz or writing exercise so that you can prepare.

 

Attendance

Attendance constitutes a large portion of your grade and should not be taken lightly. Missing class will not only penalize your point earning in this category, but you will also run you the risk of missing quiz information, question set turn-in, and your participation level will suffer. I will grant you one absence, free of charge. Thereafter, each absence will cost you five points deducted from the possible 40.

There are no excused absences aside from emergency-related, properly documented cases. You have one free absence, so use it wisely. Do not show up the week after an absence, having not contacted me at all, and expect to receive an excused exception.

 

Participation

In addition to attending class regularly, participation and contribution to discussion are vital to enhancing our experience as a group. Therefore, significant point value has been designated to this category. While it is not necessary to speak every meeting, adequate participation is necessary in order to earn the full 40 points.

 

Class Decorum and Plagiarism

Please maintain proper and professional behavior at all times during discussion. Turn off cell phones, arrive on time, and show respect for fellow students and your instructor.

 

Plagiarism is unacceptable and is grounds for termination from the course as well as the university.

 

The University of South Florida has an account with an automated plagiarism detection service which 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 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. Also see www.turnitin.com and http://www.ugs.usf.edu/catalogs/0304/adadap.htm#plagiarism.

 

*Please inform me of any disabilities or special needs and the University and I will do whatever is necessary to accommodate them.

** If conditions exist that prevent regular attendance of discussion and/or lecture, you must inform me within the first or second week of classes in order to arrange alternate evaluative procedures.

 

 

Question Sets

(Due on or before date listed)

 

#1 (Due Jan. 29)  [Specifically referring to Plato’s Five dialogues and Chaffee, ch 2]

1.) Based on Chaffee’s discussion of thinking actively vs. passively, give at least two examples of the ways in which Socrates exhibits the quality of ‘thinking actively.’ (You can use any of the dialogues)

 

2.) Describe how a critical thinker discusses ideas in an organized manner. (according to Chaffee) Then, assess whether or not Socrates meets these standards. Which of the characterizations does he exhibit? Which does he not? Explain.

 

3.) Based on what you know so far about thinking critically, does Socrates live up to these characterizations? Compared to another character in the dialogues, (Euthyphro, Meletus, etc) how does Socrates differ in his approach to solving problems and answering questions? Does this contrast make him more of a critical thinker or less? Why? why not? Defend and Explain.

 

#2 (Due Feb. 19) [Refer to Descartes’ Meditations and Chaffee, ch 3 and 4]

1.) Discuss the way people view the world through different ‘lenses.’ Give an example to illustrate this phenomenon. Based on your example, how accurate are our senses in providing us with clear, certain, and objective facts about the world we share? Explain.

 

2.) How does Descartes challenge the idea that what we perceive provides us with knowledge about the world? How can our interpretations of our perceptions lead us astray in making factual claims about the world, according to Descartes? Give at least two examples.

 

3.) Briefly describe Descartes’ proof of god’s existence. Is the proof valid? Sound? Invalid? Explain the reasoning behind your assessment.

 

#3 (Due March 18th) [Refer to Hume’s Enquiry and Chaffee ch 5, as well as notes from discussion]

 

1.) What is the difference between belief and knowledge? Does completely accurate belief count as knowledge? Why or why not?

 

2.) Would Hume assert that human knowledge is acquired (if it is at all), by a priori or by a posteriori means? Why? Describe what these two types of knowledge are and why Hume’s philosophy relates to whichever one you chose.

 

3.) According to what we have discussed about knowledge thus far, do you think we are born with all the necessary ‘tools’ to learn (as in Descartes’ argument for a priori knowledge), or that we must learn by experience, by a posteriori means? Explain.

 

 

#4 (Due April 1st) [Refer to Kant’s Groundwork and Chaffee ch 9,10, and 11, and your notes]

1.) Based on Chaffee’s categorization of various types of moral judgments, (p. 425-428), which does Kant’s ethical proposition fall under? Does his system appeal to the interest of personal needs, societal happiness, authority, etc? Is it an absolute or relativistic moral formula? Explain.

 

2.) Is the Categorical Imperative (whichever version you choose to discuss) an example of critical thinking? Does it serve as a sound argument, free of fallacies of relevance, false generalization, etc? Why or why not?

 

3.) Suppose there is an officer of the law (a police person) at your door, looking for a criminal, wanted for grand-theft. The criminal happens to be your brother and/or sister. You are hiding him/her in your house to save them from severe punishment. Is it your moral obligation (i.e. your duty) to a) turn your family member in to the authorities, or b) maintain the undisclosed location of your sibling in order to protect them? Why? How would Kant respond to this dilemma? Explain.

 

#5 (Due April 15th) [Refer to Utilitarianism and Chaffee, ch 9, 10, and 11]

1.) Based on Chaffee’s categorization of various types of moral judgments, which does Mill’s ethical proposition fall under? Explain.

 

2.) Describe one of the objections to Mill’s utilitarianism and his reply. Is the reply valid/sound? Does his reply adhere to the requirements of being relevant, not over-generalizing, etc? Why or why not? Explain.

 

3.) Suppose there is a family member or close friend of yours stuck to rail-road tracks spanning a bridge. A train is swiftly approaching and you (assuming you have calculated this prior to the situation) know that if the train stops abruptly, it will jump the tracks and fall over the extremely high ravine, thereby sending hundreds to their deaths. If you let the train pass, however, a beloved person in your life will perish. What do you do? What would Mill argue you should do? Does Mill’s ethical philosophy work in such a situation? Why or why not?