Logic and Critical Thinking

Fall 2006

 

Professor Martinez-Saenz

Office: Hollenbeck 301

Phone: 937 327 7847

e-mail: mmartinezsaenz@wittenberg.edu

 

Course Objectives

This course will be divided into two parts. The first part of the course is designed to introduce students to formal logic.  By the end of the semester the students should be able to do the following: (1) translate statements in Categorical and Propositional (2) evaluate and solve proofs in Categorical and Propositional Logic, (3) understand better some methods and techniques for problem solving.  Students will take three exams and quizzes during this part of the class. During the second part of the semester we will work on developing our critical thinking skills.  The students will get an appreciation of critical thinking as it relates to the law.  Each student will have the opportunity to evaluate court decisions enabling him or her to recognize the subtleties involved in rendering legal decisions.

 

Course Requirements:

Quizzes 20%: There will be a short quiz every Friday, excluding exam weeks.  These quizzes will enable me to determine whether or not each of you is understanding the material. I will drop the 3 lowest quiz grades.  No make-up quizzes will be given.

 

Logic Exams 60%

Logic 1: September 13, 2006

Logic 2: October 4, 2006

Logic 3: October 20, 2006

 

Argumentative Paper 20 %  DUE December 13, 2006 by 5 PM

Each student will be expected to read and write a reaction to a U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision.  You can select from the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Gratz v. Bollinger, Grutter v. Bollinger.  It is your burden to convince me of your position.  You will, as a consequence, be expected to write an “argumentative paper.”   If you have any questions regarding this assignment please ask.  Keep in mind the Decision is quite long.  Therefore, I would urge you not to wait until the last minute to begin reading and preparing your paper.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/

 

The essays should be MORE than two pages, but LESS than six pages.  Answers that

either do not meet the minimum requirement or exceed six pages will not be evaluated.

Use standard margins and no more than 12 point font.

 

This class will not be exclusively a lecture class.  While I will lecture, at least half of the class will be devoted to discussion. Since participation is an integral part of this class, attendance is required.  If you have not read or done the assignment for the day please do not try to make up some nonsense.  It will serve you better in the long run to acknowledge your mistake and perform better the next time.  All students will be expected to go to the board during the first part of the course.  I will explain this more fully during the first class session.

ACADEMIC DISHONESTY WILL RESULT IN FAILURE OF THE COURSE see Student Handbook for Wittenberg’s policy on academic dishonesty.


Texts

 

David A. Spieler Thinking Logically II (TL)

 

Schedule Reading Schedule

 

8/21- Introduction

8/23- Chapter 1

8/25- Quiz

 

8/28-

8/30- Chapter 2

9/1- Chapter 2 continued

 

9/4 – LABOR DAY no classChapter 2 continued

9/6- Chapter 2 continued

9/8 -Quiz

 

9/11- Chapter 2 continued

9/13-  TEST # 1

9/15- Riddle

 

9/18-Chapter 3 

9/20-Chapter 3 continued

9/22 Guest Speaker: Karen Reynolds, Director Career Center

 

9/25-Chapter 3 continued

9/27- Chapter 3 continued

9/29- Chapter 3 continued

 

10/2-Chapter 3 continued

10/4- TEST # 2

10/6- No class

 

10/9-Chapter 3 and Handouts

10/11- continued

10/13- continued

 

10/16-FALL BREAK

10/18- Review

10/20-Test # 3

 

10/23- “Statements” E-RESERVE

10/25- Types of Arguments E-RESERVE

10/27- Quiz

 

10/30- Arguments  continued

11/1- Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States E-RESERVE

11/3- Quiz

 

11/6-Roe v Wade E-RESERVE

11/8- Planned Parenthood v. Casey E-RESERVE

11/10- In class exercise

 

11/13- “Separate but Equal” Plessy v. Ferguson E-RESERVE

11/15- Brown v. Board E-RESERVE

11/17- In class exercise

 

11/20  NO CLASS

11/22  NO CLASS

 

11/27- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke Powell Opinion

“The Diversity Rationale”

11/29- Grutter v. Bollinger Thomas Opinion

12/1- Gratz v. Bollinger Rehnquist Opinion

 

 12/6- Continued E-RESERVE

12/8-Review