Here are our recommendations:

Building Thinking Skills Book 2 — age 10
Building Thinking Skills Book 3 Figural – age 11
Building Thinking Skills Book 3 Verbal — age 12
The Fallacy Detective — age 13
The Thinking Toolbox — age 13
Critical Thinking Book 1, Chapter 2 — age 14 (you could skip this–CT2 has a short review of this chapter)
Critical Thinking Book 2 — age 14 or 15
Introductory Logic Video Course by James Nance — age 15-16
The Art of Reasoning by David Kelley — age 16-17

I have included the ages here, but it is not so much an age requirement for each book as it is a progression. We suggest you progress from Building Thinking Skills to The Fallacy Detective to The Thinking Toolbox to Critical Thinking to Introductory Logic to The Art of Reasoning. There are other books which could replace The Art of Reasoning (Intermediate Logic by Nance, Traditional Logic by Martin Cothran, Material Logic by Martin Cothran,
Introduction to Logic by Irving M. Copi, Critical Thinking in US History) as you see fit. I wish I could eliminate recommending CT1 altogether, but Chapter 2 of CT1 is not covered in The Fallacy Detective or The Thinking Toolbox, and it is an important chapter. CT2 DOES have a short review of what you learned in Chapter 2 of CT1, so if you are short of funds, you PROBABLY could get away with skipping CT1 entirely and just go directly to CT2. The Thinking Toolbox can be used after or before The Fallacy Detective.

Last night, Sir Gibbsley’s prized possession, his Tribal Tooth Mask, disappeared. Can you help him find it? Sir Gibbsley used to hunt elephants in Africa till a rogue elephant took out his right leg. Now he loves to terrify his nephew Horatio with fearsome tales of the Serengeti. Use your critical thinking skills to find Sir Gibbsley’s Tribal Tooth Mask and return it to its case.

Today’s student would find Logic difficult, due to its antiquated language and sentence structure, but author Daniel Valles has produced a curriculum which makes it usable again.

Taken from the Art of Logic web site:

Based on Isaac Watts’ book, Logic, the Logic Seminar provides instruction in clear thinking from a Christian perspective on how to properly exercise our senses to discern between good and evil. If we cannot think clearly, we will not interpret God’s Word clearly either. Set in 1776, this 3-DVD Set contains almost four hours of video and over forty short lessons enriched with an engaging colonial theme and cinematic illustrations. The entire curriculum includes a Student Workbook, Teacher Guide and Tests & Quiz Pack. Besides helping the students learn the fundamentals behind their thinking, they are largely taught what makes good thinking, how to judge rightly, and to be aware of what can affect or influence their thinking. Visit the website to preview all of the lessons and learn more about this unique approach to this vital subject of our thinking!

Now for the contest!!

In the comments below describe an activity, game, or exercise which will encourage good thinking skills.

The winner will receive a complete Logic Seminar Combo (DVD set, Student Workbook, Teacher Guide, and Test & Quiz Pack).

We’ll pick a winner in a few days.

Thanks,
Olaf V., South Holland, Netherlands

Myers Family reviews the new edition of The Fallacy Detective

Last night, Sir Gibbsley’s prized possession, his Tribal Tooth Mask, disappeared. Can you help him find it? Sir Gibbsley used to hunt elephants in Africa till a rogue elephant took out his right leg. Now he loves to terrify his nephew Horatio with fearsome tales of the Serengeti. Use your critical thinking skills to find Sir Gibbsley’s Tribal Tooth Mask and return it to its case.

Go here to solve the mystery.

I’m always delighted when two sides that seem mutually opposed come together in harmonious agreement. I’m even more delighted when I’ve taken one of those sides.

In this case, I write of the efforts of Nathaniel and Hans Bluedorn, brothers from Iowa who advocate homeschooling and create educational materials from a Christian worldview. The fruit of the latest Bluedorn effort is a short text, The Fallacy Detective, designed to be a primer in logic for older children –specifically, homeschooled Christian children, though the book is intended for anyone who wants to explore the subject. As something of a downside, the book is marketed on the conservative Web site http://www.townhall.com. It shares pages with the extremist works of Ann Coulter, among others, but certainly belongs in better suited company.

Since the focus of the book is the detection of logical fallacies as a first step in the study of logic, judgments made by the authors are at a minimum and, thankfully, backed up well. As good Christians, they have faith in the Bible, but are not afraid to analyze its meanings and questions through logic. At worst, they point out that the question Who made God? is loaded against Christian dogma. That the brothers begin the book by firmly establishing their beliefs is comforting, and do not attempt to fight any further ideological battles over whether their beliefs are correct.

Well, for the most part. There was one thing I didn’t like, buried near the end. The book teaches its reader to recognize propaganda techniques and distinguish them from logical tactics, and at one point they explicitly state that the claim there is no God is a lie. Its only fair to apply the books lessons to itself for consistency, and in this one case, I must disagree. After all, as much as a person can use the Bible as a factual authority, I could claim that an equally valid world viewpoint comes from the Quran, or from secularists. From this complaint alone, I emphasize that an open mind is critical to appreciating this book from a non-Christian standpoint.

The brothers Bluedorn believe that logic is the language of God — an explanation I agree with entirely, as long as it is interpreted with an open mind. They also claim that studies in logic will strengthen the beliefs of Christians. I also agree with this. However, I find it hard to stomach their insinuations that all other religions are illogical, and that logic is to be used as a combative weapon. After all, all beliefs rest mightily on a floor of assumption; it would be unfair to judge Hinduism or Buddhism purely on Christian terms and make use of that as a logical counterargument. (In fairness, these claims were made in an accompanying text, A Christians Guide to Learning Logic at Home.)

I often think back to Monty Pythons Life of Brian,where Graham Chapmans title character, meant to parallel Jesus, tells a large crowd how important independent thought is for the management of their own lives. As they respond in unison, Yes! We will think for ourselves! the audience becomes acutely aware of this kind of sheep mentality. I find it wonderful that the Bluedorns, among others, are actively reinvigorating the religious world with a healthy dose of independent thought, at a time when idolatrous worship of high-profile figures like Justice Roy Moore, and the resulting secular backlash, threatens to destroy whatever fragile relationship remains between these two sides that seek to push each other away.

Teaching people to ask these kinds of questions can only be beneficial, both from my point of view and that of the brothers Bluedorn. This attitude directly confronts both those extremists who believe in blind faith without knowledge, and those who have no appreciation for the root and meaning of logic. There is far more common ground to be found here than many will realize. The Fallacy Detective, and other works like it, can be read and appreciated by people of all beliefs as long as they are all taken in the proper context.

After all, logic’s beauty is, to a point, its self-consistency. I believe in logic because it works within itself and when applied to the world around us. Obviously, the beliefs of no two Christians are exactly alike, but we still share enough common ground to make the debate worthwhile. In the meantime, Ill be looking for secular interpretations and appreciations of faith to hit the bookstands.

(first published 2003)

Logic is neither “Greek” nor “Hebrew.” Polylogism [many logics] is an underlying presupposition of multiculturalism, which teaches that different cultures have different logics, and that all of these different logics are equally valid, which simply means that none of them are actually valid, which ultimately reduces to the assertion that there is no absolute truth, only relative cultural truth.

1+1=2 — and this formula is neither peculiarly Hebrew nor peculiarly Greek.
If A > B and B > C, then A > C — and this formula is neither peculiarly Hebrew nor peculiarly Greek.

“Syllogism” is simply a word which describes a logical process which God has inscribed into everyone’s mind — Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Chinese, Zulu. Nobody invented the syllogism. Syllogisms have always been used and have always been observed. Many persons have described that logical process, and one of those persons happened to have assigned the name “syllogism” to it, and that name has happened to have “stuck.” That is a Greek name, but there is nothing about the logical process which is peculiarly Greek. The Scriptures are filled with syllogisms.

Another formulation of logic is called Propositional logic (a.k.a. Symbolic Logic).

If A is true then B is true.
A is true.
Therefore B is true.

Scripture is filled with this form also. Leibniz did not invent it, he merely described what has always been around.

The real difference is not some kind of culturally specific logic (Hebrew logic, Greek logic, etc.), but culturally specific presuppositions — you call it “mindset.” Greek culture, Hebrew culture, Latin culture, Chinese culture, Zulu culture, American culture, Presbyterian culture, Baptist culture, Buddhist culture, Hindu culture, Feminist culture, Republican Party culture, Homeschool culture, Classical music culture — each has some culturally specific propositions which they simply presume to be true, but which may actually be false. But the propositions of Scripture are true, and each culture — including Hebrew and Greek culture — must be brought into conformity to Scripture. One step in this process is to show each culture its cultural sin by pointing out the logical contradiction within its own presuppositions. Another step is to point it to the only source of true propositions, which is God speaking through the Scriptures. Of course, no individual from that culture will listen unless he has a heart to seek the truth, which is the venue of logic.

It wouldn’t be fair to simply dismiss an argument by saying that syllogistic reasoning is false. (Can you prove it’s false?) If you deny syllogisms, I believe it can be demonstrated (probably syllogistically) that you will actually end up denying the ability to communicate on a meaningful level. You end up with nonsense like,

Syllogistic reasoning is not true.
You are using syllogistic reasoning.
Therefore your reasoning is not true.

This reasoning is syllogistically valid, and if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true. But if the conclusion is true, then the conclusion must be false because the argument uses syllogistic reasoning! The conclusion is both true and not true at the same time and in the same respect, which is absurd nonsense.

If you would disagree with a syllogistic conclusion, then you must show that either the premises are not true (one or all of the propositions inadequately represent what Scripture says), or else that the reasoning process is false (the premises are arranged into illogical relations or at least into relations unwarranted by Scripture).

Harvey

Did you catch the other ‘fallacy’? The sentence… isn’t. It does not express a complete thought. “More people”? More people than WHAT? More people than horses? More people than frogs? More people than….what? If you have a “more”, you must have a “than”. No one will prove Pepsi guilty of false advertising. They didn’t say anything. It’s very much like the deceptive, “Compare at $9.99!” It’s a non-sentence, but it fools the majority.

Mark G. van der Hoek

Fallacy Detectives,

We’ve created a new forum!

The Fallacy Forum

We hope this forum will be as fun as our old forum, but focus on logical fallacies and errors in reasoning.

You can stay up-to-date with what we’re doing by subscribing to our email list.

The Fallacy Detective News

Just use your head!
Nathaniel Bluedorn