Logic & Critical Reasoning
Fall 2025
MWF 10/Bowman 324; and 11 (FSEM)/Bowman 201
Bowman 324
Professor: Dr. David K. Braden-Johnson
Department: English & Philosophy
Office: 60 Porter Street, Office #109
Office Hours: MW 3:30-4:30; F 2-3
Email: d.johnson@mcla.edu
Blog: http://www.critojazz.blogspot.com
Online Text: Matthew Van Cleeve, Introduction to Logic and Critical Reasoning.
Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking - Open Textbook Library
Focus of Course
This course is designed to improve your ability to understand, construct, and criticize both informal (natural language) and formal (categorical and propositional) "arguments" or claims presented as reasons for accepting some further claim. Our every effort to communicate (including our efforts to teach and learn) involves the use (and, quite frequently, misuse) of logical argumentation. Consider, for example, the following syllogism (an argument consisting of three statements (two premises and one conclusion) relating three terms (nothing, logic, and eternal happiness):
Nothing is better than finding eternal happiness.
Taking a course in logic is better than nothing.
Therefore, taking a course in logic is better than finding eternal happiness!
The argument has a superficially valid form (a>b, c>a, therefore, c>b) which produces a rather unbelievable result. It is clear that something in our reasoning has gone wrong -- but what exactly? (It turns out that the premises equivocate on the meaning of the two phrases "better than nothing" and "nothing is better than.") Our most general task is to avoid all such logical mistakes (especially in more serious contexts). To this end we will consider in some detail the very notion of argument, argument structure, and the criteria for constructing good arguments; distinguish arguments supported by evidence and reason from mere opinion or belief; learn about a constructive form of induction and the limits of deduction; assess the nature and scope of “critical thinking”; and, most generally, apply these logical concepts to our writing, thinking, and acting.
I assume as well that our primary, collaborative task is to provide an inclusive and effective environment for learning -- one that promotes careful, thoughtful, and critical thinking.
In my view, critical thinking is the educational counterpart of rationality: A critical thinker is one who appreciates (has the correct emotional and dispositional response to) and accepts the importance, the convicting force, of reasons; one who, when assessing claims, making judgments, or contemplating alternative actions, seeks reasons on which to base those assessments, judgments, and actions. {There are, of course, other, marginally different yet often compelling, interpretations of critical thinking.) We will frequently supplement our philosophical discussions with a consideration of the nature and value of teaching and learning. In fact, we may spend as much time discussing the general topics of pedagogy (theories of teaching and learning) and critical thinking as we devote to the more traditional concerns of logic.
Online Activities
In addition to assignments posted to Canvas, my blog listed above contains links to all ancillary University services, course handouts, and assignments, including a noninteractive page that lists weekly assignments for this course (“Assignments: Logic and CR”). Since I prefer to devote class-time to the exposition and analysis of student and textual positions, I typically reserve my own views for this online medium.
Class Policies and Expectations
Carefully review Handout CPE.
Cancellations. I will attempt to email the entire class to warn of any unanticipated cancellations.
Laptop Policy
Like a concert hall or theater, our classroom is reserved for face-to-face interaction. Thus, barring special needs or circumstances, you may bring but not use your laptop during class. The same policy applies to cell phones and all other distracting gadgets. Please print out in advance any electronic material required for class.
Examinations
There will be several exams, most likely 4, spaced roughly evenly throughout the semester. They will be modeled after the exercises of the text and designed to test your attendance and note-taking skills, basic grasp of the issues, ability to study for cumulative exams, and attention to the details of all reading assignments and problem sets.
My grading policy is, therefore, transparent and simple, based solely on the scores of your exams (See Handout CPE, “grading”).
Note: There will be an option to substitute a critical writing exercise for one quiz; details to follow.
Art and Philosophy
Fall 2025
MWF 1-1:50
Bowman 201
Professor:
David K. Braden-Johnson
Department:
English and Philosophy
Office: 60 Porter Street, Office #109
Office
Hours: MW 3:30-4:30; F 2-3; and by appt.
Email: d.johnson@mcla.edu
Blog: http://www.critojazz.blogspot.com
Required
Text: Aesthetics, Cahn and Meskin,
eds. (In MCLA Bookstore)
Focus of Class
This is an
introductory yet rigorous seminar in the philosophy of art (often
called “aesthetics”). In the context of a philosophical (essentially
theoretical, rather than a more narrowly historical, psychological, or
sociological, etc.) approach to the products and processes of human artistic
efforts, this course surveys and employs a variety of traditional and
contemporary concepts for describing accurately our experience, understanding,
and appreciation of all forms of art.
Our
philosophical inquiries will engage two central questions of aesthetics:
“What is art/the aesthetic -- can it be clearly defined?” and “What is the source of art’s unique
value to humans?” We will also take up several related,
domain-specific, or applied questions such as:
What are the significant connections between artists and their audiences, society, history, politics, and the so-called “art-world”? What is the nature of artistic innovation, creativity, and interpretation? How are emotions/feelings, knowledge, truth, morality, taste, beauty, experience, and interpretation related to the arts? What is the nature of modern, or conceptual, art? Is music a type of language?
Online
Activities
My blog listed
above contains links to all supporting course handouts (DKBJs Handouts) and assignments,
including a non-interactive page that lists weekly reading assignments for this
course (Assignments: Art and Philosophy). I will also
post each assignment to Canvas.
Class Policies
and Expectations
Carefully review Handout CPE
Cancellations
I will attempt
to email the entire class to warn of any unanticipated cancellations.
Laptop Policy
Like a concert
hall or theater, our classroom is reserved for face-to-face interaction. Thus,
barring special needs or circumstances, you may bring but not use your
laptop during class. The same policy applies to cell phones, IPods, and all
other distracting gadgets. Please print out in advance any material required
for class.
Exams
Every
two or three weeks, students will assist in composing and then complete in
class short exams covering the content of all discussions and
readings.
My grading policy is transparent and simple, based solely on the scores of your exams. (See Handout CPE,“grading”).
------------------------------------
Ethics and Animals
Fall, 2025
MW 2-3:15
Bowman 201
Professor: Dr. David K. Braden-Johnson
Department: English & Philosophy
Office: 60 Porter Street, Office #109
Office Hours: MW 3:30-4:30; F 2-3; and by appt.
Phone: (413)
662-5448
Email: d.johnson@mcla.edu
Blog: http://www.critojazz.blogspot.com
Required Text: Lori Gruen, Ethics and Animals: An Introduction. All other readings in handout form or online.
Focus of Course
Ethics
We
all subscribe, at any point in time, to a certain set of moral propositions (only
some of which we can readily articulate). For example, someone might hold to each
of the following (moral/ethical/normative) views:
(1) Tolerance is always a good thing.
(2) Late-term abortions are wrong.
(3) Suicide should be viewed as simply a matter of personal choice.
(4) Sexual harassment is never excusable.
(5) Eating turkey on Thanksgiving is a harmless tradition.
(6) Killing whales for profit is inhumane and should be illegal.
It is important to note that ethics is not a unique form of reasoning; rather, it involves giving moral reasons to support the moral positions/beliefs/claims we actually hold or assert. Ethics therefore entails a number of questions: Are our reasons objective? That is, do they hold true for all persons in relevantly similar situations? Or could our moral reasons be reducible to custom (cultural relativism), to subjective feelings (emotivism), to self-interest (egoism), or to religion (theism)? What is the role of consistency or coherence in ethics? Should the defender of (1) tolerate someone else's defense of sexual harassment or third-trimester abortion? Can the defender of (5) make (rational) sense of his or her commitment to (2) or (6)? Is there an intellectually responsible escape from these concerns in some variety of “relativistic,” contextual, or “personal” ethics?
Who matters?
Which
species of animals on earth matter to humans (or have value of some sort to or for us); or, on the assumption that human
valuations often reflect the value that inheres to objects, have value to or in
themselves (i.e., "intrinsic" value)? These very general axiological (value-based)
questions will serve as the starting point for our consideration of the proper range of human (moral or ethical)
valuations. Of course, the earth and at
least some of its creatures do matter to some extent to all of us, as we
naturally include ourselves and/or our interests and companion/favorite animals
among those most valued objects.
How much do they matter?
Therefore, the real question we must ask is this: How much ought these living beings (including humans) matter to us and why? In other words: What is the proper degree of respect due these others? Can we identify a universal set of basic moral obligations to (some part of) the animal world, or will these obligations vary along cultural, ethnic, geographical, racial, historical, or gender-based lines? And, given certain inevitable conflicts that will arise within any coherent set of valuations, what kinds of tradeoffs are we justified in making? Given, for example, certain morally relevant similarities between many human and nonhuman animals, are we ever morally justified in advocating or engaging in forms of scientific experimentation on nonhumans that are designed to benefit humans alone.
The ethics of use
Most
generally, is the human use or consumption,
in various ways, of sentient (or conscious, or self-aware) yet nonhuman life
consistent with a recognition of the special kind of value (assuming there be
such -- here we can raise the specter of the proper valuation of non-animal
life or even non-living entities, though environmental ethics will not be our
main focus) that attaches to these living beings? Or might we identify some morally relevant
difference (or set of differences) between humans and all other creatures that are
sufficient to justify current human consumptive practices (namely, the use
nonhuman animals for food, clothing, or medical, sport, and entertainment
purposes)?
Online Activities
My blog listed above
contains links (“DKBJ’s Handouts”) to all supporting course handouts and
assignments, including a noninteractive page that lists weekly writing
assignments/notifications for this course (“Assignments: E&A”). Since
I prefer to devote class-time to the exposition and analysis of student and
textual positions, I typically reserve my own views for this online medium.
Please feel free to offer comments on my (main) blog posts.
Class
Carefully review Handout CL. Maintaining
civility and openness is especially important – and at times challenging – in
this context. Our discussions and
readings will involve unpleasant (often ignored) facts about human-animal
relations and contentious moral theories, many of which explicitly condemn the
commonplace, traditional, or seemingly innocuous daily activities of the vast
majority (if not all) of humanity.
Therefore, our task is to carve out a safe, productive, intellectually
engaging space for the careful consideration of these facts and theories about
our relations to nonhuman others. This
is decidedly not the time for moralizing (“Well, if you want to be a better
person…”), proselytizing (“Animals are people, too; end of story!”), or the
defensive promotion of one’s long-held view (“Animals have been eating each
other since the dawn of time.…”).
Cancellations
I will attempt to email the
entire class on Office 365 to warn of any unanticipated cancellations.
Laptop Policy
Like a concert hall or
theater, our classroom is reserved for face-to-face interaction. Thus, barring
special needs or circumstances, you may bring but not use your laptop
during class. The same policy applies to cell phones, iPods, and all other
distracting gadgets. Please print out in advance any electronic material
required for class.
Examinations
There will be no examinations in this course.
Book Review
See Handout BR
Multi-Stage Critical Research Essay
See Handout M-SCRE
