Description:

This course is an inquiry into techniques of persuasion and the standards for interpretation and assessment that are the basis for critical thinking. Argumentative and non-argumentative forms of persuasion are examined, including propaganda, exaggeration, stereotyping, slanted news and common fallacies. In addition, the course offers standards for evidential warrants based on samples, probabilities and causal claims. Relations between categorical propositions and Venn diagrams are examined and, finally, the course suggests strategies for fresh attacks on conceptual problems. 3 hrs./wk. Note: An honors contract is available. Contact the Honors Program Office, COM 201, for more information.

Supplies: Refer to the instructor's course syllabus for details about any supplies that may be required.

Prerequisites: NONE

Textbook(s): For information see - http://bookstore.jccc.net

Course Fees: NONE

Course Objectives:

Upon successful completion of this course the student should be able to:

1. Identify and apply linguistic tools for achieving clarity in thinking and communicating.
2. Construct, analyze, and evaluate, with the standards offered in the course, arguments in everyday language.
3. Identify commonly encountered forms of persuasion and fallacious reasoning found in public discourse.
4. Recognize, analyze, and evaluate, with the standards offered in the course, elementary deductive forms of reasoning.

Content Outline & Competencies:

I. Argument Structure
   A. Traditional logic
      1. Identify the relevant  indicator words” which are
linguistically associated with premises and conclusions.
      2. Identify both premises and conclusions in selected arguments and
write the selected arguments into standard form argument structure.
      3. Distinguish between a logical analysis of an argument structure
and a "critical thinking" evaluation of an argument structure.
      4. Distinguish between concepts of  truth and validity and describe
the importance of this distinction in relation to argument analysis.
      5. Distinguish between argument structures and statements which
express causal connections between events but not inferential
connections.
   B. Critical thinking
      1. Describe how premises present evidence for conclusions and
distinguish between the claim-to-truth property of premises and the
emotive properties of premises.
      2. Describe and explain the relevant criteria for judging whether or
not a premise is true.

II. Linguistic Considerations in Argument Analysis
   A. Definitions
      1. Identify and describe the following types of intentional
definitions:
         a. Lexical
         b. Stipulative
         c. Precising
         d. Persuasive
         e. Theoretical
      2. Distinguish intentional definitions from operational, ostensive,
and syntactic definitions and describe the differences between each.
      3. Describe the differences between extensional and intentional
definitions of  given words.
      4. Distinguish between vague language and ambiguous language in the
context of arguments.

III. Techniques of Deception and Manipulation
   A. Fallacies
      1.  Distinguish between fallacies of relevance and fallacies of
credibility.
      2.  Describe and identify each of the following types of fallacies: 
amphiboly, equivocation, false dilemma,  appeal to force, appeal to pity,
false authority, ad hominem, biased statistics, circular reasoning, false
analogy, hasty generalization, incomplete evidence, slippery slope, post
hoc, ignoring common cause, confusing cause and effect, and genetic
fallacy.
   B. Advertising and media
      1. Distinguish promise ads from identification ads and describe the
psychological dynamics of each.
      2. Identify in advertising contexts each of the following
techniques:  plays to patriotism and loyalty, manipulative rhetoric, 
slogans, and plays to weaknesses and fears.
      3. Describe the distinctions between qualitatively researched
marketing techniques which focus on unconscious motivations and
quantitative marketing techniques which focus on a personal and specific
audience.
      4. Identify those specific fallacies which advertisements are
designed to help us make.

IV. Inductive Reasoning
   A. Distinguish between the concepts of induction and deduction.
      1. Classify supplied argument structures as instances of induction
or deduction.
      2. Describe the salient features of  inductive argument structures
and deductive argument structures.
   B. Analogical reasoning
      1. Describe the standard form for an analogical argument.
      2. Identify the standards applicable to evaluating the strength of
analogical arguments, including comparing the number of resemblances
between the analogs, clarifying the number of things compared, describing
the diversity among the things compared, and describing the relevance of
the attributes ascribed to the analogs to the conclusion.
      3. Apply the provided analogical evaluative standards to selected
analogical arguments and assess these arguments’ strength.
   C. Generalizations
      1. Distinguish between statistical generalizations and categorical
generalizations and identify each in selected texts.
      2. Explain the concept of a  fair sample.”
      3. Describe the relationship between size and diversity in a fair
sample.
      4. Describe and identify those fallacies which are particularly
associated with inductive generalizations, including hasty generalization,
anecdotal evidence, misleading vividness, and biased statistics.

V. Causal Inferences
   A. Describe each of the following methods of John Stuart Mill for
identifying causal relationships between events:  the method of agreement,
the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, and
the method of concomitant variation.
   B. Apply the above methods of Mill to supplied empirical data in order
to identify which events may be characterized as causes and which events
may be characterized as effects.
   C. Define necessary causal conditions, probable necessary causal
conditions, sufficient causal conditions, and probable sufficient causal
conditions.
   D. Differentiate between Mill’s methods with regard to each
method’s capacity, necessary causal conditions, probable necessary
causal conditions, sufficient causal conditions, and probable sufficient
causal conditions.
   E. Explain the identifying properties of a controlled experiment.
   F. Describe David Hume’s analysis of causal agency and distinguish
Hume’s analysis from the classical conception of causality which Hume
attacked.
   G. Explain the conceptual relationship between Hume’s analysis of
causal agency and Mill’s methods of causal analysis.
   H. Identify those fallacies most frequently committed in causal
reasoning.

VI. Probability and Inductive Logic
   A. Distinguish between empirical probability and a priori probability.
   B. Describe the rules of elementary probability and apply these rules
to events selected by the instructor.
   C. Calculate the expected utility of events specified by your
instructor.
        
VII. Specific Forms of Deductive Reasoning
   A. Conditional arguments
      1. Describe the structure of conditional sentences and distinguish
material conditionals from other types of conditionals.
      2. Define antecedent condition and  consequent condition and
describe the truth-functional relations between these conditions in
material conditional sentences.
      3. Correctly translate English sentences supplied by your instructor
into material conditional form.
      4. Evaluate assigned conditional arguments with regard to validity.
      5. Identify those fallacies which are specifically associated with
conditional argument structures.
   B. Relations among categorical propositions
      1.  Define:  categorical proposition, distribution, quality, and
quantity.
      2.  Identify the four types of standard form categorical
propositions and the relations which exist between these propositions,
including contrary, subcontrary, contradictory, subalternate, and
superalternate relations.
      4.  Translate given English sentences into standard categorical
propositions.
      5. Describe the concept of  existential import and its effect on the
traditional square of opposition.
      6. Test the validity of supplied categorical syllogisms by Venn
diagrams and syllogistic rules of validity.
   C. Propositional logic
      1. Identify the structure of the following argument forms: 
hypothetical syllogisms, dilemmas, disjunctive syllogisms.
      2. Identify the symbolic connectors which express these argument
forms.
      3. Produce truth tables which define values for the connectors for
the above argument forms.
      4. Translate supplied English sentences into sentential forms and
express the value of such sentences using definitions of truth functional
connectors.
      5. Determine the validity of supplied arguments using truth tables
and definitions of truth-functional connectors.

Methods of Evaluation of Competencies:

Evaluation of student mastery of course competencies will be accomplished using the following methods:

At least one of the following methods:  research paper, essay, short
written answer, multiple choice questions, problem solving, or classroom
presentations.  A minimum of three examinations will be given  which will
constitute no less than 60% of a student’s grade.

Caveats: NONE

Disabilities:

If you are a student with a disability, and if you will be requesting accommodations, it is your responsibility to contact Access Services. Access Services will recommend any appropriate accommodations to your professor and his/her director. The professor and director will identify for you which accommodations will be arranged.

JCCC provides a range of services to allow persons with disabilities to participate in educational programs and activities. If you desire support services, contact the office of Access Services for Students With Disabilities (913) 469-8500, ext. 3521 or TDD (913) 469-3885. The Access Services office is located in the Success Center on the second floor of the Student Center.