|
Lecturer(s)
|
-
Stránský Michal, Mgr. PhD.
|
|
Course content
|
1. Introduction to Informal Logic 2. Propositional logic 3. Paraphrase and interpretation of the text 4. How to recognize an argument? 5-6 Argument structure 7. Developed arguments - argumentation diagram 8. Deductive and inductive argumentation 9-10 Evaluation of the argument 11. Fallacies 12. Basics of Pragmadialectics 13. Final summary
|
|
Learning activities and teaching methods
|
- Home preparation for classes
- 40 hours per semester
- Preparation for course credit
- 40 hours per semester
- Participation in classes
- 10 hours per semester
|
| prerequisite |
|---|
| Knowledge |
|---|
| Prerequisities are not set. |
| Prerequisities are not set. |
| Skills |
|---|
| Prerequisities are not set. |
| Prerequisities are not set. |
| learning outcomes |
|---|
| Knowledge |
|---|
| to define the basic concepts of argumentation (argument, premise, burden of proof, etc). |
| to define the basic concepts of argumentation (argument, premise, burden of proof, etc). |
| to explain basic logical operations (conjunction, disjunction, implication). |
| to explain basic logical operations (conjunction, disjunction, implication). |
| to characterize the basic requirements for argument paraphrase and interpretation. |
| to characterize the basic requirements for argument paraphrase and interpretation. |
| to describe basic argumentation schemes (vertical and horizontal pattern, conjoined premise). |
| to describe basic argumentation schemes (vertical and horizontal pattern, conjoined premise). |
| to explain some basic fallacies (ad hominem, straw man, slippery slope, ad baculum etc.) |
| to explain some basic fallacies (ad hominem, straw man, slippery slope, ad baculum etc.) |
| Skills |
|---|
| to identify and paraphrase an argument both in spoken and written text. |
| to identify and paraphrase an argument both in spoken and written text. |
| to apply the rules of propositional logic to simple judgments. |
| to apply the rules of propositional logic to simple judgments. |
| create an argumentative scheme of a complex argument. |
| create an argumentative scheme of a complex argument. |
| to make a basic evaluation of the argument with regard to the factuality of the premises and the resulting relationship between the premise and the conclusion. |
| to make a basic evaluation of the argument with regard to the factuality of the premises and the resulting relationship between the premise and the conclusion. |
| to identify a fallacy. |
| to identify a fallacy. |
| teaching methods |
|---|
| Knowledge |
|---|
| Lecturing |
| Lecturing |
| Skills |
|---|
| Dialogic (Discussion, conversation, brainstorming) |
| Dialogic (Discussion, conversation, brainstorming) |
| Practice exercises |
| Practice exercises |
| assessment methods |
|---|
| Knowledge |
|---|
| Written examination |
| Written examination |
|
Recommended literature
|
-
Eemeren, F. H. Grootendorst, R. Henkemans, A. F. S. Argumentation. Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation. London, 2002.
-
Hurley, Patrick J. A concise introduction to logic. 10th ed. Belmont : Thomson, 2008. ISBN 978-0-495-50383-5.
-
Picha, Marek. Kritické myšlení a rekonstrukce argumentu. Brno. Masarykova univerzita, 2014.
-
Rottenberg, A., T. The Structure of Argument. St. Martin, 2006.
-
Szymanek, K. Umění argumentace-Úlohy na zkoumání argumentů. Olomouc: UP, 2004. ISBN 80-244-0834-1.
-
Walton, Douglas. Infromal Logic. A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge: UP, 2008.
-
Weston, Anthony. A Rulebook for Arguments, Fourth Edition. 2009. ISBN 978-0-87220-954-1.
|