Teaching Philosophy 34 (2):133-142 (2011)

A course in symbolic logic belongs as a requirement in the undergraduate philosophy major. In this paper, which started life as a letter to my departmental colleagues, I consider and respond to several reasons one might have for excluding Logic from the core requirements. I then give several arguments in favor of keeping Logic. The central—and most important—argument is that the lack of a proper background in logic makes it very difficult to approach many relatively straightforward philosophical arguments, let alone the more technical subliteratures of philosophy. In developing this argument, I consider a few core texts and arguments and bring out how a student with some background in formal logic would be able to approach the texts and arguments with much greater ease than a student who lacks such a background.
Keywords Teaching Philosophy
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0145-5788
DOI 10.5840/teachphil201134217
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 50,308
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Using Syllogistics to Teach Metalogic.Lorenz6 Demey - 2017 - Metaphilosophy 48 (4):575-590.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
6 ( #1,025,280 of 2,326,024 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #165,413 of 2,326,024 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes