Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LOGOS vs. Memoria Press Logic courses

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    LOGOS vs. Memoria Press Logic courses

    Can anyone provide a knowledgable compare/contrast between the LOGOS and the Memoria Press Logic courses? thanks
    thanks!
    Glen Moore
    [url]www.[B]M[/url][/B]emoria[B]P[/B]ress.com/course

    #2
    Well since we are at the Memoria Press site, I suppose I should say that the Cothran text is unequivocally the best.

    However, in my experience and having taught both texts, I think it ultimately depends on the teacher and the class. Both have strengths and weaknesses and they are different approaches. So I would say to review both texts and determine which one covers your weaknesses the best or which one best plays to your strengths and then go with that one.

    Comment


      #3
      Comparison of Traditional Logic and Introduction to Logic

      Originally posted by jeremiah213
      Can anyone provide a knowledgable compare/contrast between the LOGOS and the Memoria Press Logic courses? thanks
      Well, let me take a stab at this question, with the obvious proviso that I authored one of the texts being compared. And let me class my answers in two parts: the first those with which I think the authors of both texts would agree, and the second those with which there might be disagreement.

      1. Facts about the two books with which both authors would agree:

      First, the Memoria Press Traditional Logic series emphasizes traditional, linguistic logic while Jim's series emphasizes modern mathematical logic.

      Second, the Memoria Press program is "deeper" (it goes into one system of logic and spends all its time studying it, while Jim's program is "wider" in the sense that it covers several system of logic (the traditional and the modern).

      Third, the Memoria Press program has more exercises than Jim's (I think he would agree with this, anyway).

      2. Facts about the two books with which there may be disagreement between the authors:

      First, the two systems respectively studied in the two books are entirely different, involve different assumptions about reality, and have different philosophical origins. Traditional logic is Aritotelian in origin and assumes that words or "terms" legitimately refer to universal ideas (also called "natures" or "essences") which exist in things. This is an assumption that is common to all of classical thought and to historic Christianity, and finds its greatest expression in the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas. Modern logic is nominalist in nature and originates with Gottlob Frege, a 19th century German philosopher, Bertrand Russell, Alfred North Whitehead and Ludwig Wittgenstein. I think Jim would agree with me on most of these facts, although he might not agree with me as to the significance of them.

      Secondly, traditional logic is what was actually used in the trivium. The trivium is language study, and traditional logic is conducted in and oriented toward real human language, while modern logic deals much more in mathematical symbols. This is a reflection of the differing assumptions about words. In traditional logic, a term is a sign signifying a nature, and cannot be replaced with any other word to yield the same meaning, since then it would refer to another nature. In modern logic, on the other hand, terms can function as essentially mathematical symbols, which can be replaced with any other term and still yield the same meaning. Traditional logic treats language qualitatively, while modern logic involves the belief that language can be quantified. Again, I think Jim would agree with most of these points, but not necessarily about their significance.

      Thirdly, traditional logic uses a mastery learning approach, ensuring that the student has mastered the program at each level and is therefore prepared to proceed to the next lesson. It includes quite a lot of exercises to ensure this mastery. Jim's program would benefit from some supplementation in this regard (I think the videos that go along with the program help in this regard).

      All that being said, Jim's program is a fine program and is the best thing out there to teach the system of modern logic at the high school level.

      Martin

      Comment

      Working...
      X