Critical Thinking Core Concepts

---

Short history of Logic

On the other hand, if we take Logic to be the analysis of concepts involved in making inferences, and the identification of standards and patterns of correct inference, Logic can be traced only back to the days of Aristotle (350 years B.C. or so), with some parallel development in early Hindu writings. It's not clear that this increase in logical self-consciousness improved the accuracy of reasoning processes for humankind in general, but knowing what Aristotle knew about logic can definitely help you be a better reasoner.

Around the end of the 19th century, Logic received renewed interest (and an emphasis on symbolic representation), from mathematicians in search of a fundamental connection between logical and mathematical reasoning. Development of, and reaction to, this line of inquiry led to two divergent lines of emphasis in the study of logic, which you may have heard of:

Symbolic (or Formal) Logic vs Informal Logic (or Critical Thinking).

In a typical symbolic logic course, emphasis is placed on the precise symbolic representation of logical concepts, the study of the abstract relationships between these concepts, and the systematization of these relationships.

In an "informal logic" or Critical Thinking course, such as ours here at Longview, the focus is instead on the application of logical concepts to the analysis of everyday reasoning and problem-solving. Elements of symbolic logic will frequently be involved, but only to the extent that it contributes to this practical objective.

Notice that neither of these directions of emphasis really concern themselves much with how people actually think, or what you might call a psychology of thought. Informal Logic begins with the perception that people don't actually reason all that well, but jumps from there to the matter of doing something about it. Symbolic Logic begins with the perception of what constitutes good reasoning at a rudimentary level, and goes on from there to investigate good reasoning at higher and higher levels of sophistication.

I often tell my students that the study of logic should not be all that mysterious - it is merely the formalization of successful patterns of thought.  By successful I mean that these patterns of thought lead us to the truth or to knowledge more reliably than the unsuccesful patterns (fallacies) of thought.  It is important to recognize the successful patterns so that we can repeat and apply them in our search for knowledge -and to avoid falling prey to the unsuccesful patterns.

Permission to reproduce these resource pages is granted for
non-profit educational use provided the above information
is retained on all copies.

Inquiries to: michael.connelly@mcckc.edu
Last modified: 03/02/04