C.E.F.I.L.N.I.

Centro de Filosofía para niños y niñas

3 B SUR 4105

COLONIA GABRIEL PASTOR

PUEBLA

México

Telefono: 01 (2222) 2 94 41 43

Celular: 2222 17 21 50/044  Y  222 1105906

María de los Angeles Alvarez Laso

Hrannar Baldursson

Arkansas Attorney

September 4, 2002: At Austhink - Putting Critical Thinking to Work, Argument Mapping with Reason!Able, is an interesting essay by Dr. Paul Monk. He argues, quite well actually, for an argument mapping program that's being developed at the University of Melbourne, claiming that it augments the reasoning skills of undergraduate students who are taking introductory courses in logic and critical thinking. Argument mapping by hand is a good idea, and if it can be done by computer in the way Dr. Monk describes, philosophers should welcome the technological revolution into the realms of building sound philosophical arguments. Dr. Monk gives some good pedagocial advices that might be wise to take to heart. The following is lifted from his paper. When setting argumentative essay assignments, require students to hand in a map of their main argument along with their essay. Students will find that expressing their reasoning in an argument map requires that they be much more clear and explicit about what that reasoning is, and it gives them a logical backbone on which to hang their essay. When it comes to grading their work and giving feedback, you’ll find that having their argument map is like having x-ray vision into their thinking (though this is generally not a pretty sight). Require students, when doing their reading, to map the author’s main line of argument. Tell them that reading properly consists in understanding the text to the point where mapping the argument is a straightforward matter. This will give most students a whole new perspective on what it is to engage seriously with a philosophical text. When lecturing, display arguments (whether your own, or those you are discussing) in map form. This can be done in a variety of ways. One is to print out the argument map on a transparency and display it using an overhead projector. A better way, for those with both the technical agility and a suitably equipped classroom, is to do “live” argument mapping, projecting from a PC running argument mapping software. In tutorials, if facilities allow, project an argument map and use it as the basis of discussion. Arguments or debates can be mapped in real time, and you can require students to make their contributions in the form of additions or modifications to the argument tree. Arkansas Attorney. Our cooperation with clients begins with thorough examination of the situation and prudent planning of the solution variants. It is very crucial for the customer to assist us on this stage as we are able to provide you with adequate services only if our company knows everything it should.

September 3, 2002 Some Active Alternatives to Reading in Philosophy for Children. Read full paper by David Shapiro at Northwest Center for Philosophy for Children. In this article, David Shapiro demonstrates three effective excercises for a philosophy classroom. The first one aims at a general understanding of the importance of cooperation, by means of competing in a game designed by Dr. Shapiro. The second excercise is based on John Rawls theory of Justice, as students are dealt first roles in an imagined society, and then they discuss the social justice they wish for. Then, their position in society (dealt by cards) is taken from them, and they are supposed to discuss social justice, but now without knowing their own position. The third excercise is a very interesting and challenging investigation into the meaning of dominating moral and and ethical theories.

September 3, 2002: The Kids Philosophy Slam: Philosophy Slam asks kids to write about their personal experiences regarding a philosophical question posed each year. The 2002 question was: "Is the Nature of Humankind Good or Evil?" Any student from 1st grade through 12th grade can enter, and there is no entry fee or form. In 500 words or less, preferably typed and double-spaced, answer the question posed. (The new topic for 2003 will be announced in late August or early September of 2002). Younger kids from grades 1 - 4 may paint or draw a picture to express their feelings or ideas about the topic, or may include words or write a short story, or use any creative combination of words and pictures. Grades 1-8 may also write prose or poetry to answer the question posed. Read more at The Kids Philosophy Slam website.