Credit Hours: 3

Program: Certificate in Practical Adult Knowledge and Competence (CPAK)

Course Level: Post-secondary, Adult Education

Delivery Mode: Hybrid / Online / In-person

Duration: 12 weeks (adaptable to 8-week intensive)

Prerequisites: None

Instructor Qualifications: Master’s degree or higher in philosophy, rhetoric, psychology, education, or related field; demonstrated experience in teaching logic or adult education.

I. Course Description

This course develops the essential but often overlooked reasoning and logic skills adults need for effective personal, professional, and civic life. It trains learners to analyze arguments, evaluate evidence, identify bias, detect fallacies, and reason through uncertainty. Drawing from classical logic, modern cognitive psychology, and contemporary media examples, the course restores disciplined reasoning as a life skill rather than an academic abstraction.

Students will practice real-world applications of logic—interpreting news claims, assessing workplace arguments, analyzing policies, and making better personal decisions. Emphasis is placed on intellectual humility, reflective judgment, and clarity of communication.

II. Rationale

Modern adults live amid information overload, persuasion, and ideological polarization. Yet, few have been systematically taught how to think, only what to think. Critical thinking and logic are not innate; they are learned disciplines that allow adults to interpret information responsibly, resist manipulation, and reach sound conclusions.

This course fills that gap by bridging philosophical logic with practical reasoning. It combines timeless principles—deduction, induction, fallacy recognition—with cognitive insights about bias and emotion. Graduates of this course become clearer thinkers, fairer communicators, and wiser decision-makers, both in private and public life.

III. Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion, learners will be able to:

Explain the structure of reasoning and identify premises, conclusions, and inferences. Recognize assumptions and distinguish facts from interpretations. Identify and analyze common logical fallacies in speech, writing, and media. Evaluate the strength and reliability of evidence from diverse sources. Apply deductive, inductive, and probabilistic reasoning to real-world situations. Recognize and counter cognitive biases in personal and professional decisions. Communicate arguments clearly and respectfully in writing and dialogue. Integrate ethical and civic responsibility into reasoning practices.

IV. Course Sequence and Module Overview

The course is organized into six thematic units across twelve weeks, balancing theory, application, and reflection.

Unit 1: The Nature of Thought and Reasoning (Weeks 1–2)

Introduces students to what critical thinking truly means, exploring the difference between knowledge and wisdom. Learners examine the components of reasoning—claims, premises, and conclusions—and assess their own thinking habits. They learn to construct argument maps and analyze examples from everyday life.

Activities: Self-assessment on thinking habits; mapping a short opinion article; class discussion on reasoning vs. intuition.

Deliverables: Reflection journal entry #1; quiz on reasoning structure.

Unit 2: Cognitive Bias and the Limits of Human Reason (Weeks 3–4)

Covers the psychology of reasoning, introducing major cognitive biases such as confirmation bias, anchoring, and framing effects. Students learn why emotion and habit shape reasoning and how to detect bias in themselves and others.

Activities: Bias identification workshop; personal bias inventory; group analysis of advertisements and media clips.

Deliverables: Reflection journal entry #2; bias case analysis paper.

Unit 3: The Logic Toolkit (Weeks 5–6)

Teaches the forms of reasoning—deductive, inductive, and abductive—and their use in everyday life. Students practice identifying valid and invalid arguments, distinguishing sound reasoning from persuasive rhetoric, and recognizing common fallacies.

Activities: Interactive exercises on syllogisms and argument forms; fallacy-spotting in news headlines; small-group debates.

Deliverables: Logic quiz; short essay analyzing a flawed argument; reflection journal entry #3.

Unit 4: Evaluating Evidence and Uncertain Reasoning (Weeks 7–8)

Focuses on evidence evaluation and probabilistic reasoning. Students learn how to assess data quality, interpret statistics, and distinguish correlation from causation. Bayesian and decision-tree thinking are introduced in simplified form to aid real-world judgment.

Activities: Data interpretation exercises; evaluating scientific and policy claims; probability decision games.

Deliverables: Evidence analysis worksheet; reflection journal entry #4.

Unit 5: Logic in the Real World: Communication, Ethics, and Policy (Weeks 9–10)

Explores how logic operates in social and civic life. Students analyze argument structure in political, business, and ethical contexts. Attention is given to rhetorical manipulation, propaganda, and moral reasoning. The unit emphasizes logical consistency as an ethical obligation.

Activities: Speech and media critique; ethical dilemma analysis; practice in constructive debate and respectful disagreement.

Deliverables: Group presentation analyzing a public argument; reflection journal entry #5.

Unit 6: Integration and Application (Weeks 11–12)

Students synthesize course skills into applied reasoning projects. They construct and defend a logical argument related to a real-world issue, documenting how they evaluated evidence, avoided bias, and maintained ethical integrity.

Activities: Workshop on argument writing; peer review; oral presentations.

Deliverables: Final capstone project; self-evaluation of reasoning growth.

V. Teaching and Learning Methods

Instruction employs andragogical principles emphasizing autonomy, application, and reflection.

Interactive Lectures: Brief conceptual overviews paired with examples from real media and daily life. Problem-Based Learning: Students analyze live controversies and solve reasoning problems collaboratively. Reflective Journals: Continuous self-assessment of reasoning progress and awareness of bias. Peer Discussion and Debate: Practice of respectful disagreement and reasoning clarity. Workshops: Fallacy detection, argument mapping, data interpretation, and ethical decision-making.

Digital tools include collaborative whiteboards for argument mapping, discussion forums, and quizzes for self-paced review.

VI. Assessment and Evaluation

Student progress is measured through formative and summative assessments emphasizing both understanding and application.

Assessment Breakdown:

Reflection Journals (5 total) – 15% Quizzes and Worksheets – 20% Short Analytical Essays – 20% Group Presentation (Argument Evaluation) – 15% Final Capstone Project (Applied Reasoning Portfolio) – 30%

Capstone Project:

Students select a real-world claim (e.g., a policy, advertisement, or editorial) and analyze it comprehensively:

Identify argument structure and assumptions. Evaluate evidence quality and logic. Identify biases or fallacies. Construct a revised, logically sound version of the argument. Reflect on ethical implications of reasoning.

VII. Learning Materials

Primary Text:

Critical Thinking and Logic for Adults: The Lost Discipline of Clear Thought (Torah University Press).

Supplementary Readings:

Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Housel, Morgan. The Psychology of Money. (for applied reasoning in finance) Wheelan, Charles. Naked Statistics. Weston, Anthony. A Rulebook for Arguments. Aristotle. On Rhetoric (selected excerpts). Open-access media articles and data visualizations for case analysis.

VIII. Accessibility and Support

This course is designed for inclusivity in both digital and in-person settings. All readings are provided in accessible digital formats. Recorded lectures include captions and transcripts. Optional workshops support learners who need extra help with logic notation or statistical reasoning.

IX. Evaluation of Course Effectiveness

Course quality is reviewed annually through:

Pre- and post-assessments of reasoning skill. Student feedback surveys on confidence in critical thinking. Faculty review of project quality and consistency. Advisory board oversight integrating philosophy, education, and communication experts.

X. Implementation Timeline

Pilot Offering: Spring 2026 (Hybrid format).

Review and Revision: Fall 2026 based on pilot feedback.

Full Launch: Spring 2027 as part of the CPAK core sequence.

This course aligns directly with Financial and Economic Literacy (PAK 103), Civic and Legal Literacy (PAK 102), and Communication, Media, and Digital Literacy (PAK 105), forming an integrated cluster on reasoning, decision-making, and information evaluation.

XI. Sample Assignments

Bias Inventory Reflection: Identify three personal cognitive biases with real examples. Propose corrective habits. Fallacy Detection Log: Keep a one-week log of media fallacies with brief explanations. Data Reasoning Analysis: Critically interpret a published graph or statistic. Ethical Reasoning Case Study: Evaluate an ethical dilemma using logical and moral reasoning steps. Capstone Project: Analyze and reconstruct a flawed public argument using course frameworks.

XII. Grading Scale

Percentage

Grade

Descriptor

90–100%

A

Excellent analytical and reflective mastery

80–89%

B

Strong understanding, minor gaps

70–79%

C

Satisfactory, needs improvement

60–69%

D

Limited comprehension or application

<60%

F

Fails to meet course outcomes

XIII. Institutional and Civic Benefits

This course promotes intellectual maturity, civic responsibility, and ethical communication. It strengthens adult learners’ ability to discern truth in complex environments, enhancing both personal independence and the integrity of democratic dialogue. It reinforces Torah University’s (or equivalent institution’s) mission to unite wisdom, logic, and ethics for the betterment of individuals and society.