Select the keyword that best fits the statement in each item.
Write the chosen
letter on a separate sheet of paper.
1. Which fallacy literally means hitting the person below the belt
instead of focusing on the issue at hand?
A. mora licensing
B. equivocation
C. argumentum ad baculum
D. ad hominem
2. According to Husserl, the success of natural science lead to the
gradual scientific rejection of .
A. spirit
B. matter
C. nature
D. existence
3. Who institutionalized the pragmatic method of philosophizing?
A. John Dewey
B. Socrates
C. Ludwig Wittgenstein
D. George Hegel
4. What is Husserl’s point of view with regards to consciousness?
A. The study of consciousness is the same as the study of nature
B. The study of human consciousness differs from the way
scientists study nature.
C. It does not matter whether we study consciousness similarly
or differently than the way scientists study nature.
D. Husserl was not interested in the study of consciousness.
5. This fallacy is committed when one reaches a generalization based
on insufficient evidence.
A. ad misericordiam
B. false analogy
C. hasty generalization
D. post hoc
6. Which among these headlines presented information that are fair,
objective, and moderate?
A. It’s time to consider other means of cash aid distribution
B. Other countries around the world have much better means in
cash aid distribution
C. Government vows to faster distribution of coronavirus aid
D. We can also learn lesson from Vietnam how they distribute their
cash aid
7. Which among these headlines has no errors in terms of spelling,
grammar, and content?
A. Robredo Chides Government for Unclear Communication on New
Quarantine Rules
B. Robredo Blames the Government as They Don’t Have Clear Rules
in Quarantine
C. Robredo Charge the Government as Culprit of Confusion in Quarantine
D. Robredo blames those in Executive Branch for
Communication’s Unclear
8. Which among the following statements contain
substantiated generalizations?
A. “Drug war a massive failure”—Robredo
B. Robredo lies to world, shames the nation and herself in UN message
C. The real albatross on Leni Robredo’s neck
D. Let Leni plan on her own drug war
9. Which among the following authors could be the most credible
according to his or her Twitter account’s background?
A. Banat By – Simpleng tao na mahilig bumanat
B. Atom Araullo- Journalist. @ UNHCPPh Goodwill Ambassador
C. AkoNgaSY Lyco- Speak now or be silent forever. Follow me I will
not follow you
D. Senyora- Full time haciendera and professional husgadera
10.Which among the following publishers pose no particular agenda or bias?
A. Bulag Ang ABS-CBN sa Katotohanan by Antonio Brigas
B. ABS-CBN Naipasara Sanhi ng Di Pagrenew ng Prangkisa by
GMA News
C. Nararapat Lamang na Huwag ng Magbukas ang ABS-CBN by
Balat Sibuyas
D. Bye Bye Kapamilya by the Avengers
Truth is one of the significant lessons in philosophy. It has been a topic of discussion in
its own right for many years. Moreover, its value and influence to man’s life cannot be
denied.
What’s In
ACTIVITY: Unscramble Letters (Critical Thinking)
Directions: Unscramble the following letters to identify the concept being described.
UNSCARMBLED LETTERS DESCRIPTION ANSWER:
It is a mental grasp of reality reached
LWKEDNGO either by perceptual observation or by a
process of
reason based on perceptual observation.
This is a science devoted to the discovery of
E G L Y E I O S P T M the proper method of acquiring and
O validating knowledge.
It is an abstract or generic idea generalized
NCPTEOC
from particular instances.
This knowledge is validated which means
RUTHT
that it is highly based on the facts of
reality.
It is a group of statements, one or more of
which (the premises) is claimed to provide
NTGRUAEM support for, or reason to believe one of the
others (the conclusion)
Notes to the Teacher
The teacher should give a hint that methods of philosophizing would equip them with
knowledge and skills in acquiring wisdom and truth. Unlike science, which uses
observations through experiments in proving a theory, philosophy utilizes “pure reasoning”
to investigate a certain reality or phenomenon to arrive at a certain truth.
What’s New
ACTIVITY: Comic Strip (Critical Thinking, Communication, Character) Directions:
Analyze the comic strip and answer the following questions.
Source: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1513293938691384&type=3
1. Look at the comic strip. Do you agree with the reasoning of the person
inside the car? Why or why not?
2. If you are the biker, how would you react to the remarks of the person
inside the car?
What is It
Philosophers generally believe that reason is the road to wisdom. However they have
different interpretations of what reason consists of and some philosophers even
challenge the pre-eminence of reason in the pursuit of wisdom.
I. METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING
Here, we are going to explore some of the methods of philosophizing that philosophers
employ. According to Wilber (2006) Think of wisdom as the summit of the mountain
with different paths to get there. We are going to study the different paths to wisdom
the philosophers offer.
1. The dialectic method
This method of philosophizing was conceived by the Greek
philosopher Socrates, (born 470 BCE) one of the great
philosophers of the ancient world. Unfortunately, he did not
leave any written words and everything people know about him
came from the Dialogues written by his famous student, Plato.
Socrates’ aim was to achieve what he called the good SOCRATES
life which is based on the proper care of one’s soul (psyche in Greek). The soul,
according to Socrates, can be properly taken care of if we make it as good as possible
(Stumpf 2008). Since by its very nature the soul’s activity is to know, the soul can only
be good if we employ it in the activity of having a clear awareness of the meaning of
some words (Stumpf 2008). When we have a clear awareness of what justice is, we
harm our soul if we act contrary to what we know, like harming others (which is the
opposite of being just).
However, how can we achieve a clear understanding of words? We can achieve this by
an act of “disciplined conversation” (Stumpf 2008) which Socrates compared to an
intellectual midwife. Socrates called this method dialectic.
The method appears simple but anyone subjected by Socrates to this method eventually
felt its intense rigor.
The method starts with eliciting the definition of a certain word from a person who
appears to be familiar (or “pretends” to be familiar) with its meaning. Socrates then
points out the imperfections of the understanding of the person through a series of
questions. What Socrates desires is for the person to realize his ignorance and
contradictions, and thereby correcting his own mistakes and arriving at a complete
knowledge of
the true meaning of the word.
The method, however, does not sit well with the ruling elites of Athens (the city where
Socrates lived). They accused him of not worshiping the Greek gods
and corrupting the youth. His defense (which was dramatically recorded in Plato’s
dialogue the Apology) was a model of “forceful argument” (Stumpf 2008) but it fell on deaf
ears. In the end, he was forced to drink poison. Socrates was the first philosopher to die
fighting for truth.
The Socratic Method was modernized and treated in a different way by George Wilhelm
Hegel, a German philosopher. Hegel was an idealist. He believed that the ideas of the
human minds have access of what the world is like. People are social beings and could
be completely influenced by other people’s ideas. An individual’s mind is influenced by
means of a common language, customs of one’s society, and the cultural institutions
that one belongs to. Hegel refers this to “Spirit” as the collective consciousness of a
society which is responsible for honing one’s consciousness and ideas.
Hegel also believed that the Spirit is constantly changing and evolving. According to
Hegel, the spirit changes through dialectic. First, there is an idea about the world
(much like a thesis), which has a natural characteristic of having errors which give rise
to the antithesis.
The thesis and antithesis can be eventually resolved by creating a synthesis which is a
new idea comprised of the essentials of both the thesis and the antithesis.
To Hegel, society and culture follow this design, and one could understand all of human
history without the use of logic or empirical data simply by using logic (Klein, 2013).
2. The Pragmatic Method
Hundreds of years after the death of Socrates, a new philosophy emerged as inspired by
the idea of change initiated by the evolutionary thoughts of Hegel and Darwin in 19th
century America. This philosophy became known as pragmatism. It was started by
Charles S. Pierce (1839-1914), popularized by William James (1842-1910) and
institutionalized in American culture by John Dewey (1859-1952).
We will explore this briefly to complete the methods since a thorough presentation of
this theory was already provided in module 2.1.
According to the pragmatists, philosophy seems to offer a set of beliefs about human
beings and his relationship to the world. Pragmatists offer no such beliefs. Rather, they
seek to make philosophy relevant by solving real life problems. It is purely a philosophy
of method and not of
substance.
What pragmatism aims is to test the dogma of science, religion and philosophy by
determining their practical results. The pragmatic test is: if I practice this belief, will it
bring success or failure? Will I solve problems or create problems? Successful
experience is the verification process of truth for the pragmatists (Stumpf 2008).
3. The Phenomenological Method
The phenomenological method was conceived by Edmund
Husserl (born in 1859), one of the greatest intellects of of the
19th century. His ideas and method influenced the thoughts of
some of the 20th century philosophical giants: Martin
Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Maurice Merleau-Ponty
among others.
What prompted Husserl to develop phenomenology? To answerEDMUND
this, weHUSSERL
have to look
back at Husserl’s time and place: the 19th century Europe. At that time,
science was on the ascendancy prompted by the great discoveries of Galileo, Newton,
and Darwin among others. Husserl himself was impressed by the achievements of
science. Unfortunately, according to Husserl, science brings a certain attitude which is
counterproductive to the human soul: the naturalistic attitude (or simply naturalism).
Naturalism in this context is the idea that everything can be explained in terms of
matter or the physical. Since man is not only physical (i.e. body) but also spiritual, this
naturalistic attitude brings a distorted view of man by banishing the spiritual from the
world which includes the banishment of ideas, values, and cultures (Husserl, 1965).
To counter the naturalistic tendency, Husserl returned to the idea of the thinking self
which was given preeminence by the 17 th century French philosopher, Rene Descartes.
More specifically, the layman’s term given to the thinking self is “one’s immediate
experience.”
Husserl’s main purpose was to build a philosophy free from any biases or preconceived
ideas. One can only do this if one returns to immediate experience. Husserl said that he
was only looking to “things and facts themselves, as these are given in actual
experience and intuition” (quoted by Stumpf 2008). This experience is not the objective
world of science separate from us, but the world as it appears to us or (borrowing the
term of the 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant) the phenomenal world -
hence, the term phenomenology.
However, our beliefs about human beings and the world prevent us from seeing clearly
this immediate experience which he calls “pure subjectivity”. Thus, to know the truth,
we have to put aside one by one all our limiting beliefs about the world which
represents our biases. Husserl calls this process phenomenological epoche (epoche is the
Greek word for bracketing). Bracketing is not ignoring. It is an act of stepping back at
our biases and prejudices to make sure that they do not influence the way we think.
Only facts provided by immediate experience must influence us.
4. The Primary and Secondary reflections
Another influential intellectual movement which had its roots in the 19 th century ideas
of Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) and Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) was
existentialism.
Kierkegaard’s ideas were in part a reaction against the overly ambitious system building
the philosophy of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831).
On the other hand, Nietzsche’s ideas were a reaction against the religious and rational
value system still prevalent in 19th century Europe (Stumpf 2008). While Kierkegaard
was religious and Nietzsche was atheistic (atheism is the denial of the supernatural),
they both grounded their philosophy on the personal choices of the individual which
becomes one of the important tenets of existentialism.
In the 20th century, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) and his partner, Simone de Beauvoir
(1908-1986) popularized atheistic existentialism while Gabriel Marcel (1889-1973) and
Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) promoted religious existentialism. Religious existentialists saw
certain parallels between existential ideas and religious themes like the fall of Adam
and Eve which can be compared to the theme of inauthentic existence in existentialist
philosophy (Stumpf 2008).
After that brief overview on existentialism, let us focus our attention on one
existentialist method identified by Gabriel Marcel: the primary/secondary reflection.
For Marcel, reflection is not just a disinterested look at experience. It emerged when
something valuable is at stake. Marcel gave an example of a watch. Suppose you try to
take a watch from your pocket. To your surprise, the watch that you expect to be there
is not there. A break from your ordinary routine happened. From this break, reflection
appears in the form of a question: Where is my watch? Then, a host of questions,
connected to the first one, followed: Where was the last time I’ve seen my watch? Was
there a hole in my pocket? You try to retrace your steps from this moment back to the
time when you last saw your watch.
From this example, you will see that reflection arise when there is a disruption from
your normal routine and when something valuable is at stake.
Then, Marcel identified two levels of reflection: primary reflection and secondary
reflection. Marcel applied these two levels of reflection to the most fundamental
question: Who am I?
Nowadays, we try to answer this question by filling up a form given by our school for
example. The form asked us to write our name, age, gender, address, name of parents,
etc. To answer this, of course we have to think to distinguish who we are (the self)
against other things (the non-self or objects). This is the primary reflection.
Yet, we had an uneasy feeling that all the information we put on the form (although
true) do not fully capture who we really are (Marcel 1970). We view that our self is
bigger and more expansive than what is there on the form. Thus, we are not merely
thinking but we are thinking about thinking and about the process we perform in
answering the form. This is the secondary reflection.
The result of secondary reflection is a more expansive view of the self until it embraces
the world. Thus, the separation of the self and the world brought about by primary
reflection were united by the secondary reflection.
5. The Analytic Method
Another reaction to the Hegelian system building philosophy is
the analytic approach initiated by philosophers at Cambridge
University (England):
George Edward Moore (1873-1958), Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)
and Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951). The task of analytic
approach is not to create another system of ideas to counter the
Hegelian system but to clarify how philosophers used words
through an
analysis of language (Stumpf 2008). As quoted by Stumpf, Wittgenstein said that ‘the
object of philosophy is the logical clarification of thought’ so that ‘the result of
philosophy is not a number of philosophical propositions, but to
make propositions clear”. Analytic philosophers employed various methods of linguistic
analysis such as the principle of verification and logical analysis (Rudolf Carnap). What
we are going to use is the method of Wittgenstein.
We can divide Wittgenstein’s philosophy in to the earlier Wittgenstein and the latter (or
the new) Wittgenstein. The earlier Wittgenstein followed the idea of his mentor and
close friend Bertrand Russell who view language in only one way: stating facts.
Wittgenstein’s first book (the only one published during his lifetime) Tractatus Logico-
Philosophicus (1919) reflected this idea.
However he soon realized that words had multiple functions depending on the context
to which it occurs. Wittgenstein used the analogy of “tools in a tool box” (Wittgenstein
1968). If we look at the tools inside a tool box ‘there is a hammer, pliers, a saw, a screw
driver, a ruler, a glue pot, glue nails and screw. The functions of words is as diverse as
the functions of these objects’ (quoted by Stumpf 2008).
What Wittgenstein wants is to analyze language in the way actual people used it in
ordinary situations and not to construct an ideal language based on logic and
mathematics like what Russell seems to be doing.
To analyze language, we have to realize that it follows rules. If there are rules in every
aspect of life, there are certainly rules on how we put together and communicate words.
Wittgenstein believed that these rules are like the rules of games (Wittgenstein 1968)-
language games. For example, the usage of words like “demand”, “supply”, “money”,
“price” in the context of economics differ from its usage in everyday life. These are
technical words and they follow certain rules (i.e. the language game) within that
discipline that affects the way these words are used.
Lesson DIFFERENT FALLACIES
2
You have just learned that it is not enough to acquire knowledge but you should analyze
if that knowledge you have acquired is truthful or not. Philosophizing involves the gift
of speech and the gift of intelligence that enable us to reason out and detect the falsity
or truthfulness of a statement. When one reasons out, he/she expresses his opinion and
when others disagree, then argument begins. In philosophical parlance argument is not
an emotional reptilian word war or a territorial show of force between persons but a
philosophical method in knowing the truth of a certain phenomenon or reality. It is a set
of statements which includes the premises and conclusion (the latter is the one that
claims the truth of the premises) (Cornejo & Ebia, 2017).
However, there are arguments that are erroneous or based from faulty reasoning called
Fallacies (Abella, 2016). Unconsciously, we are culprits of this in our daily interaction
with people including our families and friends. Even TV commercials intentionally
employ some faulty reasoning to convince their target market to purchase their
products. Lawyers outwit each other by employing some fallacies to defend their
clients. I am sure you are familiar with the famous “Flip Top Battles” group in today’s
digital world. Shall we say a modern dialectical approach which appeal not only to the
mind but also to our aesthetic sense? They entertain audience and it is awesome how
they display their wit to outsmart each other in a poetic manner. It becomes an art and
aesthetically superb, but if you go beyond entertainment and analyze their statements
there are a lot of faulty reasoning going on. Below are some of the Fallacies which we
believe you need to be aware of. Abella, Roberto D. in his book “Introduction to the
Philosophy of the Human Person” laid down some of these fallacies:
FALLACY Short Description Examples
1.Argumentum ad Hominem came from Latin word “How can we believe him
Hominem “homo” which means man. This when he talks about social
“Attacking fallacy literally means hitting the distancing, he is a lawyer who
person below the belt instead of is a liar.”
the Person” focusing on the issue at hand.
2. Argumentum ad Baculum is a Latin word which “TV Patrol is the best news
Baculum means scepter or stick. A scepter program on TV. If you don’t
(Appeal to Force) is a symbol of authority. believe me, I won’t let you
Normally it is the Pope who watch the TV.
carries it in his hands. This is
committed when a person uses
threat or force to
advance an argument.
3. Argumentum ad Misercordiam came from Latin “Forgive me officer, there are
Misercordiam word Misericordia which means lot of boarders in this
(Appeal to Pity) pity or compassion. A person apartment including myself.
uses emotion such as pity to Only the owner was issued a
convince someone quarantine pass. We don’t
have food, we can’t give our
ATM to the owner. That’s why
I went out. So I did not violate
the Bayanihan Act Heal as
One.”
4. Argumentum ad Populum is the Latin word for “I’m sure you want to have an
Populum people. Most of TV commercials i phone. Almost 80% of your
“Appeal to people”/ are guilty of this argument which schoolmates are using it.”
Bandwagon fallacy exploit people’s vanity, desires,
etc.
5. Argumentum ad Traditio means tradition. All of us in the family, from
Tradition Advancing an idea since it has our ancestors up to now,
“Appeal to Tradition” been practice for a long time. are devout
Catholics, so it is only right
that you will be
baptized as a Catholic.
6. Argumentum and Ignorantiam a Latin word for According to Zecharia
Ignorantiam ignorance. Whatever has been Sitchin, the author of the book
“Appeal to Ignorance” proven false must be true and “Cosmic Code, “Adam was
vice versa the first test tube baby. Since
nobody proves otherwise,
therefore it is true.”
7. Petitio Principii According to Merriam Webster’s “God exists because the Bible
(Begging dictionary (www.merriam- says so. The Bible
the
Question)
webster.com>dictionary>petitiopr is inspired. Therefore we know
incipii) that God
, it is a fallacy in which a Exists.”
conclusion is taken for granted
in the premises. Also
called-“circular
argument.”
8. Hasty This fallacy is committed when Our neighbor who is a police
Generalization one reaches a generalization officer was convicted of being
based on insufficient evidence a drug dealer, therefore, all
police officers are drug
dealers.
9. Cause and Effect Assuming that the effect is “My teacher didn’t collect
related to a cause because both the homework two weeks in
events occur one after the other. a row when my friend was
absent. Therefore, my
friend being absent is the
reason why my teacher
doesn’t collect
the homework.”
10. Fallacy of Infers that something is true of a “You are a doctor, therefore
Composition part, is true of a whole you came from
a family of doctors.”
11. Fallacy of Division Infers that something is true of “Your family is smart,
the whole, must also be true on therefore you are
its smart.”
parts
12. Fallacy of Using the same term in a “Humans walk by their legs.
Equivocation different situation with different The table has legs. Therefore
meaning. the table
walks by its legs.”
FACTS VERSUS OPINION: FOCUS ON INFORMATION LITERACY
Today's students, many of whom do most of their research online, are able to access a
nearly limitless supply of information -- much of it came from unknown sources. In fact,
the very nature of the medium allows anyone with an Internet provider and a small
amount of skill to disseminate whatever information he or she chooses. The result is a
World Wide Web of overflowing information, on the other hand, it also contains
inadvertent ignorance and blatant biases.
A. IDENTIFYING THE FACTORS OF A QUALITY WEBSITE
Michigan State University reference librarian Terry Link suggests examining the following
factors when evaluating the quality of a Web site:
Authority: Who is the author and what are his or her qualifications? Who is the
publisher and what is the purpose of the site?
Verifiability: Are sources provided?
Timeliness: Is the information current? When was it posted and/or last
updated?
Relevance: Does the material contain unsubstantiated generalizations?
Bias: Is the language emotional or inflammatory? Does the information
represent a single opinion or a range of opinions?
Orderliness: Is the page arranged in an order that makes sense? Are
underlying assumptions identifiable? Is the information consistent?
Clarity: Is the information clearly stated? Does the author define important
terms?
Validity: Do the facts presented support the conclusions?
Likewise, when we critique sources, we must first understand the difference between fact
and opinion.
FACT OPINION
A fact is a statement that can be An opinion is a statement of belief
proven true or false. which may or may not be backed up by
facts,
but cannot be proven true or false.
Is objective Is subjective
Is discovered Is created
States reality Interprets reality
Can be verified Cannot be verified
B. THE EVALUATION PROCESS
In considering the kinds of sources or sites, Robert Harris, a professor of English at
Southern California College suggests that students should ask themselves, "Which
sources are likely to be fair, objective, lacking hidden motives, showing quality
control?" Harris recommends selecting sites that include as many of the following as
possible:
the author's name, title, and/or position.
the site's organizational affiliation, if any.
the date the page was created or updated.
contact information, such as an email or snail-mail address.
Once students have located sources that appear appropriate and credible, Harris advises
students to subject the sites to the CARS checklist for informational quality. The four
components of the CARS checklist are:
Credibility: What about this source makes it believable?
Accuracy: Is the information provided up-to-date, factual, detailed, exact,
and comprehensive?
Reasonableness: Is the information fair, objective, moderate, and consistent?
Support: Can the information be corroborated?
C. HOW DO I KNOW?
Harris suggests that, when evaluating those four components, students examine the
sites based on the following:
Type -- determine whether the URL includes .gov (government), .edu or .ac
(educational/academic), .com (commercial), .org (nonprofit organization), or.
~ (personal page).
Publisher -- determine whether the organization, agency, school, business, or
individual maintaining the site is likely to have a particular agenda or bias.
Author -- determine the author's education, training, and background to find
out whether he or she is a trained expert, an experienced enthusiast, or an
uninformed observer.
Structure -- determine whether the format is clear, logical, and easily navigable.
Language -- determine whether the text contains emotional, inflammatory,
profane, or confusing language. Count the number of spelling, grammatical,
and typographical errors. Too many mistakes can indicate carelessness and
suggest informational errors as well.
Dates -- determine when the information was published and/or updated. If
possible, check the publication dates of supporting data.
Graphics -- determine whether images and animations take up a
disproportionate amount of space in relation to their informational value.
Decide whether the graphics convey information, add interest, provide
interactivity, or simply distract.
Links -- determine whether the site's bibliography and/or links contain both
supportive and contradictory information.
What’s More
ACTIVITY 1: FACT VS. OPINION (Critical Thinking)
Directions: Analyze the following statements. Write F if it is FACT and O if it is
OPINION. Write your answer before the number.
1. According to the latest survey, families are purchasing more household items
on credit.
2. You can hear all the news you need to know from the BBC Radio 1 news team.
3. The professor argues that the effect of carbon emissions on the surrounding
environment will only get worse.
4. The research team has discovered a new method for conducting this
chemical analysis.
5. The latest poll shows a marked increase in employee dissatisfaction.
6. I think public opinion will change over time.
7. This book is an enjoyable story of life in a small village.
8. The use of computers at the college has increased and the stationery budget
has doubled in the last few years.
ACTIVITY 2: I-BILIB (Critical Thinking, Communication,)
Directions: Analyze the following pictures. Write BILIB if the picture followed CARS
(Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness, and Supported) and write NOT if it did not
follow CARS according to Robert Harris. Afterwards, explain your answer.
ACTIVITY 3: LET’S APPLY (Critical Thinking, Character)
Directions: Fill in the table below with the main proponents of methods of
philosophizing. For each method, answer the questions: “How can you find truth using this
method?” and “On what real-life situation can you apply this method?”
On what real-life
How can you find
Methods of Main situation can you apply
truth using this
Philosophizing Proponent(s) this method?
method?
1. Dialectic
2. Pragmatic
3. Phenomenological
4. Primary and
Secondary
Reflections
5. Analytic
What I Have Learned
ACTIVITY: IMPORTANT POINTS TO PONDER
(Critical Thinking, Character, Communication)
Direction: Complete the statements below:
I learned that Truth is
I feel that Truth is important because
I commit to uphold the truth by
What I Can Do
ACTIVITY 1: WIN AN ARGUMENT (Communication, Critical Thinking, Character, Collaboration)
Directions: By using the graphic organizer of dialectic method below, answer the
question: How do you criticize someone’s opinion/argument in a way that makes sense and is respectful?
Try to talk or interview two persons that have contrasting idea about the question, then
write your own synthesis to their answers.
THESIS ANTI-
SYNTHESIS
ACTIVITY 2: COMIC CON
(Critical Thinking, Character, Communication, Creativity)
Directions: Draw a comic strip that portrays ONE type of fallacy. Explain your work.
Explanation:
Assessment
Select the keyword that best fits the statement in each item. Write the chosen letter on
a separate sheet of paper.
1. What type of fallacy is present in the statement, “Before we begin the
debate, everyone here should know that my opponent is a convicted
felon”?
A. mora licensing
B. equivocation
C. argumentum ad baculum
D. ad hominem
2. According to Husserl, the success of natural science lead to the
gradual scientific rejection of .
A. spirit
B. matter
C. nature
D. existence
3. When Husserl described human experience as the immediate
data of consciousness, he meant .
A. Pure subjectivity
B. Pure objectivity
C. materialism
D. dualism
4. What is Husserl’s point of view with regards to consciousness?
A. The study of consciousness is the same as the study of nature
B. The study of human consciousness differs from the way
scientists study nature.
C. It does not matter whether we study consciousness similarly
or differently than the way scientists study nature.
D. Husserl was not interested in the study of consciousness.
5. What type of fallacy is present in the statement, “My father smoked
four packs of cigarettes a day since age fourteen and lived until age
sixty-nine. Therefore, smoking really can’t be that bad for you”?
A. ad misericordiam
B. false analogy
C. hasty generalization
D. post hoc
6. Which among these headlines presented information that are
fair, objective, and moderate?
A. It’s time to consider other means of cash aid distribution
B. Other countries around the world have much better means in
cash aid distribution
C. Government vows to faster distribution of coronavirus aid
D. We can also learn lesson from Vietnam how they distribute their
cash aid
7. Which among these headlines has no errors in terms of spelling,
grammar, and content?
A. Robredo Chides Gov’t for Unclear Communication on New
Quarantine Rules
B. Robredo Blames the Government as They Don’t Have Clear Rules
in Quarantine
C. Robredo Charge the Govrnment as Culprit of Confusion in Quarantine
D. Robredo blames those in Executive Branch for
Communication’s Unclear
8. Which among the statements contain substantiated generalizations?
A. “Drug war a massive failure”—Robredo
B. Robredo lies to world, shames the nation and herself in UN message
C. The real albatross on Leni Robredo’s neck
D. Let Leni plan on her own drug war
9. Which among the following authors could be the most credible
according to his or her Twitter account’s background?
A. Banat By – Simpleng tao na mahilig bumanat
B. Atom Araullo- Journalist. @ UNHCPPh Goodwill Ambassador
C. AkoNgaSY Lyco- Speak now or be silent forever. Follow me I will
not follow you
D. Senyora- Full time haciendera and professional husgadera
10. Which among the following publishers pose no particular agenda or bias?
A. Bulag Ang ABS-CBN sa Katotohanan by Antonio Brigas
B. ABS-CBN Naipasara Sanhi ng Di Pagrenew ng Prangkisa by
GMA News
C. Nararapat Lamang na Huwag ng Magbukas ang ABS-CBN by
Balat Sibuyas
D. Bye Bye Kapamilya by the Avengers
Additional Activities
ACTIVITY: EVERYDAY FALLACIES (Critical Thinking, Communication, Character)
Directions:
A. Observe conversations of your parents and identify three (3) common
fallacies.
B.Watch commercials on TV and news and take note of the
fallacies committed. Identify 5 fallacies and write your
answers on a separate sheet of paper.
Critical Thinking Questions:
1. In your relationship with your family, what common
fallacy or fallacies you commit as an alibi for any
wrongdoing? Narrate at least two occasions.
2. Do you think Fallacy can help us in finding the truth? Why or why not?
3. What methods of philosophizing do you think are most
useful in finding the truth? Explain?
