James Lee

This paper presents a novel approach to teaching critical thinking. The approach centers around developing the student’s ability to engage in analytic reasoning. By “analytic” in the previous sentence I mean reasoning about analyticity, i.e., coming to know truths about analytic propositions as opposed to synthetic propositions. I consider the ability to engage in this kind of reasoning to be what some philosophers call “conceptual competence”. I argue that focusing on conceptual competence in critical thinking courses benefits philosophy departments in two ways. First, focusing on conceptual competence distinguishes the content of a critical thinking course from, say, courses on logic or probability/statistics. Second, conceptual competence is a skill that is unique to philosophy. I argue that it is also a fundamentally important skill for all students. Thus, teaching critical thinking as conceptual competence can situate philosophy at the center of any school’s general education plan.

This paper defends a theory of how it is that games are identical both at a time and over time. I argue that this view is an improvement over the account that Michael Ridge defends in his paper “Individuating Games”. This improvement involves a distinction between two kinds of individuation: constitutive individuation and relational individuation. I argue that this distinction does a better job at solving the various puzzles that are related to the synchronic and diachronic identity of games. I go on to show how this approach can be applied to other social entities.

Explanation can be distinguished between linguistic practices and metaphysical relations. At least with respect to metaphysical explanation, some are skeptical that any knowledge gained via explanation qua linguistic practices confers knowledge of explanation qua metaphysical relation. I argue that this skepticism is unfounded. Engaging in the linguistic practice of explanation gives us no reason to skeptical in beliefs about corresponding metaphysical relations like causation or grounding. Moreover, those very linguistic practices can provide resources to justify beliefs in those relations. So, exploring those practices can move us forward in developing an epistemology of grounding and metaphysical explanation.

This paper will argue for the teaching of component skills in philosophy. We can distinguish between complex and component skills. Component skills bear a kind of constitutive relation to complex skills. We observe this distinction at use in standard pedagogies related to activities like sports, music performance, and mathematics. The central thesis is that devoting pedagogical resources to the development of component skills, especially at introductory levels, promotes better learning outcomes with respect to complex philosophical skills. Aside from defending this thesis, I will also provide a number of examples of activities that can be used to develop component skills.

Socratic dialogue is widely recognized as an effective teaching tool inside of the classroom. In this paper I will argue that Socratic dialogue is also a highly effective teaching tool outside of the classroom. I will argue that Socratic dialogue is highly effective outside of the classroom because it is a form of learning based assessment. I will also show how instructors can use technology like email to implement Socratic dialogue as a form of teaching and assessment, and thus offer a viable alternative to traditional assessments like exams and papers.