Curriculum Unit Plan 9.0-1schools.yrdsb.ca/markville.ss/mm/OISEAQ/Curriculum Unit Plan 9.0-1.… · Curriculum Unit Plan Course Title: ... Lesson 4 – Exploring Our Matrix Page 16

1

Curriculum Unit Plan

Course Title: Philosophy: Questions and Theories Course Code: HZT4U Grade Level: 12 Unit Name: Epistemology: What do we know and how do we know it? Authors: Christopher Clarke, Justin Malisani, Sofia Mojica, Laura Waters and Peter Wray Date of Completion: July 23, 2009 Preliminary Culminating Activities: For this unit we have two culminating tasks – a group debate along with a Unit Test Board Game. For this group debate we will have students taking on the role of specific philosophers, researching the pertinent background information, then going head to head with other “philosophers” arguing as to what constitutes knowledge and what does not. There will be an anonymous vote as to who has the most convincing argument. There will be Grade 10 and 11 students invited in to learn more about the subject and hopefully create interest for course selection. The other culminating task we have planned is the Interactive (electronic) Unit Test game board. The game board is projected on the white screen. Taking turns, students roll a die and move the game piece accordingly. Wherever the game piece lands, the students will answer the corresponding question on either the scantron sheet, or foolscap provided (multiple choice on Scantron; short answer on foolscap).

2

Table Of Contents:

Summative Assessment Plan: Page 3 Unit Overview: Page 5 Instructional Organizer: Page 9 Summaries of Learning Activities: Lessons 1 and 2 – An Introduction to Epistemology and Philosophers

Page 10

Lesson 3 – Philosopher’s Solo Page 11 Lesson 4 – Exploring Our Matrix Page 16 Lesson 5 – Theories of Perception Page 19 Lesson 6 – Socratic Dialogues Page 20 Lesson 7 – Philosopher’s Debate Page 23 Lesson 8 – Philosophy Game Unit Test Page 24

Appendix: Page 25

3

Summative Assessment Plan:

Course Title and Code: Philosophy: Questions and Theories Grade: 12 Destination: University Unit: Epistemology

Enduring Understandings:

By the end of this unit, the students will be able to:

1 • identify the main questions, concepts, and theories of epistemology 2 • evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of responses to some of the main questions of epistemology defended by some major philosophers and schools of philosophy, and defend their own responses 3 • demonstrate the relevance of philosophical theories of epistemology to concrete problems in everyday life 4 • explain how different epistemological theories apply to subject areas such as psychology

4

Specific Expectations:

• demonstrate an understanding of the main philosophical questions of epistemology (e.g.,What is human knowledge? Can humans know the world as it really is? Are there some things that humans can never know? Are there some things that we know with absolute certainty?)

• evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the responses given by some

of the major philosophers (e.g., Aquinas, Plato, Descartes, Berkeley, Nagarjuna) and major schools of epistemology (e.g., skepticism, empiricism, pragmatism) to some of the main epistemological questions (e.g., Is human knowledge based entirely on sensory perception? What counts as a justification in claiming to know something?), making reference to classic texts (e.g., Plato’s Meno, Descartes’ Discourse on Method)

• formulate their own ideas about some of the main questions of epistemology, and explain and defend those ideas in philosophical exchanges with others

• describe instances in which philosophical problems of knowledge occur in everyday contexts (e.g., conflicting eyewitness claims in court trials), and can be clarified and analyzed using philosophical theories of epistemology

• explain how theories of knowledge (e.g., realism) are adopted and applied in subject areas such as psychology (e.g., the psychology of perception).

5

UNIT OVERVIEW

Lesson Title and Number

Title of Task Description EU Being Addressed

Scaffolding Required?

1 – Introduction to Epistemology

Welcome to Epistemology!

Please see Appendix 1 for Lesson

Please see Appendix 1for Lesson


2 – Overview of Philosophers

An Overview of Various Epistemological Philosophers and Primary Documents




3 – Philosopher’s Solo

Philosopher’s Solo: A Solo Journey to Discover: What is Knowledge?

In this activity, students are isolated from one another to allow time for reflective writing on course material &/or personal goals and philosophy. Students are removed from the class and escorted to the quiet nooks and crannies of the school building and property to be alone. The physical isolation, and the novel setting, jolts the student into viewing course material or themselves from a different perspective.

1 2 3 4

Basic concepts of epistemology. Overview of Philosopher’s – Descartes, Locke, Buddha (Rationalist, Empiricist and “Alternative”).

4 – Exploring Our Matrix

“Sense Data” Activity Journal Responses “Philosophers Movie Critique”

“Sense Data” – Students will be role playing the same observational process simulating Bertrand Russell’s examination of what we truly “know” Journal Responses - Students have 2 opportunities of Write/Pair/Share activities to begin class based on relevant issues. Philosophers Movie Critique- Movie critique on how Plato’s Allegory of the Cave can be compared to The Matrix. Must include ideas for at least 1

1 2 3

Examine what it means when we say “knowledge” and how it applies to our life in T/P/S. Examine how the “Knowledge” that we think we know may not be “knowledge” through a Russell’s text. “Sense Data” activity will allow them to apply

6

other philosopher. theories in real world. Extend this idea through study of Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” The Matrix will allow a current application for epistemological ideas.

5 – Theories of Perception

Sensory Perception Illusion Response

On-line activities demonstrating how sensory perceptions may be deceitful. Students must explain what they conclude about sensory perceptions after now seeing the many different ways they can be deceiving.

3 4

With previous lessons new knowledge students will experience first hand how sensory perceptions can be deceitful through sensory perception illusion exercises. Must be linked to theory.

6 – Socratic Dialogue

Writing Your Own Socratic Dialogue (Formative Assessment Activity)

This activity consolidates student’s understanding of the main theories of knowledge (Rationalist, Empiricist, Skepticism, etc.) from lessons 2-5 and accompanying notes. For this activity students will work in pairs (set to maximize support and cooperation by teacher) Students will use their notes, review materials provided and/or PowerPoint review on class web page to assist them is writing a Socratic style dialogue on the nature of knowledge. As creativity counts, some may choose to perform the dialogue other hand in a written copy.

1 2 3 4

The knowledge and understanding from previous lessons is consolidated here through paired discussion and summarizing notes. The students are encouraged to voice their own supported opinion in the dialogue. Students will be exposed to the original philosophical work Plato’s The Meno.

7 – Culminating Debates

Philosopher’s Debate and Open House (Summative

Students will work in groups of 2 to 3 to research the epistemological ideas of a

1 2 3

Students need to be aware of the basic concepts of

7

Assessment) particular philosopher. They will also come up with some statements about knowledge to be debated in class. A debate organizer will be completed. Debate will take place over two days will each group representing their philosopher on knowledge concepts. Students will address questions determined by the teacher and also their own. At the end there will be a free vote as to which “philosopher” won. Students from grade 10 or 11 classrooms and/or administrators will be invited in to learn more about the philosophy program.

4 epistemology and the history of this branch of philosophy. They will have overview background information on each of the philosophers before beginning this task.

8 – Culminating Task/Test

Philosophy Game Students will be playing a philosophy board game with a variety of questions in order to determine their understanding of the epistemology unit.

1 2 3 4

Students will require knowledge and understanding of the entire unit.

Course Description: This course addresses three (or more) of the main areas of philosophy: metaphysics, logic, epistemology, ethics, social and political philosophy, and aesthetics. Students will learn critical thinking skills, the main ideas expressed by philosophers from a variety of the world’s traditions, how to develop and explain their own philosophical ideas, and how to apply those ideas to contemporary social issues and personal experiences. The course will also help students refine skills used in researching and investigating topics in philosophy. This unit plan covers epistemology, the study of knowledge. We feel that this unit has the capability of covering many of the big ideas and names within philosophy. We hope to give our students the opportunity to discuss, debate, question and analyze the ideas of main names in this field of philosophy. We want students to demonstrate an understanding of the main philosophical questions of epistemology and be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the responses given by some of the major philosophers and major schools of epistemology. We also want to include primary source texts. We formed our curriculum assessment around students gaining the ability to

8

formulate their own ideas about epistemology while at the same time incorporating classical theories.

HZT Philosophy – Epistemology Unit Overview

~ May 2009 ~ Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

1 Introductory lesson - Epistemology

2

3

4 Intro continued

5 Overview of Philosophers

6 Intro to Solo and Philosophers Log

7 PHILOSOPHERS SOLO

8 DEBRIEF SOLO AND QUESTIONS

9

10

11 Theories of Perception: Build off Matrix? Subjective/ Objective Truth -Show Matrix here?-

12 Matrix

13 Matrix

14 Theories of Perception: Sensory Perception

15 Socratic dialogue Assignment

16

17

18 Computer Lab time to complete Socratic dialogue Assignment

19 Group Debate Prep

20 Group Debate Prep

21 Group Debate

22 Group Debate

23

24

25 Debate Video

26 Review

27 Unit Test

28 Unit Test

29

30

31

Notes:

9

Summary of Learning Activities and Strategies

Lesson 1: An Introduction to Epistemology and Philosopher’s Log Book

Time: 75 minutes Expectations: EP1.01

Please see Appendix 1.0 and 1.1 for example of a full lesson plan.

Lesson 2: Overview of Philosophers Time: 75 minutes

Expectations: EP1.02 Please see Appendix 2 for an example of a full lesson plan.

Lesson 3: Philosopher’s Solo Time: 225 minutes

Expectations: EP1.01, EP1.02, EP1.03, ISV.03, ISV.05, EPV.01, EPV.02

Learning Strategy/Activities: Day 1 Purpose: The purpose of this activity is to introduce each student to a number of different ways to think about how humans obtain knowledge and truth. The focus is on Rationalist, Empiricist and “Alternative” Epistemology.

Philosophers Logbook: 1. Introduce Philosophers log. The log is a record of their written thoughts as they

encounter and critique philosophical issues. Students should be encouraged both to demonstrate their understanding of a philosophical position and to examine that position in the “laboratory of the self”. To run a position through the laboratory of the self is to test its premises against the students’ own experiences and understanding of the world. (For example, the student should ask him/herself: ‘When I am reflecting on Knowledge am I do so from a rationalist, empiricist or alternative – Eastern Spiritual Philosophy perspective). The Philosophy Log is a tool that can be used for formative assessment in this unit, measuring student understanding and offering an opportunity for individualized feedback. Alternatively, it may be used throughout the course, in each unit of study. The

10

teacher may choose to use the Log as a formative assessment to begin the year, and then evaluate the Log entries summatively as the course progresses. The rubric (Appendix 3.5) allows for both summative and formative use.

Handout: 2. Introduce Philosophers Handout: Each student is handed three pieces of paper

indicating three different perspectives on knowledge – Rationalist - Descartes, Empiricist - Locke, and Alternative: Eastern Spiritual Philosophy- Buddha (see Appendix 3.1, 3.2, & 3.3). Along with these pieces of paper each student is also handed a booklet (dollar store purchase), this is their philosophers log. Each student is asked to acquaint themselves albeit briefly with all three philosophers and perspectives by reading over the material given to them by the teacher.

Three Corner Triangle Exercise: 3. Activity 1: Following student reflection regarding all three perspectives

(Appendix 3.1, 3.2, 3.3), the teacher initiates a three corner triangle exercise. This is the introductory activity to understanding rationalist perspective, empiricist perspective, and alternative perspective – Eastern Spiritual Philosophy. The purpose of this activity is to introduce each student to a number of different ways to think about how humans obtain knowledge and truth. Students are unaware at the time but statements posed from each of the following perspectives on “what is knowledge;” for example, There are some things that humans can never know (see examples in Appendix 3.4). Three corners of the classroom are assigned a category (I believe this to be true; I believe this not to be true; I don’t know) and students are invited to move to the corner that corresponds to their opinion. Corner groups are instructed to discuss reasons for their opinion and develop an argument in support of this opinion. Each corner reports their argument to the class. The teacher emphasizes the use of logic and examples when justifying opinions. All along the teacher is instructing and helping them to understand their choice. It is not fundamentally important where everyone really ends up rather an exercise to get the students aware of the topic and that the topic of epistemology can be seen from a variety of perspectives. The goal is to create opportunities for dialogue, emphasizing philosophy as a communal activity.

4. By the conclusion of the discussion, students are familiar with issues of concern to epistemology philosophers. Students should be asked to reread the 3 page handout (Descartes, Locke and Buddha) so that they are able to match key figures with the ideas they have discussed and to fix the new knowledge in their minds. Students should discover that they have been relating to the ideas of one philosopher or another, and they are predisposed in this way to engage with this philosopher and with the material in general. . Indicate that the culminating activity will also require the skills employed in this activity: critical thinking, presenting arguments to the class, and using logic to defend opinions.

11

5. Brief Solo for the next Day

Day 2 Purpose: To clarify the student’s ways of knowing and will disclose a student’s method of knowing.

Philosophers Solo 6. Activity 2: Philosophers Solo. This activity should act as a catalyst towards a

deeper understanding of their philosophy on Knowledge and truth.

Rationale: In this activity, students are isolated from one another to allow time for reflective writing on course material &/or personal goals and philosophy. Students are removed from the class and escorted to the quiet nooks and crannies of the school building and property to be alone. The physical isolation, and the novel setting, jolts the student into viewing course material or themselves from a different perspective. The solo can be used to mimic Descartes’ experience as he underwent his Method of Doubt. It can be used to allow students time to generate their own ideas about how they have come to acquire knowledge, away from the peer pressure of the classroom. The solo should be a time for reflection and thought to occur. A common activity in a wilderness setting is to have students on solo write a letter to themselves, outlining their own philosophy in life – the ethical imperatives – and this was the impetus behind developing this Lesson. The Process: The key to success in this activity is framing the “solo experience” to the students. Describe to the students how Descartes isolated himself in a dark room, with only a candle, and systematically doubted everything he could in order to arrive at a Philosophical First Principle, a certain truth. Emphasize the power of this experience, and the profundity of his conclusion. Ask the students to try and embody this intensity in order for them to try and unravel their own philosophical truth and quest to understand how we know what we know. Emphasize the scarcity of time we spend genuinely alone, without an iPod or TV or computer or magazine. How often are we entirely alone with our thoughts? Students are generally fascinated to realize it is almost never. Inform students of their task on the solo: they will record their own thoughts and wrestle with the three questions concerning their own ways of knowing as they endure the solitude.

12

Three Questions: a) Hold an object in your hand, like a rock or a pencil. What is the name you give to

this object in your hand? b) How do you know that the object in your hand really exists and you are not

imagining it? c) What evidence shows that what you know about this object is in fact the truth?

They will record their own answers to three key questions to help develop their own sense of “how they have come to know what they claim to know?” And “How they know what absolute truth is?” They must think and write, and they cannot do anything else. The recording of their three questions and thoughts should be written in their philosopher’s log.

7. In the proper mindset, escort students to locations in the school pre-chosen for their isolation. They must walk in silence and speak with no one. Even better, take them to the soccer field and have them spread out completely.

8. Have the students bring only a pen and their Philosophers Log – no iPods or cell phones.

9. At a pre-arranged time, have students return to class. Tips/Advice:

• For some classes, the activity seems impossible. You can’t imagine setting them free in the school. You can arrange for the students likely to roam the halls to be placed in solo sites close to you. Walk the halls to see that they are staying in place.

• Notify your hall monitors and admin of what you are planning. This way, they can help monitor students, and also will not hassle the students to get back to class.

• This activity was adapted from the Canadian Outward Bound Wilderness School Instructor Manual. The resource has many other suggestions of ways to use the solo experience.

10. Quick and informal debrief the activity as a whole class. To build on to this

assignment would be to encourage them to do the solo as an experiment: How long can they last alone? What will they discover? If it helps, you can talk about the origins of the solo experience in many cultures, particularly some Native cultures, as an opportunity for important self-realization and growth.

Day 3: Purpose: To reflect and share their Philosopher’s Solo experience

13

Debrief Solo – Reflect, Retell, Relate/Think, Pair, Share

11. Debrief the experience with the whole class. Ask them to reflect back on their Solo. Then, students are invited to pair up together and share their experiences of being alone and communicate their philosophical conclusions to one another. The listener should record the other students findings in their philosophical Log and compare and contrast their findings together. They are then asked to share some of their conclusions with the rest of the class. All the while the teacher is drawing parallels between the philosophers and the students answers.

Letter Writing Assignment:

12. Have the students reread the Handouts (Appendix 3.1, 3.2,& 3.3) of each major philosopher and write a letter to one of the philosophers outlining how they have similar and contrasting perspectives on how they know what they know (See Rubric Attached).

13. Conclude by pointing out how the Epistemology issues and terminology learned in this activity will be needed for the culminating activity.

Description of Assessment:

Students are assessed for their contribution to class and group discussions. Students may be assessed for note-taking. The teacher may consider assessing student knowledge with a quiz on the material in the readings. Students may be assessed or evaluated for their Philosophy Log entries (Appendix 3.5). Students may be assessed on the written letter to a philosopher (Appendix 3.7). Students may be assessed on their solo experience (Appendix 3.6)

Resources: Print: Law, Stephen (2007). The Great Philosophers: The Lives and Ideas of History’s Greatest Thinkers. London: Quercus. Hampshire, Stuart (1956). The Age of Reason. New York: The New American Library. Berlin, Isaiah (1956). The Age of Enlightenment. New York : The New American Library. The Ontario Educational Communications Authority (2004). Philosophy. Ontario: TV Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Education (2000). The Ontario Curriculum Grades 11 and 12 – Social Sciences and Humanities. Ontario: Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Electronic The Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy – www.utm.edu/research/iep/ The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy – www.rep.routledge.com:/routledge/signpost/sp.html

14

The Ontario Philosophy Teachers’ Association – www.ontariophilosophy.ca

Lesson 4: Exploring Our Matrix Time: 225 minutes

Expectations: EP1.04, EP1.05 Learning Strategy/Activities:

Day 1

• Write/Pair/Share activity (15 mins) Begin class with a question on the board that accesses prior knowledge and ties in to the central reading (Bertrand Russell) for the day:

“Is there any “knowledge” in the world that is so certain that no reasonable man could doubt it?” (Bertrand Russell) This is the first line of the reading we will be examining today. Allow students 10 minutes to journal – Ask students to pair and share their thoughts with each other. Circulate to see if students are on the right track – prompt/give examples where necessary. On the board write “Things we “know”” and record answers from each pair for the class to see. Now ask the class “how” we know these things to be true. Take an example from the board and ask class to prove that it is true. The answer will undoubtedly be based on a sensory perception (ex:“I can see it”). Explain that we will be examining sensory perceptions and how they affect how we “know” things.

• Bertrand Russell: Problems of Philosophy: “Appearance and Reality” (30 mins) Linked to the previous activity ask class, “Have you ever thought something to be true based on your sense perceptions but in reality was false” (Give examples: Think you see a friend but it turns out to be someone else, etc.) You can also talk briefly about appearance vs. reality as they will have some knowledge of this from English classes – Shakespeare. Students will relate to it and then you can explain how philosophical “Appearance and Reality” theory is similar to it. Hand out central reading or if you have computer access they can visit this link: http://www.ditext.com/russell/rus1.html OR You can allow the class to listen to the MP3 link of the text: http://www.listentogenius.com/author.php/133 If reading hard copy you may want to read the first page with the class to get them “into” it. Instead of providing study questions to assess their understanding of the text get each student to come up with 3 critical questions. They will be finishing this for homework and explain that homework completion is important for the next class activity.

• Begin watching “The Matrix” (30 minutes)

15

Ask students who have seen the plot to explain how they think it relates to what they are learning. Provide study questions as they watch. Note: Teacher will determine what parts to cut out to fit the movie into the allotted times. Day 2 of “Exploring Our Matrix” Learning Strategies/Activities

• Write/Pair/Share Activity (15 minutes) Begin class with 2 pills on the desk or draw a red pill and a blue pill on the board. Ask the students; “If you were faced with the same choice as Mateus gave Neo in the Matrix what would you choose?” Discuss with class the pros and cons of both decisions. By knowing the “truth” your whole life may be turned upside down On the board teacher surveys student choices and tallies up how many chose blue and how many chose red. Divide class into a red pill group and a blue pill group. Then members of each group will form min-groups of 2 or 3. Each group will come to a consensus on why they chose that particular pill. Each group will share their responses with the class This is a good lead into Russell’s “Appearance and Reality” they had for homework.

• Sense Data Activity (approx 35 minutes) Students will get into groups of three and share their critical questions they came up with and then agree on 1 they will share with the class. Allow all groups to share their critical question and allow feedback of the question. Pay particular attention to Russell’s “sense data” process where he examines his table through all his senses to determine if he really has knowledge of the table being in front of him. For this activity the class will divide into groups of 3 to simulate this important observational process that is central to understanding the topic. The students must choose 1 physical object in the class and examine it the way Russell does the table. Then the group will act out using only questions the simulation and mental process they go through when they perceive an object in the room the way Russell does it. You may model an example.

• “The Matrix” (approx 25 minutes) Watch middle portion of the movie with study questions Day 3 of “Exploring Our Matrix”

• Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” (30 minutes) This Allegory is a perfect fit for the Matrix and the understanding of sense perception and knowledge. Instead of reading the allegory it is important that the students have a visual as the concept can be hard to follow at first. So instead of reading show a video clip of the animated version of the allegory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2afuTvUzBQ (approx 8 mins)

16

Discuss before viewing that they will be viewing a very famous philosophical text from Plato’s The Republic. It is a fictional dialogue between Socrates (who was the teacher of Plato) and a young follower of his named Glaucon. Explain that it can be argued that we live in a world of relative ignorance and we become comfortable with that ignorance, because it is all we know. When and if we begin to be faced with truth, the process may be overwhelming, and many would desire a return to their old lives. Plato’s allegory shows that if you continue to seek truth, you will eventually be able to handle it better and desire even more! However others who are still masked in ignorance may ostracize you thinking you are weird. Distribute handout with study questions. (see handout)(Finish for homework)

• “Philosopher’s Movie Critique”: Required Task - Handout assignment and discuss. The task is to write a movie critique on how Plato’s Allegory of the Cave can be compared to The Matrix. Both deal with the question of knowledge and how our senses can deceive us from “reality.” In your critique you must also include the ideas of at least one philosopher and how they would explain how the two deal with “knowledge”. Take some time with class to make sure everyone understands the task.

• “The Matrix” (approx 25 minutes)

Watch end portion of the movie with study questions http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/platoscave.html

• Using the handout (Appendix 4.0) students will be responsible for answering

some final questions regarding the Matrix. Resources: Bertrand Russell. “Appearance and Reality”, Problems of Philosophy . 7-16, 1912. Oxford Press http://www.ditext.com/russell/rus1.html http://www.listentogenius.com/author.php/133 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2afuTvUzBQ “The Matrix” Quinton, A.M. 1955. “The Problem of Perception” Mind, pp. 28-51. 1955 New Serials Description of Assessment: “Critical questions” from Russell’s text. – Formative assessment (group) Sense Data role play – Can be assessed for Thinking and Application Movie Critique -“The Matrix” and “The Allegory of the Cave” comparison – Assessed for Knowledge/Thinking/Communication

Lesson 5: Theories of Perception Time: 75 minutes

Expectations: EP1.04, EP1.05 Learning Strategy/Activities:

17

This lesson is to provide the class of a fun and authentic way to experience for themselves how sensory perceptions can be illusions (the psychology of sensory perceptions). At the beginning of the class hold up a piece of paper for a couple seconds and ask everyone to write what it says.

Students eat their lunch in the

the cafeteria.

Students will write using only one “the”. Explain that our expectations and experiences can affect our perceptions. There are many examples of this in daily life. You can discuss how the theories of other philosophers that you have already studied fit into this idea. Example Descartes says that we may have knowledge based on sensation, but it is unreliable. You can talk about the Empiricists as well here. The next section must take place in a computer lab. John Ridley Stroop was a psychologist and he developed a series of tests to show how confusion occurs when two forms of perception are in conflict. The idea here is to say the colour that the word appears in (not the names of the colours themselves). The test scores you and demonstrates how perceptions cannot always be counted on at first. Students take the test and score themselves: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/java/ready.html Then students are to find on the internet 1 more “sensory perception illusion exercise”. Here are some links they can go on: http://www.scientificpsychic.com/graphics/ http://www.archimedes-lab.org/index_optical.html http://www.geocities.com/just_optical_illusions/ Homework task is to explain what sense(s) it deceives and what they conclude about sensory perceptions after now seeing the many different ways they can be deceiving. Resources: http://www.scientificpsychic.com/graphics/ http://www.archimedes-lab.org/index_optical.html http://www.geocities.com/just_optical_illusions/ http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/java/ready.html Description of Assessment: Sensory perception illusion exercise can be assessed for Knowledge and Application.

18

Lesson 6: Socratic Dialogue Time: 150 minutes

Expectations: Learning Strategy/Activities:

Intro: Through some freak accident you are hurdled back in time to ancient Athens. By incredible luck (and because otherwise this assignment wouldn’t work as well) you bump into two Athenians whom you recognize as Socrates’ old students Crito and Plato. They are busily engaged in a philosophical discussion. Having taken this philosophy course you figure you are more than a match for any ancient Greek. So, hoping to get your name in the history books you tell Plato to pick up his pen and you begin a Socratic dialogue with Crito (as he seems the easier mark) on the nature of knowledge. The Assignment:

1. You are to write a Socratic style dialogue between you and Crito (or some other ancient Greek sounding name) on either “What is knowledge?” or “How do we come to know something?”.

2. This must be written in the style of the Plato’s Socratic dialogues, but in English (examples given below).

3. The dialogue you create must clearly and logically discuss the epistemological question you have chosen above and demonstrate a clear knowledge of at least three of the various theories we have studied in class.

4. The idea is to have a little fun with this assignment while communicating your understanding of the topic.

5. The dialogue should be no more than three typed pages and will be graded according to the rubric given below.

6. Creativity counts! What is a Socratic Dialogue and How do I Write One? Socratic dialogues are philosophical conversations between two or more people in which Socrates asks a series of questions that lead the other person, through discussion, to an answer. This answer is always something that proves Socrates’ right. Socrates rubs this in at the end of every dialogue by asking a question along the lines of “So I was right wasn’t I?” to which the other person, at this point, can only answer “Yes” (No wonder they killed him =)).

19

The style of a Socratic dialogue may be hard to get used to at first, so please look at this sample Dialogue. It’s on Freewill, whereas yours will be about knowledge. *Also make sure you read through the Points to Keep In Mind section that is written below this example.

Sample Socratic Dialogue (on Freewill) "Adelphos: Socrates, why do you waste your time by chatting with the people on the street? Socrates: Ah, Adelphos! What a delightful surprise!. I have waited years for somebody to ask this question. Exactly in what sense am I wasting my time? Adelphos: You aren't teaching anyone with your little dialogues in a way that can change their fate. Look at Demos there. He is the son of wise Erasmus, and also a wealthy young man of Athens. The gods know the number of his days, and he has inherited the wisdom of his father and the kindness of his mother. Look upon his face, his bearing, his diligence. He will be a fine young man whether he listens to you babble on for hours or not. Socrates: There are a few questions I want to ask you. First, if the gods know the number of Demos's days, does that necessarily make any action of his futile? Adelphos: It does not. The good deeds of a good man bring much blessings, whether his life is long or short. Socrates: And is it always the case that good fathers have good sons? Adelphos: That is not the case, though there are more good sons that come from good fathers than bad sons that come from good fathers or good sons that come from bad fathers. Socrates: Exactly what causes the exceptions, particularly when bad sons are born to good fathers? Adelphos: It depends. Sometimes it's the result of the bad character that's given to the sons by the gods. Sometimes it's the ideas imposed upon the sons by other people that corrupt a naturally good character. Socrates: How do these ideas get imposed upon the naturally good sons? Adelphos: From spending too much time listening to the ideas of other people with poor character and imitating their actions. Let me give you an example. Alcibiades was born of a good family and he had plenty in terms of beauty and cleverness, but he turned out bad because he was surrounded by a few reckless and wild people.

20

Socrates: Yet it would seem to me that if anyone was fated by the gods to be good, Alcibiades was. It looked as if he had many gifts from the gods and blessings from his parents, yet he turned out bad because he imitated the poor judgments and actions of others. Was he simply fated to spend his time with evil friends and so to learn to make bad choices? Or did he choose to do so? Adelphos: I see where you are going with this, Socrates. But choosing and being fated to choose are the same thing..." * (The dialogue above is taken from http://classicalschool.blogspot.com/2008/04/writing-socratic-dialogue.html) **For a real (and short) Socratic dialogue click on this link to Plato’s classic Socratic dialogue (on virtue) The Meno: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/meno.html

Points to Keep In Mind

These guidelines will help you keep your Socratic dialogue on track:

1. Use clear examples everyone will understand. 2. Make sure your wording is easy to understand. 3. Your part of the conversation is only to ask questions. The other character can

give answers or ask questions. 4. Try to draw out the possible ridiculous consequences of the other person holding

their belief (reductio absurdum) 5. Keep emotion out of it. 6. Try to make it interesting. 7. Don’t make the person you are dialoguing with too naïve. Perhaps they can

represent an alternative philosophical position that we have studied in class, but that you can refute or shoot down fairly easily.

8. Make sure it ends in agreement.

Resources:

How to write a Socratic Dialogue http://www.sfcp.org.uk/socratic_dialogue.htm Early Philosophers Explained http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/index.htm Epistemological Podcast – Reviews Basic theories of knowledge. If you don’t want to join, just click the Listen button. http://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail?pid=19988 Simple Blog site discussing Socratic Dialogues http://classicalschool.blogspot.com/2008/04/writing-socratic-dialogue.html Timeline of Early Philosophers http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/zt.htm

Description of Assessment: Please see Appendix 6.0, 6.1, 6.2

21

Lesson 7: Culminating Activity: Philosopher’s Debate Time: 375 Minutes

Expectations: EP1.01, EP1.02, EP1.03, EP1.04, EP1.05 Learning Strategy/Activities:

In this lesson, students are going to work together in groups to represent a variety of different philosophers and/or philosophical schools. Students will be able to choose the philosopher they wish to represent from a list of my suggestions or come up with their own ideas. Students will be encouraged to represent a variety of philosophical backgrounds, from various historical time periods and also from various cultural groups. Please see Appendix 7.0, 7.1 and 7.2 for graphic organizer and rubric Resources: Blackwell Philosophy Resource Center – www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/PHILOS Guide to Philosophy on the Internet – www.earlham.edu/~peters/gpi/index.htm The High School Philosophy Website Project – www.oise.utoronto.ca/`hsphil History of Western Philosophy: Summary Outline – http://home.earthlink.net/~pdistan/index.html The Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy – www.utm.edu/research/iep/ Meta-Encyclopedia of Philosophy – www.ditext.com/encyc/frame.html Noesis: Philosophical Research Online – http://noesis.evansville.edu/bin/index.cgi The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy – www.rep.routledge.com:/routledge/signpost/sp.html

Lesson 8: Culminating Activity: Philosophy Board Game? Time: 150 minutes

Expectations: EP1.01, EP1.02, EP1.03, EP1.04, EP1.05 Learning Strategy/Activities:

Please see Powerpoint document attached. In the "Matrix," which was touched upon in this unit, Neo is torn between choosing the blue pill, which will bring him back to his reality, or the red pill, which will allow him to unravel the secrets of the Matrix. In keeping with the theme of knowledge and choice, the Unit Test is designed to provide students with the opportunity to choose their own questions (by chance), and subsequently, how much the test will be out of.

22

The (electronic) gameboard is projected on the white screen. Taking turns, students roll a die and move the game piece accordingly. Wherever the game piece lands, the students will answer the corresponding question on either the scantron sheet, or foolscap provided (multiple choice on Scantron; short answer on foolscap). Expectations Covered: * identify the main questions, concepts, and theories of epistemology; * evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of responses to some of the main questions of epistemology defended by some major philosophers and schools of philosophy, and defend their own responses; * demonstrate the relevance of philosophical theories of epistemology to concrete problems in everyday life; * explain how different epistemological theories apply to subject areas such as psychology Resources: electronic board game unit test game piece die short answer question cards scantron sheet foolscap for short answer questions answer key laptop cart/LCD

23

APPENDICES

Appendix 1.0 Lesson 1 – Introduction to Epistemology

UNIT: 3

TOPIC: Introduction to Epistemology

TIME: 75 mins

LESSON: 1

SUBJECT: Philosophy – Questions and Theories, HZT4U

GRADE: 12

SPECIFIC EXPECTATIONS:

Demonstrate an understanding of the main philosophical questions of epistemology (E.g., what is human knowledge? Can humans know the world as it really is? Are there some things that humans can never know? Are there some things that we know with absolute certainty?)

RESOURCES AND EQUIPMENT

Blackboard Overhead Chart Paper Textbook Worksheets Workbook Print Material Handouts CD/Video/DVD TV/CD/VCR/DVD Player Other: markers, post-its, LCD

TYPE OF ASSESSMENT

Diagnostic Formative Summative

ASSESSMENT TOOLS

Anecdotal Checklist Conference Rubric Presentation Rating Interview Question/Answer Exhibition/Demonstration Learning Log Observation Performance Task Quiz, Test, Examination Select Response Self-Assessment

LEARNING STRATEGIES

Activity Centers Anticipation Guides Annolighting a text Brainstorming/ Word web Carousel Case Studies Choral Reading Debates Dramatizations/Skits Exit Slip Field Trip Four Corners Gallery Tour Games Graffiti Wall Graphic Organizers Group Work Inside/Outside Circle Jigsaw Journaling Lectures Literature Circles Note Taking Numbered Heads Paired Reading Pass The Paper Place Mat Portfolios Posters Presentations

TIME

30 mins

5 mins

LESSON DESCRIPTION:

1. Numbered Heads: Make 8 groups. 2. Graffiti Wall – 3 minutes per station: Each group

will visit a station to write their answers on the following questions on chart paper on the wall:

Is it possible to know anything with certainty? Do you believe that you have knowledge that does

not depend at all on perceptual experiences? How can we differentiate between the concepts of

knowledge, wisdom, belief, and ideology? What does it mean for something to be true? Is there one thing that you can say for certain is

true? If yes, what is it? If no, what is it / if no, why? If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to

here it, does it make a sound? What is your interpretation of the meaning of this question?

How do you know that your experiences of consciousness (or reality) are the same as everyone else's?

If a placebo has an effect, is it any less real than the real thing?

3. After visiting all of the stations, instruct each group to

ACCOMMODATIONS/ MODIFICATIONS

Decreased Workload Increased Time Peer Tutoring Teacher Assistance Scribing Use Of A Timer Different Mode Of Response Visual Aid Manipulatives Technology Other:

24

TYPE OF ASSESSMENT


ASSESSMENT TOOLS




MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES

Visual Linguistic Musical Logical Intrapersonal Kinesthetic Interpersonal Naturalist Existentialist

Put Yourself On The Line Role Play Seminars Send A Problem Snowball Stand-N-Share Storytelling Tableau Talking Chips Think, Pair, Share Time Lines Value Lines Venn Diagrams Videos Other: Parking Lot

10 mins

20 mins

10 mins

summarize their graffiti walls 4. Groups present their graffiti wall summaries

5. Journaling: Introduce Philosopher’s log journal

assignment. Annolight instructions and go over rubric. Project the first quote with the LCD. Discuss student’s reflections: “To learn something new, take the path that you took yesterday.”

6. Wonder Wall Parking Lot: Hand out post-its.

Students write down things they’re always wondered about (must be appropriate) and post them on the parking lot chart paper at the back of the class. Teacher chooses 1-3 posts-its to discuss with the class. Encourage students to keep posting throughout the unit, as it will be taken up during the last 5-10 minutes of each class.

BLOOM’S TAXONOMY

Knowledge Comprehension Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation

CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS Developing insight into egocentricity or sociocentricity

Exercising fair-mindedness Exploring thoughts underlying feelings, and feelings underlying thoughts

Analyzing or evaluating arguments, interpretations, beliefs or theories Developing intellectual humility and suspending judgment

Clarifying and analyzing the meanings of words or phrases Listening critically

Developing criteria for evaluation: clarifying values and standards Evaluating evidence and alleged facts

Noting significant similarities and differences Distinguishing relevant from irrelevant facts

Making plausible inferences, predictions, or interpretations Clarifying issues, conclusions, or beliefs

Thinking independently HOMEWORK REMINDERS

LITERACY CONSIDERATIONS

L Learn Reading of

> previewing and analyzing features of a text > locating and accessing information from a variety of sources

25

Informational Text, Visuals, Graphics

> reading aloud- thinking aloud > finding organizational and structural patterns > identifying 5 W + H > identifying signal words > extending vocabulary and identifying unknown words > reading different text forms (texts, visuals, graphics) > reading for purpose and pleasure

I Increase Reading

and Comprehension

Skills

> highlighting key words, passages, quotes, elements in texts > interpreting text forms > organizing ideas from text: note-taking skills, concept maps, visualizing > differentiating between most and least important ideas / information > identifying main points, thesis, main arguments

T Think and Respond

Critically to Informational Texts

> asking questions > making inferences > using context to find meaning > drawing conclusions > solving problems > making judgments > identifying bias > determining credible sources; analyzing validity of sources

E Evolving Writing

Skills

> writing for a purpose: webbing, mind mapping, report, types of essay, journal, procedure, reflection, synopsis, abstract, précis etc. > rapid writing, generating ideas > organizing arguments in writing > supporting the main idea / argument with evidence > adding details and explanation > writing with clarity > improving mechanics of writing

R Revising and

Editing Written Work

> reorganizing ideas > asking questions to revise writing > peer editing > proofreading without partners > improving mechanics of writing

A Applying Oral

Communication Skills

> communicating for a purpose and audience: pair work, small group discussions, whole- class discussions, oral presentations, debates, role play, jigsaws > questioning, listening and speaking > articulating and communicating ideas critically > communicating explicit and implicit messages, conclusions and inferences > communicating effectively using visuals, graphics, texts or orally

T Types of Literacy

> promoting literacy skills and experiencing literacy in a variety of forms such as literacy; digital and technological > reviewing literacy skills

E Evaluation and Exemplars

> check Liter8 skills through reading and writing tasks > use sample OSSLT test questions / templates > reflective and constructive feedback > examples and exemplars of good reading, writing and communication skills

Appendix 1.1

26

A PHILOSOPHER’S LOG: REFLECTION ASSIGNMENT

INSTRUCTIONS For the first 10 minutes of class, you will write a journal entry on a quote or article provided at the front (overhead, board, or projector). When you enter the classroom, sit down quietly and comment on the following:

1) What does the quote / article mean? 2) Provide at least one example of a life experience that relates to the quote/article.

You are to hand in your complete and insightful journals at the end of the unit (please date them). Remember, this is a quiet and reflective exercise. Please refrain from talking to your peers, and enjoy the alone time. **Note: If you have a quote that you’re particularly fond of, feel free to pass it to me so that we can use it for this exercise.

A PHILOSOPHER’S LOG:

REFLECTION ASSIGNMENT RUBRIC

CRITERIA COMMUNICATION /50

LEVEL 4

Journal responses are full and complete. Entries are insightful and perceptive, connecting personal experience to the text and making inferences and judgments. There is a thoughtful interpretation of what was read, heard, or viewed.

LEVEL 3

Journal responses are full, but are missing some entries due to absences. Some entries are insightful and perceptive, connecting personal experience to the text and making inferences and judgments. There is a thoughtful interpretation of what was read, heard, or viewed.

27

LEVEL 2 Journal responses meet basic expectations but some responses are missing necessary detail or include unnecessary information; many entries are missing due to many absences. Entries show the reader connecting the text to life experiences.

LEVEL 1

Journal responses are incomplete because a large number of classes have been missed. Entries are unclear, or show little effort or insight. The writer occasionally makes observations or predictions but these are vague and unsupported. Entries are often simply summaries.

[Learning Skill Assessed: Initiative, Organization, Work Habits, Independent

Work] Name: ________________________________________________________________________ Teacher Comments: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Appendix 2 Lesson 2: Primary Sources and Epistemology

UNIT: 3

TOPIC: Introduction to Epistemology -

Primary Sources

TIME: 75 mins

LESSON: 2

SUBJECT: Philosophy – Questions and Theories, HZT4U

GRADE: 12

SPECIFIC EXPECTATIONS:

Demonstrate an understanding of the main philosophical questions of epistemology (e.g., what is human knowledge? Can humans know the world as it really is? Are there some things that humans can never know? Are there some things that we know with absolute certainty?);

Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the responses given by some of the major philosophers (e.g., Aquinas, Plato, Descartes, Berkeley, Nagarjuna) and major schools of epistemology (e.g., scepticism, empiricism, pragmatism) to some of the main epistemological questions (e.g., Is human knowledge based entirely on sensory perception? What counts as a justification in claiming to know something?), making reference to classic texts (e.g., Plato’s Meno, Descartes’ Discourse on Method)

RESOURCES AND EQUIPMENT

Blackboard Overhead Chart Paper Textbook Worksheets Workbook Print Material Handouts CD/Video/DVD TV/CD/VCR/DVD Player Other: (Sheets with primary sources; graphic organizer in coloured paper), post-its

28

TYPE OF ASSESSMENT


ASSESSMENT TOOLS




MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES

Visual Linguistic Musical Logical Intrapersonal Kinesthetic Interpersonal Naturalist Existentialist

LEARNING STRATEGIES

Activity Centers Anticipation Guides Annolighting a text Brainstorming/ Word web Carousel Case Studies Choral Reading Debates Dramatizations/Skits Exit Slip Field Trip Four Corners Gallery Tour Games Graffiti Wall Graphic Organizers Group Work Inside/Outside Circle Jigsaw Journaling Lectures Literature Circles Note Taking Numbered Heads Paired Reading Pass The Paper Place Mat Portfolios Posters Presentations Put Yourself On The Line Role Play Seminars Send A Problem Snowball Stand-N-Share Storytelling Tableau Talking Chips Think, Pair, Share Time Lines Value Lines Venn Diagrams Videos Other: Parking Lot

TIME

10 mins

5 mins 30 mins 20 mins 10 mins

LESSON DESCRIPTION:

1. HOOK - Journaling - Project quote of the day for Philosopher’s Log assignment: “Our greatest pretenses are built up not to hide the evil and the ugly in us, but our emptiness. The hardest thing to hide is something that is not there.”

2. Debrief quote and ask students to share their thoughts.

3. Hand out graphic organizer.

4. Group Work: Assign students in groups of 3-4. Provide excerpts of epistemology theories (8 – see attached). Groups provide an interpretation of the text, and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of their main arguments. Students jot down their ideas on the graphic organizers provided.

Descarte Russell Plato Hume Al-Ghazali Aquinas Nagaruja Berkley

5. Each group presents their ideas, as the rest of the class fills out their graphic organizers, adding additional details and explanations.

6. CLOSING - Wonder Wall Parking Lot: Teacher chooses 1-3 posts-its (from yesterday’s parking lot) to discuss with the class. Leave post-its at the back of the room (beside parking lot) and encourage students to add to the wonder wall throughout the unit).

BLOOM’S TAXONOMY

Knowledge Comprehension Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation

CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS Developing insight into egocentricity or sociocentricity

Exercising fair-mindedness Exploring thoughts underlying feelings, and feelings underlying thoughts

Analyzing or evaluating arguments, interpretations, beliefs or theories Developing intellectual humility and suspending judgment

Clarifying and analyzing the meanings of words or phrases Listening critically

Developing criteria for evaluation: clarifying values and standards Evaluating evidence and alleged facts

Noting significant similarities and differences Distinguishing relevant from irrelevant facts

Making plausible inferences, predictions, or interpretations Clarifying issues, conclusions, or beliefs

Thinking independently HOMEWORK REMINDERS

29

LITERACY CONSIDERATIONS

L Learn Reading of

Informational Text, Visuals, Graphics

> previewing and analyzing features of a text > locating and accessing information from a variety of sources > reading aloud- thinking aloud > finding organizational and structural patterns > identifying 5 W + H > identifying signal words > extending vocabulary and identifying unknown words > reading different text forms (texts, visuals, graphics) > reading for purpose and pleasure

I Increase Reading

and Comprehension

Skills

> highlighting key words, passages, quotes, elements in texts > interpreting text forms > organizing ideas from text: note-taking skills, concept maps, visualizing > differentiating between most and least important ideas / information > identifying main points, thesis, main arguments

T Think and Respond

Critically to Informational Texts

> asking questions > making inferences > using context to find meaning > drawing conclusions > solving problems > making judgments > identifying bias > determining credible sources; analyzing validity of sources

E Evolving Writing

Skills

> writing for a purpose: webbing, mind mapping, report, types of essay, journal, procedure, reflection, synopsis, abstract, précis etc. > rapid writing, generating ideas > organizing arguments in writing > supporting the main idea / argument with evidence > adding details and explanation > writing with clarity > improving mechanics of writing

R Revising and

Editing Written Work

> reorganizing ideas > asking questions to revise writing > peer editing > proofreading without partners > improving mechanics of writing

A Applying Oral

Communication Skills

> communicating for a purpose and audience: pair work, small group discussions, whole- class discussions, oral presentations, debates, role play, jigsaws > questioning, listening and speaking > articulating and communicating ideas critically > communicating explicit and implicit messages, conclusions and inferences > communicating effectively using visuals, graphics, texts or orally

T Types of Literacy

> promoting literacy skills and experiencing literacy in a variety of forms such as literacy; digital and technological > reviewing literacy skills

E Evaluation and Exemplars

> check Liter8 skills through reading and writing tasks > use sample OSSLT test questions / templates > reflective and constructive feedback

30

> examples and exemplars of good reading, writing and communication skills

EXCERPTS FROM PRIMARY SOURCES

PHILOSOPHER RESOURCES Descartes

Descartes, Rene “Meditations on First Philosophy”,

Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy 3rd Edition. Translated by Donald A. Cress, 1993 Hackett Publishing Company Inc.

Plato

Plato. “Knowing and Believing”, Plato’s Republic, translated by G.M.A. Grube, pp. 135-140. 1974 Hacket Publishing Company.

Hume

SECTION IV Skeptical Doubts Cconcerning The Operations Of The Understanding (Part 1 and 2)

http://18th.eserver.org/hume-enquiry.html#4

Al-Ghazali

http://www.ghazali.org/articles/gz1.htm

Russell

Russell, Bertrand. "Truth and Falsehood",

Problems of Philosophy. p119-130, 1918 Oxford University Press.

Nagarjuna (c. 150-250)

Epistemology

By David Edward Cooper, Jitendranath Mohanty, Jitendra Nath Mohanty, Ernest Sosa (pg 87 – 96)

http://www.iep.utm.edu/n/nagarjun.htm

Bishop George Berkeley A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human

Knowledge http://philosophy.eserver.org/berkeley.html

Saint Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologicae http://www.newadvent.org/summa/

Appendix 3.1

31

Rene Descartes (1596-1650) School of Thought: Foundationalism - Rationalist Quick Facts and Bio: Dissatisfied with the type of knowledge that was prevalent in his day, Descartes set out to discover a foundation or set of principles that, because it was absolutely true, would lead him to acquire other concepts which would also be absolutely true. Accordingly, he developed a method (Discourse on Method) that, if properly followed, would help him to construct a firm foundation on which to build a view of himself and the world which he would know was true or certain. His Method to find this foundation of certain truth consisted of four steps: The first was to accept as true only that which presented itself to him in a clear and distinct manner The second was to subdivide problems that he encountered into their components parts so he could more easily find their solution. The third was to begin his search for knowledge with the simplest and most-easily understood matters and proceed in an orderly manner to study of more complex phenomena (deduction). The fourth and final step was to keep a record of his discoveries and review them so that nothing was missed as he searched for true knowledge. To begin the process of finding clear and distinct information which he could base all other true knowledge on, Descartes undertook to evaluate all the ways of knowing that might produce this true knowledge. He referred to this evaluation as doubting. The clear and distinct knowledge that characterizes the statement “I think, therefore I am” (je pense, donc je suis) is referred to by Descartes as intuitive knowledge, or conclusions one reaches on the basis of one’s intuition rather than by a complicated logical process. An intuitive conclusion is one that someone “just knows.” No proof is required in order to pualify it as certain knowledge. In today’s terminology, it could be called a “gut feeling.” Summary:

• None of the traditional subjects such as philosophy, etc. provides the certain knowledge he is seeking.

• Descartes evaluates knowledge. Any knowledge that can be doubted is rejected. Knowledge based on sensation is rejected

– Extracted from Source: Independent learning Centre, 2004 Appendix 3.2 John Locke (1632-1704) Empiricist Quick facts and Bio:

32

Founder of the Empiricist, approach to knowledge, Locke was strongly influenced by the methodologies being used by scientific researchers in his era. These methodologies stressed the importance of the empirical or observational-experimental approach to discovering scientific truth. Locke disagrees with the rationalist philosophers who maintain that our ideas are generated by reason rather tan sensation, the process relied on science for its observations. He outlines the role of sensory perception in the apprehension of ideas in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Locke maintains that all of our ideas about the external world come through sensory perception. However, he asks if you can be certain that these ideas reflect the world as it actually is. The rationalists, of course, think that you cannot rely on what the senses tell you about the world. After much thought, Locke’s answer is: Some of the ideas are accurate. Locke says that material objects have primary qualities, which are actually present in their structures and constitute the real world. They include an object’s solidity, size or extension, its figure or shape, and whether it is at rest or in motion. Use the example of a candle. We know that the candle contains these primary qualities: it is solid to the touch, it is about ten centimeters high, and it sits unmoving on the table. Thus, you can be certain that the ideas generated by the primary qualities in an object reflect that object as it really is, because these qualities are actually present in the object itself. However, there are also secondary qualities of external objects. They’re not physically present in external objects. They’re not physically present in objects. These, therefore, are not as real as primary qualities. These qualities are still caused by the objects, and exist as powers or immaterial forces in the objects. They trigger your senses to experience the object’s colour, sound, taste, smell, and temperature. But these are more subjective measurements, since what looks like green to you might look like blue to me. The heat and light of the candle, for example, are not within the candle; it is the power of the candle that causes us to experience heat and light within our bodies. Thus, according to Locke, we are less certain that our ideas of secondary qualities reflect the object as it really is. In Locke’s time, there were no set temperature scales such as Celsius or Fahrenheit. While the rationalist’s placed almost no faith in sense perception’s capacity to understand the external world, Locke is certain that the senses grasp primary qualities. He also has at least some measure of certainty that they can accurately perceive secondary qualities. Since it is the primary qualities of an object that form the essence of the real world outside the mind, and since the mind, through sensation, is able to form accurate ideas of those qualities, sensation reflects the external world as it really is. Having established that the sense can accurately reflect the world, Locke is next concerned with the way the mind becomes aware of all aspects of an object rather than just a few of them. He divides the ideas that the senses form about an object into simple ideas and complex ideas.

– Extracted from Source: Independent learning Centre, 2004

Appendix 3.3

33

Eastern Philosophy: Buddha (c.560-480 BC) The Buddha is dismissive of attempts to answer many of the great philosophical questions, such as whether the universe has always existed. He considers such questions unanswerable, preferring to focus on the practical. The Buddha is interested in acquiring the wisdom necessary to achieve a very concrete result – the removal of suffering. The philosophy of the Buddha involves a theory about the nature of human existence and how we might achieve release from suffering. He does not recommend that we passively accept his pronouncements as a matter of “faith”. Rather he encourages us actively to test them for ourselves against our own experience. The Buddha’s diagnosis of the root cause of our suffering, and his recommended cure, are encapsulated in his four “noble truths”: The Four Truths The first truth is that life is suffering. We see pain, frustration and misery all around us. Our suffering – both physical and mental – may be punctuated by brief moments of happiness, but the suffering soon returns. Why?

According to the Buddha, because we have mistaken conception of both ourselves and the world. We think of ourselves as possessing an enduring core or essence. We also suppose that the world is comprised of enduring, substantial things possessing essences of their own. But the truth is that the world sis fundamentally one of transience ad impermanence. There is no robust essential core to either ourselves or the world. Being ignorant of this, we try to cling on to things: to ideas, to external objects and even to our own identity. We crave and attempt to maintain a grip on what we believe will make us permanently happy. But we are inevitably frustrated. We are grasping at air and, therefore, what happiness we achieve is always short-lived. The second truth is that this ceaseless attempt to grasp at transient things traps us in an endless cycle of suffering, of birth and rebirth. What is reborn is not an enduring, substantial self – for we possess no such essential core. A person is best thought of, no as an entity, but as a causally interrelated bundle of ceaselessly shifting psychological and physical features that pass through countless cycles of suffering. The third truth is that we can release ourselves from the treadmill of suffering. If we let go – if we cease trying to grasp what is not there- our suffering will cease. For many Westerners the thought that there is life beyond the grave- that we might e reborn to live again – is reassuring. But for he Buddha, rebirth is something we should seek to avoid. In fact, if the Buddha is correct, the craving for such a permanent, enduring self is actually on of the root causes of our suffering. The fourth truth is the Buddha’s eight fold path: a plan for living that will help us to achieve nirvana. We need to acquire the right view, the right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration.

‐ ‐ Extracted from Source: The Great Philosophers, Stephen Law

34

Appendix 3.4 Statements to ask the class for Think Pair Share exercise Abstract /Theoretical Statements:

‐ There is a way to find out that human knowledge exists. E ‐ There are some things that humans can never know. A ‐ There are some things we can know with absolute certainty. A ‐ Knowledge is acquired and taught. E ‐ You are born with knowledge and all you have to do is think. R ‐ We absolutely know what we know. R

Practical/Applicable Statements:

‐ The sky looks blue, so it must be blue. ‐ The earth is flat. ‐ We live in a democratic society. ‐ People are all the same. ‐ The planet is heating up. ‐ Men are equal to Woman. ‐ Teacher can formulate other statements of a practical/applicable nature.

R= Rationalist; E= Empiricist; A=Alternative Appendix 3.5

Rubric: Philosophy Log Criteria Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Knowledge/ Understanding Correctly use the terminology of philosophy. Reckon with the unique character of philosophy questions.

You rarely use the terminology of philosophy, or make errors in usage. Your reflections indicate a limited understanding of the character of philosophical questions.

You use the terminology of philosophy, but make occasional errors in usage. Your reflections sometimes miss the philosophical nature of the issue.

You use the terminology of philosophy frequently and correctly. Your reflections deal meaningfully with the philosophical aspects of the issue.

You use the terminology of philosophy fluently. Your reflections deal meaningfully and provocatively with the philosophical aspects of the issue.

35

Thinking/ Inquiry Apply logical and critical thinking skills to evaluate philosophical positions.

You approach the topic with limited logic. You are not working hard enough to hone the critical and rational mind of the philosopher here.

You approach the topic with satisfactory logic. It is clear that you are making good attempts at critiquing philosophical positions.

You approach the topic with logic. You are critical in your evaluation of the philosophical positions.

You approach the topic with rigorous logic. You are critical and insightful in your evaluation of philosophical positions.

Communication Write in a clear and lucid style.

Writing has enough errors to occasionally obscure meaning. One has to work too hard to decipher meaning.

Writing is understandable, but it occasionally interferes with your meaning. One has to work a little to decipher meaning

Writing is clear and lucid. Arguments and thoughts are easily understood.

Writing is clear and lucid and enlivens the topic. Arguments and thoughts are brought to life by the writing.

Application Connect philosophical concepts to your own understanding or experiences. (Run the positions of major philosophers through the ‘laboratory of the self’)

You make limited connections between philosophical concepts and your own understanding or experiences. Do the philosophical positions ring true based on your experience of the world? You do not go far enough in answering this question.

You make adequate connections between philosophical concepts and your own understanding of the world. You can do more to test the philosophy against your own experience of the world.

You connect philosophical concepts to your own understanding or experiences. You test the philosophical position in the laboratory of the self.

You powerfully and consistently connect Philosophical concepts to your own understanding or experiences. Your laboratory of the self is operating at a deeply reflective level.

Note: A student’s whose performance is below Level 1 has not met the expectations Appendix 3.6

RUBRIC : Solo Reflection and Questions on Knowledge and Truth Category

Criteria Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Knowledge/ Understanding

Demonstrates an understanding terminology and methodology associated with epistemology.

Demonstrates limited understanding of terminology and methodology associated with epistemology.

Demonstrates some understanding of terminology and methodology associated with epistemology.

Demonstrates considerable understanding of terminology and methodology associated with epistemology.

Demonstrates thorough understanding of terminology and methodology associated with epistemology.

Thinking / Inquiry

Demonstrates an ability to critically analyze personal thoughts and a

Demonstrates limited ability critically analyze personal thoughts

Demonstrates some ability to critically analyze personal thoughts

Demonstrates considerable ability to critically analyze personal thoughts

Demonstrates an exceptional ability to critically analyze personal thoughts and always seeks

36

deeper level of thinking towards the questions in hand.

and does not illustrate a deeper level of thinking towards the questions in hand.

and rarely seeks to deepen their level of thinking towards the questions in hand.

and does seek to deepen their level of thinking towards the questions in hand.

to deepen their level of thinking towards the questions in hand.

Application

Demonstrates an ability to stay focused on task (i.e. not speaking with anyone and following directions) and clearly contemplating the questions in hand.

Does not stay on task and very little thought put into the process during the solo

Sometime stays on task but is easily swayed and brought off task. Does very little to look deeply into the questions in hand.

Stays on focused and on task. Is able to clearly demonstrate through writing and contemplation that they are bought into the process and are attempting to determine their own personal truths about knowledge

Clearly stays focused on task. Is able to demonstrate through writing and contemplation that they are sold on the process and are able to reflect on their own understandings of truth and articulate them on the page

Communication

Written answers are creative with a focus on understanding knowledge and truth.

No Focus – Unclear

Written answers attempt to define their perspective on truth but are scattered and difficult to understand

Written answers have clarity of thought, with few errors and define their perspective clearly on the questions provided.

Written answers are exceptional, with very clear links to thought patterns. Clear, crisp and concise sentences throughout that elaborate their opinions and ideas on epistemology.

Appendix 3.7

RUBRIC : Philosophy Letter Writing Category

Criteria Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Knowledge/ Understanding

Demonstrates an understanding of terminology and methods associated with either Rationalist thought, Empiricist thought, or Alternative- Buddha’s Philosophical thought

Demonstrates limited understanding of terminology and methods associated with either Rationalist thought, Empiricist thought, or Alternative- Buddha’s Philosophical thought

Demonstrates some understanding of terminology and methods associated with either Rationalist thought, Empiricist thought, or Alternative- Buddha’s Philosophical thought

Demonstrates a considerable understanding of terminology and methods associated with either Rationalist thought, Empiricist thought, or Alternative- Buddha’s Philosophical thought

Demonstrates thorough understanding of terminology and methods associated with either Rationalist thought, Empiricist thought, or Alternative- Buddha’s Philosophical thought

Thinking / Demonstrates the Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates an

37

Inquiry

ability to examine and differentiate between their own philosophical ideas around knowledge and absolute truth and is able to interweave these thoughts throughout the letter. (comparing and contrasting) Student identifies concrete examples from text (handouts)

limited ability to examine and differentiate between their own philosophical ideas around knowledge and absolute truth and is able to interweave these thoughts throughout the letter. (comparing and contrasting) Student never identifies examples from the text (handouts)

some ability to examine and differentiate between their own philosophical ideas around knowledge and absolute truth and is able to interweave these thoughts throughout the letter. (comparing and contrasting) Student rarely identifies examples from the text (handouts)

considerable ability to examine and differentiate between their own philosophical ideas around knowledge and absolute truth and is able to interweave these thoughts throughout the letter. (comparing and contrasting) Student identifies some concrete examples from the text (handouts)

exceptional ability to examine and differentiate between their own philosophical ideas around knowledge and absolute truth and is able to interweave these thoughts throughout the letter. (comparing and contrasting) Student identifies many concrete examples from text (handouts)

Application

The student creatively bridges their ideas formulated on their solo with the ideas of the chosen philosopher. Letter creatively and effectively articulates what the student’s position is on knowing and absolute truth.

Ineffective at bridging their ideas formulated on their solo with the ideas of the chosen philosopher. Letter writing is not creative and does not articulate what the student’s position is on knowing and absolute truth.

Somewhat effective at bridging their ideas formulated on their solo with the ideas of the chosen philosopher. Letter writing is somewhat creative and articulates what the student’s position is on knowing and absolute truth.

Effective at bridging their ideas formulated on their solo with the ideas of the chosen philosopher. Letter writing is creative and effectively articulates what the student’s position is on knowing and absolute truth.

Highly effective at bridging their ideas formulated on their solo with the ideas of the chosen philosopher. Letter writing is extremely creative and effectively articulates what the student’s position is on knowing and absolute truth.

Communication

Demonstrates organization, clarity of thought, spelling and grammar

Little care Many errors Not proof read

- Somewhat neat - Some errors - Unclear

- Neat - Few errors - Clarity of thought

- Very Neat - Error free - Clear, crisp and concise sentences

Appendix 4.0

The Matrix Movie Assignment

Thinking/Inquiry and Application Assignment

38

Neo is a young software engineer and part-time hacker who is singled out by some mysterious figures who want to introduce him to the secret of ‘the matrix’. The cops also seem to be after him, and he takes a chance on discovering what he has always suspected: that the world is not quite what it seems to be and a sinister conspiracy is at work.

While you are watching the movie The Matrix, answer the following questions in detail.

1. The Matrix has obvious connections to the “Evil Genius” theory of Rene Descartes. Explain how the movie relates to this theory (including Descartes idea of “I think, therefore I am”) and describe what the ‘evil genius’ is in this movie.

2. At one point in the movie the character Cypher is having dinner, in the Matrix, with Agent Smith.

During the meal he states that ‘so long as it tastes juicy, an illusory steak is real enough for him’. What theory of perception and truth is Cypher using and explain why?

3. Suppose you are a person living in the ‘real’ world outside the Matrix. Use the correspondence,

coherence and pragmatic theories of truth to determine which world (either the outside ‘real’ world or the one inside the matrix) is actually the true world. Explain each answer.

4. Neo goes to the Oracle to find out if he is ‘the one’. While there he speaks with a boy who is bending spoons. The boy says “it is not the spoon that bends it is only yourself that bends. There is no spoon.” Using each theory of Perception and Truth explain whether or not there is “a spoon” and whether Neo can bend it. (Common-sense realism, Representative theory, Subjective Idealism, Phenomenalism)

5. At the end of the film Morpheus is watching Neo take part in the film’s final battle and says that

“he (Neo) is starting to believe”. It could be said that Neo finally understands Descartes idea of “I think, therefore I am.” Explain how this knowledge of himself and of the world affects the final culminating battle.

Appendix 5.0

Plato’s Allegory of a Cave (Handout)

39

The prisoner's in Plato's cave are the poor ordinary men, like me and you. Fortunately there are philosophers who are not happy with what they see or hear and they turn their heads and even try to get out from the cave to see the “real” world. Today the situation is even worse, there are some who control the fire, the projector of the images and finally what we see in order to control us (at least they try). In the seventh book of “The Republic” the Greek philosopher Plato discusses our situation of the understanding of the world. In an allegoric view we live in a cave having our legs and necks chained so that we cannot turn around our heads and can see only before us. Above and behind us a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and us there is a raised way; and we see a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show their puppets. The situation is like in a movie theatre where we observe the shadow of objects on a wall using as a projector the light of a blazing fire. From these limitations we try our best to understand the world from the shadows of the objects. (Plato's Cave and Inverse Problems, Michael Lahanas http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/PlatosCave.htm)

Study Questions:

1. What do you think is the point of Plato’s “Analogy of the Cave”?

2. How do you think this point can be related to the Matrix?

3. What is the role of the sun?

4. Why does he pity the other enslaved men?

5. Why would the enslaved men put anyone to death who tried to release them?

6. What does this analogy say about “knowledge”? Appendix 6.0

Reason as a Basis For Knowing

40

Theories of knowledge are called rationalistic when they claim true knowledge can be acquired by reason alone. Sensory experience cannot be trusted as a reliable source of knowledge because the sensory world can deceive.

• Plato • Believed in 2 worlds: the visible, imperfect world of senses (material world) and

the invisible, perfect world of forms (innate ideas) • He laid the groundwork for rationalism • Saw that the material world changes constantly – therefore the material world can

never be known and is less ‘real’ than the world of forms • The world of forms is the truest reality and can be known because it is innate (it is

already in the human mind at birth). No one can see these forms but they claim to ‘know’ them (ie: the perfect rock concert, or slice of pizza).

• These forms are innate and are used to judge all things in the material world (ie: chairs, trees, justice, beauty)

World of Senses World of Forms Visible Invisible Material Immaterial

Changing Unchanging Particular Universal

Accessible through the Senses Accessible through reason Plato believed people go on an intellectual journey from dreaming and imagining, to believing, to thinking and finally to true knowing (Allegory of the Cave) • Dreaming and imagining – these things are merely images or copies and cannot

be ‘known’ • Believing – involves patterns and objects that can be clearly perceived. But it can

still only be belief. Ie: “This is my car.” Plato would encourage you to say, “I believe this is my car.” But you can still act on your belief and drive away with it.

• Thinking – People move to this when they use reason to formulate principles and make assumptions. Doing this moves people away from the visible world of senses towards the world of forms.

• Thinking upward to come to assumptions about the world (Einstein’s Theory of Relativity or Bishop Desmond Tutu’s advocacy of forgiving oppressors) allows people to reason their way to true knowledge.

Plato’s Intellectual Journey World What is Known Kind of Knowing

41

World of the invisible World of the invisible World of the visible World of the visible

Forms, universal concepts Assumptions, relations, concepts Objects perceived by senses Images

Knowing Thinking Believing Imagining/Dreaming

Rene Descartes • He doubted that the senses were an avenue to knowledge • Used skepticism as a tool to determine the difference between believing and

knowing • Used his evil genius argument to support his theory that the human experience

offers no grounds for believing anything • In the process of doubting everything he realized he could not doubt two things

o He could not doubt he was doubting o Because he was doubting, he had to be the doubter

• Descartes used Deductive Reasoning – every statement must be deduced from a previous statement that is assumed to be true

Descartes Deductive Reasoning Statement I doubt everything TRUE Statement Doubting everything means there must be doubting TRUE Statement If there is doubting, there must be a doubter TRUE Certainty I doubt, therefore I must exist (I think, therefore I am.) TRUE

• Descartes ideas were similar to Plato’s – Both believed ideas were innate and

people can use their ability to reason to discover these ideas. They also questioned knowledge gained from the senses.

• However, Plato never doubted the existence of the external (material) world • Plato focused on the content on the thinking rather than the thinking. Descartes

focused on the thinker and the thinking process. Descartes shifted the emphasis of understanding knowledge from content to process.

Noam Chomsky • A contemporary American rationalist • Uses the theory of innate ideas to help explain mysteries in the field of linguistics • Believes that knowledge of language is hard-wired in humans – we have the

innate ability to understand the deep structure of language • Children show their understanding of the structure by communicating in a way

that can be understood by others (ie: “Me go night-night.” – the child is not copying adults – this misapplied grammar is unique to children)

42

Appendix 6.1

Skepticism

American Philosopher Thomas Nagel showed doubt could challenge people’s

understanding of what is real. If you are sitting in a restaurant with a friend eating chocolate ice cream, how do you know both of you are experiencing the same thing. You could try their ice cream but it might just taste the same to you as your ice cream. Or perhaps you both call it chocolate but each of you tastes a completely different taste. Philosophers have used skepticism as a tool, not a philosophical position. It leads philosophers to question assumptions. The ideas of skepticism flourished all over the world. Pyrrho of Elis (@360 BCE) was a Greek skeptic who said that nothing can be known. He saw that all propositions supported by evidence seem to have opposite propositions that also are supported by evidence. Years later, the Greek philosopher Aenesidenus built on Pyrrho’s ideas and said that any person can experience a proposition and its opposite. To show that claims to knowledge are unreliable he proposed 10 arguments (called modes of doubt).

1. People’s feelings and perceptions differ 2. Physical and mental differences among people make things appear different 3. Different senses give people different impressions of things 4. People’s perceptions depend on their physical and intellectual condition when

something is perceived 5. Things appear different at different distances and in different positions 6. People do not perceive things directly. Everything is perceived through a medium

(eg. People see things through the air). 7. Variations in the quantity, colour, motion and temperance of things make them

appear different 8. People perceive familiar and unfamiliar things in different ways 9. What people call knowledge is based only on the relation of things to other things

or to themselves. Knowledge does not tell people what a thing is in itself 10. People’s opinions and customs are different in different countries

43

Though skepticism is not a school of philosophical thought it has contributed greatly to philosophical debate. Today a skeptical attitude helps people evaluate information. Appendix 6.2

Category Based Socratic Dialogue Rubric

Categories Level 1 (50 - 59%)

Level 2 (60 - 69%)

Level 3 (70 - 79%)

Level 4 (80 - 100%)

Knowledge and Understanding accurately demonstrates an understanding of epistemological question: 'How do we come to know things?' EP1.01,

• EPV.01

- defines the theories of knowledge with a limited degree of success.

- defines the theories of knowledge with some degree of success.

-defines the theories of knowledge with a considerable degree of success.

- thoroughly defines the theories of knowledge with a high degree of success.

Thinking insightfully evaluates the question's strengths and weaknesses, using the Socratic Method. EP1.02

- uses the Socratic Method to evaluate the question's strengths and weaknesses with a limited degree of success.

- uses the Socratic Method to evaluate the question's strengths and weaknesses with some degree of success.

- uses the Socratic Method to evaluate the question's strengths and weaknesses with a considerable degree of success.

- uses the Socratic Method to evaluate the question's strengths and weaknesses with a high degree of success.

Communication clearly formulates own ideas about knowledge, and explain and defend those ideas creatively in philosophical dialogue. EP1.03

- formulates own ideas about knowledge, and explain and defend those ideas in philosophical dialogue with a limited degree of success.

- formulates own ideas about knowledge, and explain and defend those ideas in philosophical dialogue with some degree of success.

- formulates own ideas about knowledge, and explain and defend those ideas in philosophical dialogue with a considerable degree of success.

- formulates own ideas about knowledge, and creatively explains and defends those ideas in philosophical dialogue with a high degree of success.

Application effectively explains views and displays use of philosophical reasoning skills in a dialogue. IS3.02

- explains views and displays use of philosophical reasoning skills in a dialogue with a limited degree of success.

- explains views and displays use of philosophical reasoning skills in a dialogue with some degree of success.

- explains views and displays use of philosophical reasoning skills in a dialogue with a considerable degree of success.

- explains views and displays use of philosophical reasoning skills in a dialogue with a high degree of success.

Appendix 7.0

Philosopher’s Group Debate Instructions

44

In this culminating activity, you are going to work in groups of 2 to learn more about the ideas of one particular philosopher and their ideas on epistemology. The debates will have an audience – either grade 10’s or 11’s and will also be videotaped You are to select ONE philosopher or philosophical school to focus on. Each group has to select a unique topic. You can choose from any of the thinkers we have discussed in this unit (Descartes, Berkeley, Hume, Locke etc.) OR you can choose your own philosopher, with my approval. PLEASE check with me before you begin your research. This project will take place over 5 days. In the first two days, we will be in the library researching our topics. We will spend two days debating various epistemological topics and then one day will be spent editing the video of the event. Questions to be discussed during the debate include:

- I know that one plus one is two - I know that the sky is blue - I know that I exist - I know I am here right now - I know that there is a God

You will be marked on evidence of your research along with your participation in the actual debate. I will be looking for you to debate enthusiastically! You will be required to submit your research notes to me after the debate. Please ensure that you not only research YOUR philosopher, but that you also research the other philosopher’s being represented in order to prepare counter arguments. After the debates, we will be holding a secret ballot vote to see who “won” the debate. May the best philosopher win! Appendix 7.1

HZT4U – Group Debate Organizer!

45

MY Philosopher is: I know that one plus one is two

I know that the sky is blue

I know that I exist

I know I am here right now

I know that there is a God

Potential Counter Arguments? 1) 2) 3) 4) Appendix 7.2

HZT4U1 - DEBATE RUBRIC Criteria Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Level R

- Extremely - Well-organized and -Organized and -Somewhat organized -Arguments are

46

Opening & Closing Statements (/10)

thorough, well-organized presentation of arguments and evidence - Opening statement engages the interest of audience; closing statement leaves no unanswered issues and resonates with the audience (8-10)

complete presentation of arguments and evidence - Opening statement successfully frames the issues; closing statement summarizes many arguments made in the debate (7-8)

generally complete presentation of arguments and evidence - Opening statement outlines or lists arguments and evidence but does not generate interest; closing statement does not reflect remarks made during debate. (6-7)

presentation of arguments and evidence -Opening statement minimally outlines arguments; closing argument briefly restates the ideas offered in the opening statement (5-6)

unorganized, incomplete, or completely lacking in evidence -Opening statement and closing statements do little more than state the position of the team (>5)

Rebuttals (/10)

- Responds to issues raised by opponents with concise, accurate, logical answers - Effectively challenges the arguments made by opponents with argument and evidence. (8-10)

- Responds to issues raised by opponents with accurate and generally concise answers - Challenges the arguments made by opponents; challenges are generally effective (7-8)

- Responds to most of the issues raised by opponents with generally accurate answers - Offers arguments, but no evidence, to counter the arguments made by opponents (6-7)

-Seems to be caught off-guard by opponents; offers tentative, somewhat accurate, but possibly vague or illogical responses -Attempts to challenge arguments of opponents (5-6)

-Is unable to respond to issues raised by opponents in a meaningful or accurate way (>5)

Effective use of philosophical evidence / content knowledge (/40)

-Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the issues, events and facts relevant to the topic -Demonstrates thorough and accurate understanding of details as well as the ability to make original connections and interpretations (35-40)

- Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the issues, events and facts relevant to the topic -Demonstrates thorough and accurate understanding of details as well as the ability to make original connections and interpretations. (30-35)

-Demonstrates an basic and accurate understanding of the issues, events and facts relevant to the topic. -Demonstrates the ability to make basic connections between facts and concepts (25-30)

-Demonstrates a generally accurate understanding of relevant issues, events and facts, but may exhibit minor confusion or misunderstandings seem to understand general ideas, but do not support their ideas with relevant facts; OR, seem to understand facts but are unable to connect them into coherent arguments (20-25)

-Demonstrates an inadequate understanding of the history content relevant to the topic -Supports statements with vague or irrelevant information, or no information at all (>20)

Language Use (/10)

- Uses language that is stylistically sophisticated and appropriate for the court - Uses language to enhance the argument (8-10)

- Uses language that is appropriate to the level of debate - Uses language to add interest (7-8)

- Uses language that is appropriate to the level of debate (6-7)

-Generally uses language that is appropriate to the court -Uses basic but clear language (5-6)

-Uses colloquial, overly simplistic language -Uses language and syntax that is unclear (>5)

Performance (/10)

Exhibits confidence, energy, and passion in the course of the hearing - Maintains respectful tone - Accesses preparation materials with ease (8-10)

- Exhibits confidence and energy in the course of the hearing -Maintains respectful tone - Uses preparation materials effectively (7-8)

- Appears nervous, yet somewhat confident, before the court - Maintains respectful tone - Use of preparation materials does not distract (6-7)

-Lacks confidence -Maintains respectful tone - Use of preparation materials distracts from quality of performance (5-6)

-Demonstrates little or no preparation -Fails to maintain respectful tone (>5)