Sophia Learning

PHIL1005: Critical Thinking (ACE recommends 3

credits)

COURSE DESCRIPTION
Critical thinking skills are essential to disciplines like computer programming, business, criminal justice, and
many more. It is also one of the key skills employers look for in every industry. In Sophia's Critical Thinking
course, students will learn how to think more critically by questioning assumptions and biases and being aware
of fallacies. Students will learn to interpret and write deductive and inductive arguments and apply to real-life
situations.

COURSE EFFECTIVE DATES: October 2022 - Present

PREREQUISITES: No prerequisites

LENGTH OF COURSE: This is a self-paced course. Students may use as much or as little time as needed to
complete the course.

ACE LEARNING EVALUATIONS RECOMMENDATION: In the lower-division baccalaureate category, 3 semester

hours in Critical Thinking (ACE ID: SOPH-0065).

GRADING: This is a pass/fail course. Students must complete 13 Challenges (formative assessments), 4
Milestones (summative assessments), and 1 Touchstone (written summative assessment) with an overall score of
70% or better.

Challenges Points Possible

Challenge 1.1: Why Learn Critical Thinking? 4

Challenge 1.2: Challenges and Barriers to Critical Thinking 4

Challenge 1.3: Introduction to Fallacies 6

Challenge 2.1: Arguments 3

Challenge 2.2: Quality of Arguments 4

© 2024 SOPHIA Learning, LLC. SOPHIA is a registered trademark of SOPHIA Learning, LLC. Page 1
 Challenge 2.3: Qualities of Good and Bad Arguments 3

Challenge 3.1: Formal Logic 4

Challenge 3.2: Testing for Validity 5

Challenge 3.3: Constructing Proofs 5

Challenge 3.4: Categorical Logic 4

Challenge 4.1: Types of Inductive Reasoning 6

Challenge 4.2 Probability 4

Challenge 4.3 Moral Reasoning 4

Total 56

Milestones Points Possible

Milestone 1 42

Milestone 2 30

Milestone 3 54

Milestone 4 42

Total 168

Touchstones Points Possible

Touchstone 4: Contrasting Normative Arguments in Standard Form 120

Total 120

Grand Total 344

Touchstones are projects that illustrate comprehension of the course material, help refine skills, and
demonstrate application of knowledge. Read further for information on the touchstones in this course:

Touchstone 4: Contrasting Normative Arguments in Standard Form (120 points): Students will make two
contrasting normative arguments about what one ought to do. Both arguments will be about the same
topic; thus, at least one of the arguments will contradict their personal opinion. Students will compose the
arguments in standard form, as a series of statements that end with their conclusion.

For more general information on assessments, please visit the Student Guide located on the course dashboard.

LEARNING OUTCOMES
Upon completion of the course, the student will be able to:

© 2024 SOPHIA Learning, LLC. SOPHIA is a registered trademark of SOPHIA Learning, LLC. Page 2
 1. Describe critical thinking in the context of the philosophies that form and define it, and explain why it is
important to making good decisions.
2. Recognize, analyze, and construct logical arguments in standard form as distinguished from persuasive
arguments.
3. Analyze and assess different types of deductive arguments for validity using truth tables, proofs, and
diagrams.
4. Analyze various inductive arguments such as statistical generalizations, causal and explanatory reasoning,
problems of probability, and moral arguments.

COURSE COMPETENCIES AND TOPICS

Unit Competencies Major Topics

1. Introduction to Define the characteristics of critical thinking and describe its Why Learn Critical
Critical Thinking importance for professional and personal success. Thinking?
Describe some of the barriers to good critical thinking, Challenges and
including closed-mindedness and bias. Barriers to Critical
Analyze arguments to spot common fallacies, including Thinking
formal fallacies with logical errors and informal fallacies that Introduction to
misdirect or include irrelevant information. Fallacies

2. Arguments Translate natural language arguments into standard form. Arguments

Evaluate arguments for validity or soundness using non- Quality of
rigorous techniques. Arguments
Analyze and translate more nuanced and complicated forms Qualities of Good
of argument in natural language such as those using and Bad Arguments
rhetorical techniques like assurring, guarding, and
discounting, and those with hidden premises.

3. Analyzing Interpret and translate arguments and statements in formal Formal Logic
Arguments logic. Testing for Validity
Use a more rigorous method for testing arguments for Constructing Proofs
validity. Categorical Logic
Use the process of proofs for showing deductive reasoning
based on common rules of inference.
Use diagrams and reasoning to test or prove categorical
statements and relational statements.

© 2024 SOPHIA Learning, LLC. SOPHIA is a registered trademark of SOPHIA Learning, LLC. Page 3
 4. Practical Analyze inductive arguments depending on their purpose, Types of Inductive
Reasoning including causal reasoning, explanatory reasoning, analogical Reasoning
reasoning, and statistical generalizations. Probability
Analyze inductive arguments based on laws of probability, Moral Reasoning
both pure probability such as gambling scenarios and those
that apply laws of probability to statistical generalizations.
Analyze statements for use of hidden premises using
evaluative language.
Engage in moral reasoning based on moral truths and moral
duty.

© 2024 SOPHIA Learning, LLC. SOPHIA is a registered trademark of SOPHIA Learning, LLC. Page 4