Classical Education: Hallmarks 4

Classical Education requires its students to study Logic. What does that mean? One simple definition states: Logic is the science and the art of reason.

Logic is a prerequisite to the study of philosophy and it has several branches. For many of us, our only educational exposure was in mathematics...whether we knew it or not, we were learning a form of Symbolic Logic.

Formal Logic teaches students to analyze the validity of the relationship between ideas, arguments, and conclusions. These are based on formulaic connections that can be signified with symbols. You know, this is really hard to explain in an understandable way! I've never tried to do this before and it's not easy! Anyway, Formal Logic is based not so much on truth of content, as consistency of thoughts and statements: students learn to recognize and construct both deductive and inductive arguments, as well as to identify fallacious reasoning. It's all about FORM.

Material Logic follows the teaching of Formal Logic on the educational spectrum, and is primarily concerned with Truth content. It applies the forms learned in Formal Logic, but goes further in evaluating the Truth of the statements and conclusions. It requires analyzing word-use, definitions, and truth-values. It's all about CONTENT and is very philosophical in nature.

Clear as mud? In case none of that makes sense, let me redeem this post by quoting 2 men worthy of being listened to. Our friend, Augustine of Hippo, in his On Christian Doctrine, says this:

...the validity of logical sequences is not a thing devised by men, but is observed and noted by them that they may be able to learn and teach it; for it exists eternally in the reason of things, and has its origin in God. For just as the man who narrates the order of events does not himself create that order; and as he who describes the situations of places, or the natures of animals, or roots, or minerals, does not describe arrangements of man; and as he who points out the stars and their movements does not point out anything that he himself or any other man has ordained; in the same way, he who says, "When the consequent is false, the antecedent must be false," also says what is most true; but he does not himself make it so, he only points out that it is so.

G.K. Chesterton says this:

Logic and truth ... have very little to do with each other. Logic is concerned merely with the fidelity and accuracy with which a certain process is performed, a process which can be performed with any materials, with any assumption. You can be as logical about griffins and basilisks as about sheep and pigs ... Logic, then, is not necessarily an instrument for finding out truth; on the contrary, truth is a necessary instrument for using logic--for using it, that is, for the discovery of further truth ... Briefly, you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it.

So, if I made no sense, at least draw something from these wise men!