Fallacy Detective vs. Art of Argument?

[Kris in Wis]

Has anyone used Classical Adacemic Press' Art of Argument and/or Argument Builder?

How does this compare with The Fallacy Detective?

Thanks!

[Kathie in VA]

I've only used Fallacy Detective. When we did FD we did it all orally. I believe Art of Argument is more of a workbook approach. I think it also covers more topics then Fallacy Detective does alone (although if you follow with Thinking Toolbox I think they cover similar material).

hths... perhaps someone else can help more..

[Laurel-in-CA]

I used Art of Argument for a class and added in extra examples from Fallacy Detective. This worked well for us and definitely wasn't too much material for a semester.

[Kimm in WA]

I'm glad you asked this question, Kris, 'cuz I was wondering the same thing.

My older son disliked Introductory Logic . . . well, actually I disliked it more than him. I was wondering if, after doing Fallacy Detective and Thinking Toolbox, Art of Argument and Argument Builders would be redundant.

Thanks for advice,
Kimm

[Kathy in MD]

I'm glad you asked this question, Kris, 'cuz I was wondering the same thing.

My older son disliked Introductory Logic . . . well, actually I disliked it more than him. I was wondering if, after doing Fallacy Detective and Thinking Toolbox, Art of Argument and Argument Builders would be redundant.

Thanks for advice,
Kimm

I've only used the Thinking Tool Box and the AoA. The TTB is extremely light, a good intro and good to get discussions started, but still light. AoA teaches the termonology and has examples. I think though to make it strong, you have to follow the author's recommendation to look for real world fallacies.

[Gwen in VA]

My 13yo dd did FD last year orally, and this year she is working through AofA. I had originally planned for her to do Traditional Logic 1 this year but realized that she just wasn't ready for it.

She has really enjoyed AofA. The approach is very similar to FD, but the actual fallacies examined and the examples used are different enough that she has learned a lot of new material through AofA. Since AofA is a workbook and I have required her to write out all the answers (mean mom!), she has also "cemented" a lot of what she learned in FD.

If I had younger kids coming along, I might or might not use both FD and AofA again.

1) FD and AofA are similar but different enough that using them both is not redundant.

2) Fallacies are really important, so if you have a kid who isn't necessarily ready for formal logic but has finished FD, I would strongly recommend AofA.

3) If you have an older student who just needs to cover the material so he can move on to formal logic, I would definitely NOT use both AofA and FD.

[Kimm in WA]

Thanks. I'll look forward to looking at these "in person" at the curriculum fair soon.

Kimm