well its supposed to be about the reasoning behind religion and in religious material. my school offers , reasoning and religion, reasoning and value,reasoning and politics, reasoning and human nature, and reasoning and science. all students required to take one of them.
we did cover syllogisms. valid and invalid. valid yet false. fallacys. evaluations of an arguement.
but the reason i say the class is gay, is we never even got to the religion side of things.never reviewed a single piece of material. he teaches the course like its a high level course, when its a GER ( general education requirement) 101. we supposedly learned how to evaluate arguements. but hes not great at teaching a 101. he uses words and examples from high level philosophy subjects. assume we know more than we do. and the differance between a right and wrong answer on a test, is simply one word.
heres one of the EARLY questions ( like 2nd week)
Unless the quantum mechanical charm signs, the readout will not be clear.
A. The quantum mechanical charm signs if the readout will be clear.
B. If the quantum mechanical charm signs, the readout will be clear.
C If the readout will be clear, the quantum mechanical charm signs.
D. If the quantum mechanical charm signs, the readout will be clear.
E. None of the above.
they all mean the same thing but the wording is what hes looking for. and thats just a multiple choice. on open ended questions he tells me, two examples, almost identical in relevance to the topic are. "too general" and "too specific"
im sure he would be a great professor to a higher level course. but hes just no good at 101 level stuff.
oh and the answers C.
You know your a drunkard if you...
Think box wine is great; eagerly awaiting box whiskey.
Originally Posted by RSF5
Well yeah, the BATFE is like the Anti Hoppy.
Well hey, hey Mr. Policeman
Bet I can drive faster than you can
Come on Hoss, let's have some fun
Go on shoot me with your radar gun
You look bored and I sure am
Catch me if you can.