SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Introduction to
the Philosophy of
the Human
Person
Quarter 1 – Module 2.2
Methods of Philosophizing
Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person – Grade 11
Alternative Delivery Mode
Quarter 1 – Module 2: Methods of Philosophizing
First Edition, 2020

Republic Act 8293, section 176 states that: No copyright shall subsist in any work
of the Government of the Philippines. However, prior approval of the government agency or
office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit.
Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of
royalties.

Borrowed materials (i.e., songs, stories, poems, pictures, photos, brand names,
trademarks, etc.) included in this module are owned by their respective copyright holders.
Every effort has been exerted to locate and seek permission to use these materials from
their respective copyright owners. The publisher and authors do not represent nor claim
ownership over them.

Development Team of the Module

Writers: Neofidel Ignacio B. Ramirez, Gener C. Irinco, Michael S. Bernal,
Paciano B. Ferrer, Nastasia V. Besin, Jessie De Vera
Editor: Amalia C. Solis, Education Program Supervisor
Reviewers: Michael S. Bernal, Paciano B. Ferrer, Gener C. Irinco,
Nastasia V. Besin, Ernie Ronel Tirol Mabahague (Content)
Laira Janelle C. Apurillo (Language)
Management Team: Maria Magdalena M. Lim, CESO V Schools Division
Superintendent, Aida H. Rondilla, CID Chief, Lucky S. Carpio, EPS LRM, Lady Hanna
Gillo, Librarian II

Printed in the Philippines by ________________________

Lucky S. Carpio, EPS In Charge of LRMS
Department of Education

Office Address: ____________________________________________

____________________________________________
Telefax: ____________________________________________
E-mail Address: ____________________________________________
 11

Introduction to
the Philosophy
of the Human
Person
Quarter 1 – Module 2.2
Methods of Philosophizing
Introductory Message
For the facilitator:

Welcome to the Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Alternative

Delivery Mode (ADM) Module on Methods of Philosophizing

This module was collaboratively designed, developed and reviewed by educators

both from public and private institutions to assist you, the teacher or facilitator in
helping the learners meet the standards set by the K to 12 Curriculum while
overcoming their personal, social, and economic constraints in schooling.

This learning resource hopes to engage the learners into guided and independent
learning activities at their own pace and time. Furthermore, this also aims to help
learners acquire the needed 21st century skills while taking into consideration
their needs and circumstances.

In addition to the material in the main text, you will also see this box in the body of
the module:

Notes to the Teacher

This contains helpful tips or strategies
that will help you in guiding the learners.

As a facilitator you are expected to orient the learners on how to use this module.
You also need to keep track of the learners' progress while allowing them to
manage their own learning. Furthermore, you are expected to encourage and assist
the learners as they do the tasks included in the module.

4
For the learner:

Welcome to the Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Alternative

Delivery Mode (ADM) Module on Methods of Philosophizing!

The hand is one of the most symbolized part of the human body. It is often used to
depict skill, action and purpose. Through our hands we may learn, create and
accomplish. Hence, the hand in this learning resource signifies that you as a
learner is capable and empowered to successfully achieve the relevant
competencies and skills at your own pace and time. Your academic success lies in
your own hands!

This module was designed to provide you with fun and meaningful opportunities
for guided and independent learning at your own pace and time. You will be
enabled to process the contents of the learning resource while being an active
learner.

This module has the following parts and corresponding icons:

What I Need to Know This will give you an idea of the skills or
competencies you are expected to learn in
the module.

What I Know This part includes an activity that aims to

check what you already know about the
lesson to take. If you get all the answers
correct (100%), you may decide to skip this
module.

What’s In This is a brief drill or review to help you link

the current lesson with the previous one.

What’s New In this portion, the new lesson will be

introduced to you in various ways such as a
story, a song, a poem, a problem opener, an
activity or a situation.

What is It This section provides a brief discussion of

the lesson. This aims to help you discover
and understand new concepts and skills.

What’s More This comprises activities for independent

practice to solidify your understanding and
skills of the topic. You may check the
answers to the exercises using the Answer
Key at the end of the module.

What I Have Learned This includes questions or blank

sentence/paragraph to be filled in to process
what you learned from the lesson.

What I Can Do This section provides an activity which will

help you transfer your new knowledge or

5
 skill into real life situations or concerns.

Assessment This is a task which aims to evaluate your

level of mastery in achieving the learning
competency.

Additional Activities In this portion, another activity will be given

to you to enrich your knowledge or skill of
the lesson learned. This also tends retention
of learned concepts.

Answer Key This contains answers to all activities in the

module.

At the end of this module you will also find:

References This is a list of all sources used in

developing this module.

The following are some reminders in using this module:

1. Use the module with care. Do not put unnecessary mark/s on any part of
the module. Use a separate sheet of paper in answering the exercises.
2. Don’t forget to answer What I Know before moving on to the other activities
included in the module.
3. Read the instruction carefully before doing each task.
4. Observe honesty and integrity in doing the tasks and checking your
answers.
5. Finish the task at hand before proceeding to the next.
6. Return this module to your teacher/facilitator once you are through with it.
If you encounter any difficulty in answering the tasks in this module, do not
hesitate to consult your teacher or facilitator. Always bear in mind that you are
not alone.

We hope that through this material, you will experience meaningful learning
and gain deep understanding of the relevant competencies. You can do it!

6
 What I Need to Know

This module was designed and written with you in mind. It is here to help you in
internalizing the methods of philosophizing starting with the dialectic method, the
pragmatic method, and the phenomenological method. The scope of this module
equips you with skills in philosophical reasoning and critical analysis of situations
you encounter in your daily life leading to acquiring wisdom. Moreover, the module
also orients you into distinguishing erroneous or wrong reasoning. We
acknowledge that language should be diverse to meet the vocabulary level of
students including yourself. However, since philosophy is a mental subject, we
employ some vocabularies for you to be familiarized with philosophical terms which
could be useful in your interaction with people. The lessons are arranged to follow
the standard sequence of the course.

The module is divided into two lessons, namely:

 Lesson 1- Methods of Philosophizing
 Lesson 2– Different Fallacies

MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING COMPETENCIES

1. Distinguish opinion from truth;
2. Realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and truth

After going through this module, you are expected to:

1. Explore some of the methods of philosophizing that philosophers employed.

2. Identify and give examples of different fallacies.
3. Evaluate truth from opinions in different situations using the methods of
philosophizing.

7
 What I Know

Select the keyword that best fits the statement in each item. Write the chosen letter
on a separate sheet of paper.

1. Which fallacy literally means hitting the person below the belt instead of
focusing on the issue at hand?
a. mora licensing
b. equivocation
c. argumentum ad baculum
d. ad hominem

2. According to Husserl, the success of natural science lead to the gradual

scientific rejection of__________.
a. spirit
b. matter
c. nature
d. existence

3. Who institutionalized the pragmatic method of philosophizing?

a. John Dewey
b. Socrates
c. Ludwig Wittgenstein
d. George Hegel

4. What is Husserl’s point of view with regards to consciousness?

a. The study of consciousness is the same as the study of nature
b. The study of human consciousness differs from the way scientists
study nature.
c. It does not matter whether we study consciousness similarly or
differently than the way scientists study nature.
d. Husserl was not interested in the study of consciousness.

5. This fallacy is committed when one reaches a generalization based on

insufficient evidence.
a. ad misericordiam
b. false analogy
c. hasty generalization
d. post hoc

8
6. Which among these headlines presented information that are fair, objective,
and moderate?
a. It’s time to consider other means of cash aid distribution
b. Other countries around the world have much better means in cash
aid distribution
c. Government vows to faster distribution of coronavirus aid
d. We can also learn lesson from Vietnam how they distribute their cash
aid

7. Which among these headlines has no errors in terms of spelling, grammar,

and content?
a. Robredo Chides Government for Unclear Communication on New
Quarantine Rules
b. Robredo Blames the Government as They Don’t Have Clear Rules in
Quarantine
c. Robredo Charge the Government as Culprit of Confusion in
Quarantine
d. Robredo blames those in Executive Branch for Communication’s
Unclear

8. Which among the following statements contain substantiated

generalizations?
a. “Drug war a massive failure”—Robredo
b. Robredo lies to world, shames the nation and herself in UN message
c. The real albatross on Leni Robredo’s neck
d. Let Leni plan on her own drug war

9. Which among the following authors could be the most credible according to
his or her Twitter account’s background?
a. Banat By – Simpleng tao na mahilig bumanat
b. Atom Araullo- Journalist. @ UNHCPPh Goodwill Ambassador
c. AkoNgaSY Lyco- Speak now or be silent forever. Follow me I will not
follow you
d. Senyora- Full time haciendera and professional husgadera

10. Which among the following publishers pose no particular agenda or bias?
a. Bulag Ang ABS-CBN sa Katotohanan by Antonio Brigas
b. ABS-CBN Naipasara Sanhi ng Di Pagrenew ng Prangkisa by GMA
News
c. Nararapat Lamang na Huwag ng Magbukas ang ABS-CBN by Balat
Sibuyas
d. Bye Bye Kapamilya by the Avengers

9
Lesson

1 Methods of Philosophizing

Truth is one of the significant lessons in philosophy. It has been a topic of

discussion in its own right for many years. Moreover, its value and influence to
man’s life cannot be denied.

What’s In

ACTIVITY: Unscramble Letters (Critical Thinking)

Directions: Unscramble the following letters to identify the concept being described.
UNSCARMBLED LETTERS DESCRIPTION ANSWER:

It is a mental grasp of reality reached either

LWKEDNGO by perceptual observation or by a process of
reason based on perceptual observation.

This is a science devoted to the discovery of

EGLYEIOSPTMO the proper method of acquiring and
validating knowledge.
It is an abstract or generic idea generalized
NCPTEOC
from particular instances.
This knowledge is validated which means
RUTHT
that it is highly based on the facts of reality.
It is a group of statements, one or more of
which (the premises) is claimed to provide
NTGRUAEM
support for, or reason to believe one of the
others (the conclusion)

Notes to the Teacher

The teacher should give a hint that methods of philosophizing would
equip them with knowledge and skills in acquiring wisdom and truth.
Unlike science, which uses observations through experiments in
proving a theory, philosophy utilizes “pure reasoning” to investigate a
certain reality or phenomenon to arrive at a certain truth.

10
 What’s New

ACTIVITY: Comic Strip (Critical Thinking, Communication, Character)

Directions: Analyze the comic strip and answer the following questions.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1513293938691384&type=3

1. Look at the comic strip. Do you agree with the reasoning of the person inside
the car? Why or why not?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2. If you are the biker, how would you react to the remarks of the person inside
the car?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

What is It

Philosophers generally believe that reason is the road to wisdom. However they
have different interpretations of what reason consists of and some philosophers
even challenge the pre-eminence of reason in the pursuit of wisdom.

I. METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING
Here, we are going to explore some of the methods of philosophizing that
philosophers employ. According to Wilber (2006) Think of wisdom as the summit of
the mountain with different paths to get there. We are going to study the different
paths to wisdom the philosophers offer.

11
1. The dialectic method
This method of philosophizing was conceived by the
Greek philosopher Socrates, (born 470 BCE) one of
the great philosophers of the ancient world.
Unfortunately, he did not leave any written words
and everything people know about him came from
the Dialogues written by his famous student, Plato.

Socrates’ aim was to achieve what he called the good

life which is based on the proper care of one’s soul
(psyche in Greek). The soul, according to Socrates,
can be properly taken care of if we make it as good SOCRATES
Source: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Socrates
as possible (Stumpf 2008). Since by its very nature
the soul’s activity is to know, the soul can only be good if we employ it in the
activity of having a clear awareness of the meaning of some words (Stumpf
2008). When we have a clear awareness of what justice is, we harm our soul
if we act contrary to what we know, like harming others (which is the
opposite of being just).

However, how can we achieve a clear understanding of words? We can

achieve this by an act of “disciplined conversation” (Stumpf 2008) which
Socrates compared to an intellectual midwife. Socrates called this method
dialectic.
The method appears simple but anyone subjected by Socrates to this
method eventually felt its intense rigor.
The method starts with eliciting the definition of a
certain word from a person who appears to be
familiar (or “pretends” to be familiar) with its
meaning. Socrates then points out the
imperfections of the understanding of the person
through a series of questions. What Socrates
desires is for the person to realize his ignorance
and contradictions, and thereby correcting his own
mistakes and arriving at a complete knowledge of
the true meaning of the word.
GEORG HEGEL The method, however, does not sit well with the
Source: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Georg-Wilhelm-
Friedrich-Hegel ruling elites of Athens (the city where Socrates
lived). They accused him of not worshiping the
Greek gods and corrupting the youth. His defense (which was dramatically
recorded in Plato’s dialogue the Apology) was a model of “forceful argument”
(Stumpf 2008) but it fell on deaf ears. In the end, he was forced to drink
poison. Socrates was the first philosopher to die fighting for truth.

The Socratic Method was modernized and treated in a different way by

George Wilhelm Hegel, a German philosopher. Hegel was an idealist. He
believed that the ideas of the human minds have access of what the world is
like. People are social beings and could be completely influenced by other

12
 people’s ideas. An individual’s mind is influenced by means of a common
language, customs of one’s society, and the cultural institutions that one
belongs to. Hegel refers this to “Spirit” as the collective consciousness of a
society which is responsible for honing one’s consciousness and ideas.

Hegel also believed that the Spirit is constantly changing and evolving.
According to Hegel, the spirit changes through dialectic. First, there is an
idea about the world (much like a thesis), which has a natural
characteristic of having errors which give rise to the antithesis.
The thesis and antithesis can be eventually resolved by creating a synthesis
which is a new idea comprised of the essentials
of both the thesis and the antithesis. JOHN DEWEY
To Hegel, society and culture follow this design, Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:John_Dewey_cph.3a51565.jpg

and one could understand all of human history

without the use of logic or empirical data simply
by using logic (Klein, 2013).

2. The Pragmatic Method

Hundreds of years after the death of Socrates, a new philosophy emerged as
inspired by the idea of change initiated by the evolutionary thoughts of Hegel
and Darwin in 19th century America. This philosophy became known as
pragmatism. It was started by Charles S. Pierce (1839-1914), popularized by
William James (1842-1910) and institutionalized in American culture by
John Dewey (1859-1952).

13
 We will explore this briefly to complete the
methods since a thorough presentation of this
theory was already provided in module 2.1.
According to the pragmatists, philosophy seems
to offer a set of beliefs about human beings and
his relationship to the world. Pragmatists offer
no such beliefs. Rather, they seek to make philosophy relevant by solving
real life problems. It is purely a philosophy of method and not of substance.

What pragmatism aims is to test the dogma of science, religion and

philosophy by determining their practical results. The pragmatic test is: if I
practice this belief, will it bring success or failure? Will I solve problems or
create problems? Successful experience is the verification process of truth
for the pragmatists (Stumpf 2008).

3. The Phenomenological Method

The phenomenological method was conceived by
Edmund Husserl (born in 1859), one of the
greatest intellects of of the 19th century. His ideas
and method influenced the thoughts of some of the
20th century philosophical giants: Martin
Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Maurice
Merleau-Ponty among others.

What prompted Husserl to develop

phenomenology? To answer this, we have to look EDMUND HUSSERL
back at Husserl’s time and place: the 19th century Source: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edmund-Husserl
Europe. At that time, science was on the ascendancy prompted by the great
discoveries of Galileo, Newton, and Darwin among others. Husserl himself
was impressed by the achievements of science. Unfortunately, according to
Husserl, science brings a certain attitude which is counterproductive to the
human soul: the naturalistic attitude (or simply naturalism).

Naturalism in this context is the idea that everything can be explained in

terms of matter or the physical. Since man is not only physical (i.e. body) but
also spiritual, this naturalistic attitude brings a distorted view of man by
banishing the spiritual from the world which includes the banishment of
ideas, values, and cultures (Husserl, 1965).

To counter the naturalistic tendency, Husserl returned to the idea of the

thinking self which was given preeminence by the 17th century French
philosopher, Rene Descartes. More specifically, the layman’s term given to
the thinking self is “one’s immediate experience.”

Husserl’s main purpose was to build a philosophy free from any biases or
preconceived ideas. One can only do this if one returns to immediate

14
 experience. Husserl said that he was only looking to “things and facts
themselves, as these are given in actual experience and intuition” (quoted by
Stumpf 2008). This experience is not the objective world of science separate
from us, but the world as it appears to us or (borrowing the term of the 18th
century German philosopher Immanuel Kant) the phenomenal world -
hence, the term phenomenology.

However, our beliefs about human beings and the world prevent us from
seeing clearly this immediate experience which he calls “pure subjectivity”.
Thus, to know the truth, we have to put aside one by one all our limiting
beliefs about the world which represents our biases. Husserl calls this
process phenomenological epoche (epoche is the Greek word for bracketing).
Bracketing is not ignoring. It is an act of stepping back at our biases and
prejudices to make sure that they do not influence the way we think. Only
facts provided by immediate experience must influence us.

4. The Primary and Secondary reflections

Another influential intellectual movement which had its roots in the 19th
century ideas of Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) and Friedrich Nietzsche
(1844-1900) was existentialism.

Kierkegaard’s ideas were in part a reaction against the overly ambitious

system building the philosophy of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-
1831). On the other hand, Nietzsche’s ideas were a reaction against the
religious and rational value system still prevalent in
19th century Europe (Stumpf 2008). While
Kierkegaard was religious and Nietzsche was
atheistic (atheism is the denial of the supernatural),
they both grounded their philosophy on the
personal choices of the individual which becomes
one of the important tenets of existentialism.

In the 20th century, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)

and his partner, Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986)
popularized atheistic existentialism while Gabriel
GABRIEL MARCEL Marcel (1889-1973) and Karl Jaspers (1883-1969)
Source: https://iep.utm.edu/marcel/

promoted religious existentialism. Religious

existentialists saw certain parallels between existential ideas and religious
themes like the fall of Adam and Eve which can be compared to the theme of
inauthentic existence in existentialist philosophy (Stumpf 2008).
After that brief overview on existentialism, let us focus our attention on one
existentialist method identified by Gabriel Marcel: the primary/secondary
reflection.

For Marcel, reflection is not just a disinterested look at experience. It

emerged when something valuable is at stake. Marcel gave an example of a

15
 watch. Suppose you try to take a watch from your pocket. To your surprise,
the watch that you expect to be there is not there. A break from your
ordinary routine happened. From this break, reflection appears in the form
of a question: Where is my watch? Then, a host of questions, connected to
the first one, followed: Where was the last time I’ve seen my watch? Was
there a hole in my pocket? You try to retrace your steps from this moment
back to the time when you last saw your watch.

From this example, you will see that reflection arise when there is a
disruption from your normal routine and when something valuable is at
stake.
Then, Marcel identified two levels of reflection: primary reflection and
secondary reflection. Marcel applied these two levels of reflection to the most
fundamental question: Who am I?

Nowadays, we try to answer this question by filling up a form given by our

school for example. The form asked us to write our name, age, gender,
address, name of parents, etc. To answer this, of course we have to think to
distinguish who we are (the self) against other things (the non-self or
objects). This is the primary reflection.

Yet, we had an uneasy feeling that all the information we put on the form
(although true) do not fully capture who we really are (Marcel 1970). We view
that our self is bigger and more expansive than what is there on the form.
Thus, we are not merely thinking but we are thinking about thinking and
about the process we perform in answering the form. This is the secondary
reflection.

The result of secondary reflection is a more expansive view of the self until it
embraces the world. Thus, the separation of the self and the world brought
about by primary reflection were united by the secondary reflection.

5. The Analytic Method

Another reaction to the Hegelian system building
philosophy is the analytic approach initiated by
philosophers at Cambridge University (England):
George Edward Moore (1873-1958), Bertrand
Russell (1872-1970) and Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-
1951). The task of analytic approach is not to create
another system of ideas to counter the Hegelian
system but to clarify how philosophers used words
through an analysis of language (Stumpf 2008). As LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN
quoted by Stumpf, Wittgenstein said that ‘the object https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein#/media/File:35
Source:

._Portrait_of_Wittgenstein.jpg
of philosophy is the logical clarification of thought’
so that ‘the result of philosophy is not a number of philosophical
propositions, but to make propositions clear”. Analytic philosophers
employed various methods of linguistic analysis such as the principle of

16
 verification and logical analysis (Rudolf Carnap). What we are going to use is
the method of Wittgenstein.

We can divide Wittgenstein’s philosophy in to the earlier Wittgenstein and

the latter (or the new) Wittgenstein. The earlier Wittgenstein followed the
idea of his mentor and close friend Bertrand Russell who view language in
only one way: stating facts. Wittgenstein’s first book (the only one published
during his lifetime) Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1919) reflected this idea.

However he soon realized that words had multiple functions depending on

the context to which it occurs. Wittgenstein used the analogy of “tools in a
tool box” (Wittgenstein 1968). If we look at the tools inside a tool box ‘there is
a hammer, pliers, a saw, a screw driver, a ruler, a glue pot, glue nails and
screw. The functions of words is as diverse as the functions of these objects’
(quoted by Stumpf 2008).

What Wittgenstein wants is to analyze language in the way actual people

used it in ordinary situations and not to construct an ideal language based
on logic and mathematics like what Russell seems to be doing.

To analyze language, we have to realize that it follows rules. If there are rules
in every aspect of life, there are certainly rules on how we put together and
communicate words. Wittgenstein believed that these rules are like the rules
of games (Wittgenstein 1968)-language games. For example, the usage of
words like “demand”, “supply”, “money”, “price” in the context of economics
differ from its usage in everyday life. These are technical words and they
follow certain rules (i.e. the language game) within that discipline that affects
the way these words are used.

Lesson
DIFFERENT FALLACIES
2
You have just learned that it is not enough to acquire knowledge but you
should analyze if that knowledge you have acquired is truthful or not.
Philosophizing involves the gift of speech and the gift of intelligence that enable us
to reason out and detect the falsity or truthfulness of a statement. When one
reasons out, he/she expresses his opinion and when others disagree, then
argument begins. In philosophical parlance argument is not an emotional reptilian

17
word war or a territorial show of force between persons but a philosophical method
in knowing the truth of a certain phenomenon or reality. It is a set of declarations
which includes the premises and conclusion (the latter is the one that claims the
truth of the premises) (Cornejo & Ebia, 2017).

However, there are arguments that are erroneous or based from faulty
reasoning called Fallacies (Abella, 2016). Unconsciously, we are culprits of this in
our daily interaction with people including our families and friends. Even TV
commercials intentionally employ some faulty reasoning to convince their target
market to purchase their products. Lawyers outwit each other by employing some
fallacies to defend their clients. I am sure you are aware with the famous “Flip Top
Battles” group in today’s digital world. Shall we say a modern dialectical approach
which appeal not only to the mind but also to our aesthetic sense? They entertain
audience and it is awesome how they display their wit to outsmart each other in a
poetic manner. It becomes an art and appealingly superb, but if you go beyond the
performance and analyze their statements there are a lot of defective reasoning
going on. Abella, Roberto, in his book “Introduction to the Philosophy of the
Human Person” laid down some of these fallacies:

FALLACY Short Description Examples

1.Argumentum ad Hominem came from Latin word “How can we believe
Hominem “homo” which means man. This him when he talks about
“Attacking the fallacy literally means hitting the social distancing, he is a
Person” person below the belt instead of lawyer who is a liar.”
focusing on the issue at hand.
2. Argumentum ad Baculum is a Latin word which “TV Patrol is the best
Baculum means scepter or stick. A scepter news program on TV. If
(Appeal to Force) is a symbol of authority. you don’t believe me, I
Normally it is the Pope who won’t let you watch the
carries it in his hands. This is TV.
committed when a person uses
threat or force to advance an
argument.
3. Argumentum ad Misercordiam came from Latin“Forgive me officer, there
Misercordiam word Misericordia which means
are lot of boarders in
(Appeal to Pity) pity or compassion. A personthis apartment including
uses emotion such as pity tomyself. Only the owner
convince someone was issued a
quarantine pass. We
don’t have food, we
can’t give our ATM to the
owner. That’s why I
went out. So I did not
violate the Bayanihan
Act Heal as One.”
4. Argumentum ad Populum is the Latin word for “I’m sure you want to
Populum people. Most of TV commercials have an I-phone. Almost

18
“Appeal to people”/ are guilty of this argument which 80% of your schoolmates
Bandwagon fallacy exploit people’s vanity, desires, are using it.”
etc.
5. Argumentum ad Traditio means tradition. All of us in the family,
Tradition Advancing an idea since it has from our ancestors up to
“Appeal to Tradition” been practice for a long time. now, are devout
Catholics, so it is only
right that you will be
baptized as a Catholic.
6. Argumentum and Ignorantiam a Latin word for According to Zecharia
Ignorantiam ignorance. Whatever has been Sitchin, the author of the
“Appeal to Ignorance” proven false must be true and book “Cosmic Code,
vice versa “Adam was the first test
tube baby. Since nobody
proves otherwise,
therefore it is true.”
7. Petitio Principii According to Merriam Webster’s “God exists because the
(Begging the dictionary (www.merriam- Bible says so. The Bible
Question) webster.com>dictionary>petitiopr is inspirational.
incipii) Therefore we know that
, it is a fallacy in which a God exists.”
conclusion is taken for granted in
the premises. Also called-
“circular argument.”
8. Hasty This fallacy is committed when Our neighbor who is a
Generalization one reaches a generalization police officer was
based on insufficient evidence convicted of being a
drug dealer, therefore,
all police officers are
drug dealers.
9. Cause and Effect Assuming that the effect is “My teacher didn’t
related to a cause because both collect the homework
events occur one after the other. two weeks in a row
when my friend was
absent. Therefore, my
friend being absent is
the reason why my
teacher doesn’t collect
the homework.”
10. Fallacy of Infers that something is true of a “You are a doctor,
Composition part, is true of a whole therefore you came from
a family of doctors.”
11. Fallacy of Infers that something is true of “Your family is smart,
Division the whole, must also be true on therefore you are
its parts smart.”
12. Fallacy of Using the same term in a “Humans walk by their

19
Equivocation different situation with different legs. The table has legs.
meaning. Therefore the table
walks by its legs.”

FACTS VERSUS OPINION: CONCENTRATION ON INFORMATION LITERACY

Today's students, many of whom do most of their research online, are ready to
access a virtually unlimited supply of knowledge -- much of it came from
unidentified sources. In fact, the very nature of the medium allows anyone with an
Internet provider and a small amount of skill to circulate whatever information he
or she chooses. The result is a World Wide Web of abundant information, on the
other hand, it also contains unintentional ignorance and obvious biases.

A. IDENTIFYING THE FEATURES OF A QUALITY WEBSITE

Michigan State University reference librarian Terry Link recommends examining
the following features when assessing the quality of a Website:
 Authority: Who is the author and what are his or her background? Who is
the editor and what is the purpose of the site?
 Verifiability: Are sources provided?
 Timeliness: Is the information up-to-date? When was it posted and/or last
updated?
 Relevance: Does the material contain unconfirmed generalizations?
 Bias: Is the language emotional or provocative? Does the information
represent a single view or a range of opinions?
 Orderliness: Is the page organized in an order that makes sense? Are
underlying expectations identifiable? Is the information reliable?
 Clarity: Is the information clearly stated? Does the author express
important terms?
 Validity: Do the facts laid down support the conclusions?

Likewise, when we critique sources, we must first understand the difference

between fact and opinion.
FACT OPINION
A fact is a statement that can be proven An opinion is a statement of belief which
true or false. may or may not be supported by facts,
but cannot be confirmed true or false.
Is objective Is subjective
Is discovered Is created
States reality Interprets reality
Can be verified Cannot be verified

B. THE EVALUATION PROCESS

To evaluate sources or sites, Robert Harris, a professor of English at Southern
California College recommended that students should raise questions like,
"Which sources are likely to be impartial, objective, lacking hidden agenda,
showing worthy content?" Harris suggests selecting sites that contain as many
of the subsequent as possible:

20
  the writer's name, title, and/or position;
 the site's organizational association, if any;
 the date the page was produced or updated; and
 contact information, like mailing and email address, and phone
number.
Once students have found sources that seem to be appropriate and credible, Harris
instructs students to subject the sites to the CARS checklist for informational
quality. The four components of the CARS checklist are:
 Credibility: What about this source makes it convincing?
 Accuracy: Is the information provided up-to-date, factual, complete, exact, and
comprehensive?
 Reasonableness: Is the information impartial, objective, moderate, and
constant?
 Support: Can the information be verified?

C. HOW DO I KNOW?
Harris suggests that, when evaluating those four components, students scrutinize
the sites based on the following:
 Type -- identify whether the URL includes .gov (government), .edu or .ac
(educational/academic), .com (commercial), .org (nonprofit organization), or. ~
(personal page).
 Publisher -- determine whether the organization, agency, school, business, or
individual maintaining the site is likely to have a particular motive or bias.
 Author -- determine the author's training and educational background to find
out whether he/she is a trained expert, an experienced enthusiast, or an
unacquainted observer.
 Structure -- identify whether the format is clear, logical, and easily controllable.
 Language -- identify whether the text contains emotional, provocative, profane,
or confusing language. Tally the number of spelling, grammatical, and
typographical errors. Too many errors can indicate sloppiness and suggest
informational errors as well.
 Dates -- identify when the information was distributed and/or updated. If
possible, check the publication dates of supporting data.
 Graphics – identify whether images and animations take up an uneven amount
of space in relation to their informational worth. Decide whether the graphics
convey information, add interest, provide interactivity, or simply divert.
 Links -- identify whether the site's bibliography and/or links have both
supportive and inconsistent information.

21
 What’s More

ACTIVITY 1: FACT VS. OPINION (Critical Thinking)

Directions: Analyze the following statements. Write F if it is FACT and O if it is

OPINION. Write your answer before the number.
1. According to the latest survey, families are purchasing more household items on
credit.
2. You can hear all the news you need to know from the BBC Radio 1 news team.
3. The professor argues that the effect of carbon emissions on the surrounding
environment will only get worse.
4. The research team has discovered a new method for conducting this chemical
analysis.
5. The latest poll shows a marked increase in employee dissatisfaction.
6. I think public opinion will change over time.
7. This book is an enjoyable story of life in a small village.
8. The use of computers at the college has increased and the stationery budget has
doubled in the last few years.

ACTIVITY 2: I-BILIB (Critical Thinking, Communication,)

Directions: Analyze the following pictures. Write BILIB if the picture followed CARS
(Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness, and Supported) and write NOT if it did not
follow CARS according to Robert Harris. Afterwards, explain your answer.

__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
22__________________________________________
 __________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________

_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________

ACTIVITY 3: LET’S APPLY (Critical Thinking, Character)

Directions: Fill in the table below with the main proponents of methods of
philosophizing. For each method, answer the questions: “How can you find truth
using this method?” and “On what real-life situation can you apply this
method?

On what real-life
How can you find
Methods of Main situation can you
truth using this
Philosophizing Proponent(s) apply this
method?
method?

23
1. Dialectic

2. Pragmatic

3. Phenomenological

4. Primary and
Secondary
Reflections

5. Analytic

What I Have Learned

ACTIVITY: IMPORTANT POINTS TO PONDER

(Critical Thinking, Character, Communication)

Direction: Complete the statements below:

I learned that Truth is_______________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

I feel that Truth is important because________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

I commit to uphold the truth by __________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

24
 What I Can Do

ACTIVITY 1: WIN AN ARGUMENT (Communication, Critical Thinking, Character,

Collaboration)
Directions: By using the graphic organizer of dialectic method below, answer the
question: How do you criticize someone’s opinion/argument in a way that makes
sense and is respectful? Try to talk or interview two persons that have contrasting
idea about the question, then write your own synthesis to their answers.

THESIS ANTI-
THESIS

SYNTHESIS

ACTIVITY 2: COMIC CON

(Critical Thinking, Character, Communication, Creativity)

Directions: Draw a comic strip that portrays ONE type of fallacy. Explain your work.

25
Explanation:_______________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________

26
 Assessment

Select the keyword that best fits the statement in each item. Write the chosen letter
on a separate sheet of paper.

1. What type of fallacy is present in the statement, “Before we begin the debate,
everyone here should know that my opponent is a convicted felon”?
a. mora licensing
b. equivocation
c. argumentum ad baculum
d. ad hominem

2. According to Husserl, the success of natural science lead to the gradual

scientific rejection of__________.
a. spirit
b. matter
c. nature
d. existence

3. When Husserl described human experience as the immediate data of

consciousness, he meant _________________.
a. Pure subjectivity
b. Pure objectivity
c. materialism
d. dualism

4. What is Husserl’s point of view with regards to consciousness?

a. The study of consciousness is the same as the study of nature
b. The study of human consciousness differs from the way scientists
study nature.
c. It does not matter whether we study consciousness similarly or
differently than the way scientists study nature.
d. Husserl was not interested in the study of consciousness.

5. What type of fallacy is present in the statement, “My father smoked four
packs of cigarettes a day since age fourteen and lived until age sixty-nine.
Therefore, smoking really can’t be that bad for you”?
a. ad misericordiam
b. false analogy
c. hasty generalization
d. post hoc

27
6. Which among these headlines presented information that are fair,
objective, and moderate?
a. It’s time to consider other means of cash aid distribution
b. Other countries around the world have much better means in cash
aid distribution
c. Government vows to faster distribution of coronavirus aid
d. We can also learn lesson from Vietnam how they distribute their cash
aid

7. Which among these headlines has no errors in terms of spelling, grammar,

and content?
a. Robredo Chides Gov’t for Unclear Communication on New Quarantine
Rules
b. Robredo Blames the Government as They Don’t Have Clear Rules in
Quarantine
c. Robredo Charge the Govrnment as Culprit of Confusion in Quarantine
d. Robredo blames those in Executive Branch for Communication’s
Unclear

8. Which among the statements contain substantiated generalizations?

a. “Drug war a massive failure”—Robredo
b. Robredo lies to world, shames the nation and herself in UN message
c. The real albatross on Leni Robredo’s neck
d. Let Leni plan on her own drug war

9. Which among the following authors could be the most credible according to
his or her Twitter account’s background?
a. Banat By – Simpleng tao na mahilig bumanat
b. Atom Araullo- Journalist. @ UNHCPPh Goodwill Ambassador
c. AkoNgaSY Lyco- Speak now or be silent forever. Follow me I will not
follow you
d. Senyora- Full time haciendera and professional husgadera

10. Which among the following publishers pose no particular agenda or bias?
a. Bulag Ang ABS-CBN sa Katotohanan by Antonio Brigas
b. ABS-CBN Naipasara Sanhi ng Di Pagrenew ng Prangkisa by GMA
News
c. Nararapat Lamang na Huwag ng Magbukas ang ABS-CBN by Balat
Sibuyas
d. Bye Bye Kapamilya by the Avengers

28
 Additional Activities

ACTIVITY: EVERYDAY FALLACIES (Critical Thinking, Communication, Character)

Directions:
A. Observe conversations of your parents and identify three (3) common fallacies.

B. Watch commercials on TV and news and take note of the fallacies committed.
Identify 5 fallacies and write your answers on a separate sheet of paper.

Critical Thinking Questions:

1. In your relationship with your family, what common fallacy or fallacies you
commit as an alibi for any wrongdoing? Narrate at least two occasions.

2. Do you think Fallacy can help us in finding the truth? Why or why not?
3. What methods of philosophizing do you think are most useful in finding the
truth? Explain?

29
 Answer Key

10. B 10. B
9. B 9. B
8. A 8. A
7. A 7. A
6. D 6. D
5. C 5. C
4. B 4. B
3. A 3. A
2. A 2. A
1. D 1. D

Assessment What I Know

References

Books

Abella, Roberto D. (2016). Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person.

Quezon City: C&E Publishing

Binswanger, Harry. (2014). How We Know. New York: TOF Publications.

Copi, Irving M. and Cohen, Carl (2002). Introduction to Logic (11th edition). New
Jersey: Prentice Hall

Cornejo, N. & Ebia, E. Philosophy of Human Person. Mindshapers Co., Manila.2017

Hurley, Patrick J. (2011). A Concise Introduction to Logic (11th edition). Boston:

Cengage Learning

Klein, Paul S. (2013). Philosophy 101. California: Adams Media

Mabacquiao, N. (2017). Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person.
Quezon City: Phoenix Publishing.

Peikoff, Leonard (1990). Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. New York:
Dutton

30
Rand, Ayn (1990). Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (2nd edition). New York:
Meridian

Stumpf, Samuel Enoch & Fieser, James (2008). Socrates to Sartre and Beyond (8th
edition). New Yok: McGraw Hill

Wilber, Ken (2006). Integral Spirituality. Boston: Integral Books

Websites

Biography.com Biography of Edmund Husserl (July 2020). Retrieved from:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edmund-Husserl

Biography.com Biography of John Dewey (July 2020). Retrieved from:

https://www.biography.com/scholar/john-dewey

Britanica. Biography of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (July 2020). Retrieved from:
https://www.britannica.com/biography/ Georg-Wilhelm-Friedrich-Hegel

Britanica. Biography of Ludwig Wittgenstein (July 2020). Retrieved from:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ludwig-Wittgenstein

Britanica. Biography of Socrates (July 2020). Retrieved from:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Socrates

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Gabriel Marcel (July 2020). Retrieved from:

https://www.iep.utm.edu/marcel/

Lazarus C. (2017). Facts, Truths, Beliefs, Opinions, and "Alternative Facts".

Psychology Today. Retrieved from:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201703/facts-truths-
beliefs-opinions-and-alternative-facts

Merriam-Webster. July 17, 2020, (n.d.). Petitio principii. In Merriam-Webster.com

dictionary. Retrieved from:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/petitio%20princip

St. Joseph’s College (2019). Evaluating Sources: Fact Checking, Fake News, and
Bias: Fact vs Opinion. Retrieved from:
https://brooklyn.sjcny.libguides.com/c.php?g=648836&p=4692986

Starr L.(2009). Fact, Fiction, or Opinion? Evaluating Online Information. Education

World. Retrieved from:
https://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr194.shtml

31