ELEMENTARY LOGIC

IE University
Professor: DAVID MEJIA GONZALEZ
E-mail: dmejia@faculty.ie.edu

Academic year: 20-21

Degree course: FIRST
Semester: 1º
Category: COMPULSORY
Number of credits: 6.0
Language: English

PREREQUISITES
SUBJECT DESCRIPTION
This course is an introduction to Logical Reasoning and Western Philosophy. The course is
organized around six questions of fundamental human concern:

i. Who am I?
ii. What can we know?
iii. Does God exist?
iv. How should I behave?
v. How should we organize society?
vi. What is beauty?

We will evaluate the traditional philosophical responses to these questions drawing from six mayor
areas of philosophy: (i) Philosophy of Mind (ii) Epistemology (iii) Philosophy of Religion (iv) Ethics
(v) Political Philosophy (vi) Aesthetics. For each block we will read a literary text that illustrates a
relevant philosophical dilemma.
Throughout the course you will be stimulated to formulate your own conception of these issues
using philosophical methods of argumentation. Logic is the fundamental tool for philosophical
reasoning. Logic permits us to validate arguments and detect fallacies. Therefore, we will dedicate
several sessions (1/3) to a section of elementary logic (inference, validity, fallacies, etc.) within
every block. Symbolic logic is by nature a mathematical subject, and students may be required to
formalize reasoning in symbolic language. The sessions dedicated to logic are intended to help you
familiarize yourselves with logic as an instrument for philosophical thought.

Readings, as well as session organization, may be revised as the circumstances and interest
permit.

OBJECTIVES AND SKILLS

By the end of the course, students will have gained:

1
Edited by IE Editorial
14th September 2020
1. Introduce students to philosophical ways of thinking.
2. Introduce students to elementary logic.
3. Introduce students to Western philosophical tradition.
The attendance to the lectures and the completion of the mandatory assignments will contribute to
the strengthening of important skills, such as:
Critical Thinking: Analyze information objectively and make a reasoned judgment.
Creative Thinking: Connect or combine ideas or information from unrelated fields or applications to
generate multiple ideas to bring about a specific outcome. Ability to summarize and explain difficult
ideas and concepts using language appropriate to the field.
Communication: Articulate and discuss ideas and persuade others to achieve common outcomes.
Ability to develop organized and informative verbal presentations directed to appropriate audience
level.
Critical Reading: Ability to read and interpret political, philosophical and literary texts.
Critical Writing: Ability in writing that reflects careful attention to language, logic, and subtleties of
reasoning.
Critical research: Ability to conduct research into philosophical topics, drawing on other disciplines
when appropriate.

METHODOLOGY
You are expected to come prepared to all classes. This means that you should read the assigned
articles before the lecture for which they are assigned. Class lectures will often contain material not
in the readings. You are responsible for the content of both the lectures and the readings.
Be sure to acknowledge all ideas and words not your own with appropriate citations of the original
sources. All violations of academic integrity will be dealt with in strict accordance with IE University
policies.

Teaching methodology Weighting Estimated time a

student should
dedicate to prepare for
and participate in
Lectures 0.0 % 0 hours
Discussions 0.0 % 0 hours
Exercises 0.0 % 0 hours
Group work 0.0 % 0 hours
Other individual studying 0.0 % 0 hours
TOTAL 0.0 % 150 hours

PROGRAM

SESSION 1 (FACE TO FACE)

I. Who am I? The Philosophy of Mind.
1. Introduction.

SESSION 2 (FACE TO FACE)

I. Who am I? The Philosophy of Mind.
2. Descartes, Meditations I and II

2
14th September 2020
SESSION 3 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)
I. Who am I? The Philosophy of Mind.

3. Hume, “Of Personal Identity”

SESSION 4 (FACE TO FACE)

I. Who am I? The Philosophy of Mind.
4. Thomas Nagel, “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?”

SESSION 5 (FACE TO FACE)

I. Who am I? The Philosophy of Mind.
5. Logic 1 and 2

SESSION 6 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

II. Epistemology—What can we know?
1. Skepticism: Are we brains in a vat?

SESSION 7 (FACE TO FACE)

II. Epistemology—What can we know?
2. Rationalism vs. Empiricism = Kant.

SESSION 8 (FACE TO FACE)

II. Epistemology—What can we know?
3. Kahneman and Cognitive Biases.

SESSION 9 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

II. Epistemology—What can we know?
4. Logic 3

SESSION 10 (FACE TO FACE)

II. Epistemology—What can we know?
5. Logic 4.

SESSION 11 (FACE TO FACE)

III. Does God exist? Reason and Religious Belief.
1. Aquinas, Part I, Question 2, from Summa Theologiae (focus on the Third Article, known as “The
five ways”) and Anselm, “The Ontological Argument”

SESSION 12 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

3
14th September 2020
III. Does God exist? Reason and Religious Belief.
2. Hume, “Reply to the Argument from Design”.

SESSION 13 (FACE TO FACE)

III. Does God exist? Reason and Religious Belief.
3. J. L. Mackie, “Evil and Omnipotence”.

SESSION 14 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

III. Does God exist? Reason and Religious Belief.
4. Logic 5.

SESSION 15 (VIDEOCONFERENCE)
M

SESSION 16 (FACE TO FACE)

IV. Ethics—How Ought We to Live Our Lives?
1. Aristotle’s Ethics.

SESSION 17 (FACE TO FACE)

IV. Ethics—How Ought We to Live Our Lives?
2. Deontology: Kant.

SESSION 18 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

IV. Ethics—How Ought We to Live Our Lives?
3. Nietzsche, "On the Genealogy of Morals". Non-class Learning

SESSION 19 (FACE TO FACE)

4. Mill, "Utilitarianism," 363-381 & Singer, "Famine, Affluence, and Morality,"

SESSION 20 (FACE TO FACE)

IV. Ethics—How Ought We to Live Our Lives?
5. Logic 6.

SESSION 21 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

V. Social/Political Philosophy—What is Justice?
1. Liberalism: Rawls, A Theory of Justice.

SESSION 22 (FACE TO FACE)

4
14th September 2020
V. Social/Political Philosophy—What is Justice?
2. Socialism: Cohen, Why not Socialism?

SESSION 23 (FACE TO FACE)

V. Social/Political Philosophy—What is Justice?
3. Libertarianism: Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia.

SESSION 24 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

V. Social/Political Philosophy—What is Justice?
4. Logic 7 Non-class Learning

SESSION 25 (FACE TO FACE)

V. Social/Political Philosophy—What is Justice?
5. Logic 8.

SESSION 26 (FACE TO FACE)

VI. Aesthetics – What is beauty?
1. Aristotle, Poetics.

SESSION 27 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

VI. Aesthetics – What is beauty?
2. Hume, “Of the Standard of Taste” & Kant, The Critique of Judgment

SESSION 28 (FACE TO FACE)

VI. Aesthetics – What is beauty?
3. Logic 9.

SESSION 29 (NON-CLASS LEARNING)

VI. Aesthetics – What is beauty?
4. Logic 10.

SESSION 30 (VIDEOCONFERENCE)
FINAL EXAM

EVALUATION CRITERIA

**Class participation** includes weekly comments, quizzes and other activities related to the
homework/readings.
A. CLASS PARTICIPATION
Three main criteria will be used in reaching judgment about your class participation:

5
14th September 2020
Depth and Quality of Contribution: The most important dimension of participation concerns what it is
that you are saying. A high quality comment reveals depth of insight, rigorous use of case evidence,
consistency of argument, and realism.
Moving Your Peers’ Understanding Forward: Great ideas can be lost through poor presentation. A
high quality presentation of ideas must consider the relevance and timing of comments, and the
flow and content of the ensuing class discussion. It demands comments that are concise and clear,
and that are conveyed with a spirit of involvement in the discussion at hand.
Frequency: Frequency refers to the attainment of a threshold quantity of contributions that is
sufficient for making a reliable assessment of comment quality. The logic is simple: if contributions
are too few, one cannot reliably assess the quality of your remarks. However, once threshold
quantity has been achieved, simply increasing the number of times you talk does not automatically
improve your evaluation. Beyond the threshold, it is the quality of your comments that must
improve. In particular, one must be especially careful that in claiming more than a fair share of
“airtime”, quality is not sacrificed for quantity. Finally, your attempts at participation should not be
such that the instructor has to “go looking for you”. You should be attempting to get into the debate
on a regular basis.
B. ESSAY
The topic of the essay will announced in due time.

The essay will be submitted through Turnitin in online campus. Emailed work will not be accepted.
Essays will be marked according to Structure (25%), Style and Formatting (25%) and Content
(50%).
** 1,000 words (+/- 10%)**
Guidelines
1. Write 5 paragraphs: introduction, 3 body paragraphs and conclusion.
2. This is an argumentative essay (it should not be descriptive or expository)
3. In the introduction state your thesis clearly (what will you be arguing?) “x is true because a, b and
c”. Your thesis has to be a direct response to the prompt.
4. Each body paragraph should express one argument to support the thesis (a, b and c).
5. In the conclusion, repeat your thesis and explain how you have demonstrated its veracity through
the supporting arguments.
6. You have to include in-text citations, and a reference list at the end. Please use APA style
format.
7. Use a minimum of 3 RELIABLE sources (Wikipedia, and other online Encyclopedias DO
NOT count as soruces).
8. Double space.
9. 12pt, Times New Roman.
10. Include word count.
Once the essay is submitted, please remember to save the Turnitin confirmation as proof that you
submitted your essay; if you can't download the confirmation page you cannot consider the
assignment submitted.
Late Submission Policy
Up to 24 hours: 20% penalty.
No credit will be given to work submitted over 24 hours late.

Criteria Percentage Comments

Class Participation 30 %
Midterm 20 %
Essay 25 %
Final Exam 25 %

6
14th September 2020
PROFESSOR BIO

Professor: DAVID MEJIA GONZALEZ

E-mail: dmejia@faculty.ie.edu

BA in Philosophy (Universidad Autonoma de Madrid) and Comparative Literature (Universidad

Complutense). Master of Arts and Master of Philosophy, Columbia University. Ph.D.
Candidate, Columbia University. Assistant Professor, IE University

OTHER INFORMATION
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
Each student has four attempts over two consecutive academic years to pass this course.
Dates and location of the final exam will be posted in advance and will not be changed.
Students must attend at least 70% of the sessions. Students who do not comply with the 70%
attendance rule will receive a 0.0 on their first and second attempts and go directly to the third one
(they will need to enroll in this course again the following academic year).
Students who are in the third or fourth attempt should contact the professor during the first two
weeks of the course.
ATTENDANCE
Attendance is mandatory at IE University, as it is an essential factor of IE´s learning methodology.
While we do closely monitor attendance in each course, we also consider our students responsible
for their own agenda and commitments, as adult university students. With that in mind, each
student may miss up to 30% of the sessions within a given course and still maintain the possibility
of passing that given course. This 30% “buffer” is to be used for any absences, such as: illnesses,
personal emergencies, commitments, official/governmental matters, business and/or medical
appointments, family situations, etc. Students should manage their various needs, and situations
that may arise, within that 30% buffer. If a student is absent to more than the allowed 30% of the
sessions (regardless of the reason), s/he will obtain a 0.0 grade for that course in both the ordinary
and extraordinary calls of the current academic year, and s/he will have to retake the course during
the following academic year. Having established the rule, we strongly discourage to use this buffer
as granted, we highly recommend to attend 100% of the classes as it will improve your learning
outcomes, it will increase the class performance and it might improve your participation grade.
Extreme cases involving emergencies such as: extended hospitalizations, accidents, serious
illnesses and other contexts involving force majeure, are to be consulted with the Program
Management team for assessment of the situation and corresponding documentation, so that
Program Management can support and guide each student optimally.
RETAKE POLICY
Any student whose weighted final grade is below 5 will be required to sit for the retake exam to
pass the course (except those not complying with the attendance rules, whom are banned from this
possibility). Grading for retakes will be subject to the following rules: - The retakes will consist of a
comprehensive exam. - The grade will depend only on the performance on this exam; continuous
evaluation over the semester will not be taken into account. - The exam will be designed bearing in
mind that the passing grade is 5 and the maximum grade that can be attained is 8 out of 10. - Dates
and location of the retakes will be posted in advance and will not be changed.
PLAGIARISM / ACADEMIC HONESTY

7
14th September 2020
Plagiarism is the dishonest act of presenting another person’s ideas, texts or words as your own.
This includes in order of seriousness of the offense: •providing faulty sources; •copy-pasting
material from your own past assignments (self-plagiarism) without the instructor’s permission;
•copy-pasting material from external sources even while citing them; • using verbatim translations
from sources in other languages without citing them; •copy-pasting material from external sources
without citing them; •and buying or commissioning essays from other parties. IEU students must
contact the professor if they don’t know whether the use of a document constitutes plagiarism. The
professor will advise the student on how to present said material. All written assignments have to
be submitted through Turnitin, which produces a similarity report and detects cases of plagiarism.
Professors are required to check each student's academic work in order to guarantee its originality.
If the originality of the academic work is not clear, the professor will contact the student in order to
clarify any doubts. In the event that the meeting with the student fails to clarify the originality of the
academic work, the professor will inform the Director of the Bachelor Program about the case, who
will then decide whether to bring the case forward to the Academic Ethics Committee. Very high
similarity scores will be automatically flagged and forwarded to the Academic Ethics Committee.
Plagiarism constitutes a very serious offense and may carry penalties ranging from getting a zero
for the assignment to expulsion from the university depending on the severity of the case and the
number of times the student has committed plagiarism in the past.

8
14th September 2020