What do you think?
Rate this book
A Little Catechism on Logic
“Logic is a stern master; they feel it, they protest against it; they profess to hate it, and would fain dispense with it; but it is the law of their intellectual nature.”
-St. John Henry Newman, Difficulties of Anglicans
In a former age, logic was seen as the foundation of all education. For, logic was the instrument of reasoning that all other sciences used.
In seminaries, scholastic disputations (according to Fr. Hunter writing around 1900) was "employed in many Catholic Seminaries to test the work of the classes in Philosophy and Theology." (Outlines of Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, Appendix). One also sees this method employed up until the 50's in such works as the Sacrae Theologiae Summa, meant for seminarians.
More than that, such a method was employed in Catholic Undergraduate Institutions well into the 50's. An example is found in Fr. Gilby's textbook on logic, Barbara Celarent, where he outlines the practice in 1949.
Lastly, as surprising as it may be, such disputation was also practiced in Catholic High Schools. Fr. Charles Coppens, writing around 1900, describes a practice called the circle which is a simplified version of a scholastic disputation.
Further, Fr. Hill (recommending the practice to high school students) in 1873 is able to state, "In many colleges and higher institutions of learning, the students of Logic and Metaphysics, or the class of Philosophy, have regularly some practical exercises in argumentation, lasting for half an hour at a time, or longer, and occurring two or three times a week, and even oftener, when the class is sufficiently numerous."
Yet, today, it is difficult to find anyone (even among teachers) who would be able to dispute in such a rigidly scholastic manner. Such a need is this catechism meant to fill, to introduce to the basic termonology and practice of logic. Even such a basic work will place one far above his peers.
Ite Ad Thomam,
Christian B. Wagner
-St. John Henry Newman, Difficulties of Anglicans
In a former age, logic was seen as the foundation of all education. For, logic was the instrument of reasoning that all other sciences used.
In seminaries, scholastic disputations (according to Fr. Hunter writing around 1900) was "employed in many Catholic Seminaries to test the work of the classes in Philosophy and Theology." (Outlines of Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, Appendix). One also sees this method employed up until the 50's in such works as the Sacrae Theologiae Summa, meant for seminarians.
More than that, such a method was employed in Catholic Undergraduate Institutions well into the 50's. An example is found in Fr. Gilby's textbook on logic, Barbara Celarent, where he outlines the practice in 1949.
Lastly, as surprising as it may be, such disputation was also practiced in Catholic High Schools. Fr. Charles Coppens, writing around 1900, describes a practice called the circle which is a simplified version of a scholastic disputation.
Further, Fr. Hill (recommending the practice to high school students) in 1873 is able to state, "In many colleges and higher institutions of learning, the students of Logic and Metaphysics, or the class of Philosophy, have regularly some practical exercises in argumentation, lasting for half an hour at a time, or longer, and occurring two or three times a week, and even oftener, when the class is sufficiently numerous."
Yet, today, it is difficult to find anyone (even among teachers) who would be able to dispute in such a rigidly scholastic manner. Such a need is this catechism meant to fill, to introduce to the basic termonology and practice of logic. Even such a basic work will place one far above his peers.
Ite Ad Thomam,
Christian B. Wagner
- GenresPhilosophy
82 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 16, 2022
7 people are currently reading
13 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
November 25, 2023
A succinct primer on logical vocabulary and dialectic rules. I’m not sure the catechism-style question and answer format is best suited to this topic, and sometimes the definitions feel a bit backwards. Instead of forming a definition as “Q: What is X? A: X is Y”, much of the book could have just been “Y = X.”
It seems to be a shortened and reformatted adaptation of “A brief text-book of Logic” by Charles Coppens, which is re-published by the same publishing house. I prefer Coppens work as the definitions are expressed in plainer English and it is slightly more thorough in its coverage of the topic.
It seems to be a shortened and reformatted adaptation of “A brief text-book of Logic” by Charles Coppens, which is re-published by the same publishing house. I prefer Coppens work as the definitions are expressed in plainer English and it is slightly more thorough in its coverage of the topic.
March 15, 2024
Añadiría una sección de ejercicios.
December 31, 2023
A concise review
This in my opinion a succinct and well constructed review of logic as we were taught in the neoscholastic model in my school during the early 1970s.
Worth owning and re-reading periodically.
This in my opinion a succinct and well constructed review of logic as we were taught in the neoscholastic model in my school during the early 1970s.
Worth owning and re-reading periodically.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews