Course overview
- Study period
- Semester 1, 2025 (24/02/2025 - 21/06/2025)
- Study level
- Undergraduate
- Location
- St Lucia
- Attendance mode
- In Person
- Units
- 2
- Administrative campus
- St Lucia
- Coordinating unit
- Historical & Philosophical Inq
Analyses thought & its expression in oral & written work from a structured & logical perspective. Aims to promote clearer thinking, foster better expression, & improve your analytic capabilities with a view to developing clearer & more persuasive argument skills. This course may not run if there are fewer than 20 enrolments.
This is a course about thinking. The overarching goal is to develop tools which can improve the ways we think and reason about the world. The main tools in this investigation will be reason and argument. They will provide both the subject matter and the core investigative instrument of this course. The course will introduce a number of fundamental reasoning techniques includingﾠargument analysis, construction and evaluation, and elementary logic.ﾠIn each of these sections, we will focus on developing the ability to apply these techniques; but beyond this, we will also develop a critical appreciation of their respective limitations.ﾠ
Course requirements
Assumed background
No background is assumed for this course.
Incompatible
You can't enrol in this course if you've already completed the following:
PHIL7111
Course contact
Course staff
Lecturer
Guest lecturer
Ms Yael Leibovitch
Tutor
Mr Ted Hennicke
Mr William Bindley
Timetable
The timetable for this course is available on the UQ Public Timetable.
Additional timetable information
Students are to attend one 2 hour lecture and a 1 hour tutorial each week. The first tutorials will be inﾠWeek 2.ﾠ
Lectures: Tuesdays 4:00 PM - 6:00ﾠPM.
Tutorials: See timetable for more information.
Aims and outcomes
The course aims to develop the student's capacity to evaluate thought and its expression in discourse and written work from a more structured and logical perspective. The goal is to promote clearer thinking, foster better expression, and improve analytic capabilities with a view to developing clearer and more persuasive argument skills.
Learning outcomes
After successfully completing this course you should be able to:
LO1.
make use of improved critical reading skills required for undergraduate study
LO2.
make use of improved academic writing skills and the clear presentation of your ideas
LO3.
better employ key concepts and imaginative aspects of thinking necessary to good problem solving.
Assessment
Assessment summary
| Category | Assessment task | Weight | Due date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quiz |
We don't thinking like we think we think
|
10% |
24/03/2025
The online quiz will be available for students to begin all times from from 12:00 AM Monday 24th of March to 11:59 PM Monday 24th of March. From the beginning of the test, 1 hour is allocated for its completion. |
| Quiz |
Tools of Logic
|
10% |
7/04/2025
The online quiz will be available for students to begin all times from from 12:00 AM Monday 7th of April to 11:59 PM Monday 7th of April. From the beginning of the test, 1 hour is allocated for its completion. |
| Essay/ Critique, Poster | Media analysis and argument mapping | 40% |
6/05/2025 2:00 pm |
| Essay/ Critique | Argumentative essay | 40% |
30/05/2025 2:00 pm |
Assessment details
We don't thinking like we think we think
- Online
- Mode
- Activity/ Performance
- Category
- Quiz
- Weight
- 10%
- Due date
24/03/2025
The online quiz will be available for students to begin all times from from 12:00 AM Monday 24th of March to 11:59 PM Monday 24th of March. From the beginning of the test, 1 hour is allocated for its completion.
- Other conditions
- Time limited.
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03
Task description
A short quiz on concepts covered so far.
NOTE: This assessment task evaluates student’s abilities, skills and knowledge without the aid of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Students are advised that the use of AI technologies to develop responses is strictly prohibited and may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Submission guidelines
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Tools of Logic
- Online
- Mode
- Activity/ Performance
- Category
- Quiz
- Weight
- 10%
- Due date
7/04/2025
The online quiz will be available for students to begin all times from from 12:00 AM Monday 7th of April to 11:59 PM Monday 7th of April. From the beginning of the test, 1 hour is allocated for its completion.
- Other conditions
- Time limited.
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L03
Task description
A short quiz of concepts covered so far.
NOTE:This assessment task evaluates student’s abilities, skills and knowledge without the aid of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Students are advised that the use of AI technologies to develop responses is strictly prohibited and may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Submission guidelines
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Media analysis and argument mapping
- Mode
- Product/ Artefact/ Multimedia, Written
- Category
- Essay/ Critique, Poster
- Weight
- 40%
- Due date
6/05/2025 2:00 pm
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03
Task description
You are asked to select and perform an analysis of argument in a media article and to provide an additional written commentary of 800 words that evaluates the article as an argument, including suggestions on how the argument could be improved and what key questions you would ask the author—these could be questions of clarity or to get more information. If more information is requested, it is important that you explain why you are seeking it.
This important and useful exercise, building on work covered in the first half of the course, aims to develop critical writing skills essential for undergraduate study, including the study of philosophy. The topic will be discussed, the assignment described in detail, and handouts made available during lectures (and on the Course Webpage).
A word count that is within ±10% of the set length (word limit) is acceptable. Word count does not include footnotes; however, discursive footnotes are included in the word count. A word count that is outside these 10% will receive a proportionate penalty and will be graded against the grading criteria.
Marking criteria and/or marking rubrics are available in the ‘Assessment’ folder in Blackboard for this course.
Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with School policy regarding academic advice, assessment, plagiarism, etc. as stated on the School’s web-page http://www.uq.edu.au/hprc/index.html?page=49903&pid=21371 PLAGIARISM is an academic offence and will be penalized. Useful information may also be found on the UQ Cybrary web-page under “Advice & Training – UseIts”.
NOTE: This task has been designed to be challenging, authentic and complex. Whilst students may use AI technologies, successful completion of assessment in this course will require students to critically engage in specific contexts and tasks for which artificial intelligence will provide only limited support and guidance.
A failure to reference AI use may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
To pass this assessment, students will be required to demonstrate detailed comprehension of their written submission independent of AI tools.
Submission guidelines
You must submit an electronic copy (for plagiarism checking and to facilitate marking) through Turnitin under 'Assessment' on Blackboard.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Argumentative essay
- Mode
- Product/ Artefact/ Multimedia, Written
- Category
- Essay/ Critique
- Weight
- 40%
- Due date
30/05/2025 2:00 pm
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03
Task description
Identify a subject area that genuinely interests you and accommodates different defensible stances. Ensure the topic is neither too broad nor too narrow, so your argument can be developed thoroughly within the scope of this assignment.
1. Argument Map Creation
- Develop a clear main claim (thesis) you wish to defend.
- Identify supporting reasons, evidence, and any counterarguments.
- Use the argument mapping software reasons.io to construct a visual representation of your argument.
2. Essay Composition (900 words)
- Write an essay that closely reflects the structure of the argument depicted in your argument map. Your essay should be able to be understood without reference to the argument map but must be clearly derived form it.
A word count that is within ±10% of the set length (word limit) is acceptable. Word count does not include footnotes; however, discursive footnotes are included in the word count. A word count that is outside these 10% will receive a proportionate penalty and will be graded against the grading criteria.
Marking criteria and/or marking rubrics are available in the ‘Assessment’ folder in Blackboard for this course.
Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with School policy regarding academic advice, assessment, plagiarism, etc. as stated on the School’s web-page http://www.uq.edu.au/hprc/index.html?page=49903&pid=21371 PLAGIARISM is an academic offence and will be penalized. Useful information may also be found on the UQ Cybrary web-page under “Advice & Training – UseIts”.
NOTE: Artificial Intelligence (AI) provides emerging tools that may support students in completing this assessment task. Students may appropriately use AI in completing this assessment task. Students must clearly reference any use of AI in each instance.
A failure to reference AI use may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Submission guidelines
You must submit an electronic copy (for plagiarism checking and to facilitate marking) through Turnitin under 'Assessment' on Blackboard.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Course grading
Full criteria for each grade is available in the Assessment Procedure.
| Grade | Cut off Percent | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 (Low Fail) | 0 - 24 |
Absence of evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 1, Low Fail (0-24%), is generally awarded in cases where some assessment has been submitted, but it is of wholly unsatisfactory standard or quantity. In work submitted, however, there is no demonstrated evidence of understanding of the concepts of the field of study or basic requirements of the course. |
| 2 (Fail) | 25 - 44 |
Minimal evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 2, Fail (25-44%), is generally awarded to work that exhibits deficiencies in understanding and applying the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study, and as such, does not satisfy the basic requirements of the course. Often, one or more major items of assessment will not have been completed. |
| 3 (Marginal Fail) | 45 - 49 |
Demonstrated evidence of developing achievement of course learning outcomes Course grade description: Grade 3, Marginal Fail (45-49%), is generally awarded if a student has submitted work that attempts to meet the knowledge and skill requirements of the course, but is only able to demonstrate a superficial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. Students will usually have attempted all major pieces of assessment and show that they have an identifiable, emerging ability to apply basic knowledge and skills. |
| 4 (Pass) | 50 - 64 |
Demonstrated evidence of functional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 4, Pass (50-64%), is generally awarded where all major items of assessment have been submitted. An adequate knowledge of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study should be demonstrated and a functional skill level achieved. |
| 5 (Credit) | 65 - 74 |
Demonstrated evidence of proficient achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 5, Credit (65-74%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and a substantial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study have been demonstrated. |
| 6 (Distinction) | 75 - 84 |
Demonstrated evidence of advanced achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 6, Distinction (75-84%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and substantial knowledge of the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been demonstrated. |
| 7 (High Distinction) | 85 - 100 |
Demonstrated evidence of exceptional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 7, High Distinction (85-100%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and there is evidence that the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been mastered.</p> |
Additional course grading information
A word count that is within ±10% of the set length (word limit) is acceptable. Word count does not include footnotes; however, discursive footnotes are included in the word count. A word count that is outside these 10% will receive a proportionate penalty and will be graded against the grading criteria.
Essay Assessment Criteria (Philosophy)
Your written work will be assessed according to the following criteria:
1. Ability to define the topic or philosophical issue under debate. (Topic definition.)
2. Ability to construct a well-reasoned argument for a certain point of view. (Argument and Structure.)
3. Depth and breadth of understanding of the various positions in a philosophical debate. (Scope and Depth of Treatment)
4. Insight and/or originality in interpreting texts or constructing a point of view or argument. (Originality)
5. Capacity to produce a polished, well-written and appropriately referenced essay. (Presentation)
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your essay should reflect an exceptional level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken extensive, high-level research, that you are able to form a very rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is original and creative. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate and organise data and/or evidence in a critical manner and that you have a sophisticated and insightful understanding of problems and issues. Your essay will be very well written, clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 85-100%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84%), your essay should reflect an advanced level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken wide research, that you are able to form a rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is coherent and convincing. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a perceptive manner, and that your understanding of problems and issues is perceptive and insightful. Your essay will be well written, clear and concise, follow discipline conventions and have few errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 75-84%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%) your essay should reflect a proficient level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken the expected level of research, that you are able to develop or adapt convincing arguments and justify them adequately, that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a proficient manner, and that you have a good understanding of problems and issues. The presentation and referencing of your essay will largely follow discipline conventions, perhaps have some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 65-74%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%) your essay should reflect functional achievement. It should demonstrate that you are able to apply fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research and have the basic ability to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, to offer insights and to develop routine arguments. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 50-64%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%), your essay should reflect developing levels of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have a superficial knowledge of fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research, made some attempt to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and to offer insights. Your arguments, while underdeveloped, show your emerging ability to apply knowledge and skills. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate, perhaps poor, and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent. Alternatively, your essay may, in part, be well written and suggest human engagement and achievement but (whether actually developed with the help of AI or not) will (a) mostly exhibit the stereotypical and/or superficial understanding characteristic of generative AI text and/or (b) mostly fail, in a manner characteristic of generative AI text, to develop a sustained (multi-layered) argument: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 45-49%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%) your essay will reflect deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent. Alternatively, your essay may suggest developing or higher achievement but (whether actually developed with the help of AI or not) will (a) exhibit the stereotypical and/or superficial understanding that is characteristic of generative AI text and/or (b) may fail to develop, in a way that is characteristic of generative AI text, a sustained (multi-layered) argument: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 25-44%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your essay will reflect minimal evidence of achievement, and exhibit deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and/or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 1-24%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
Grade X: No assessable work received.
Your quiz assessment task will be assessed according to the following criteria:
1. Ability to produce a succinct response to a directed question.
2. Knowledge of key themes, ideas or content.
3. Ability to employ relevant terminology.
4. Ability to write in clear English (where applicable).
Unlike formative assessment undertaken during your course (such as book reviews and essays), quiz answers are typically marked on right or wrong basis for multiple choice, single word and short answer questions. The overall grade achieved for a quiz is arrived at by totalling the marks for its constituent elements.
Supplementary assessment
Supplementary assessment is available for this course.
Additional assessment information
- Failure to submit all major assessment items (those worth 15% and above) will result in a maximum grade of 2 (Fail).
- By submitting work through Turnitin you are deemed to have accepted the following declaration:‘I certify that this assignment is my own work and has not been submitted, either previously or concurrently, in whole or in part, to this University or any other educational institution, for marking or assessment’.
- All students must ensure that they receive their Turnitin receipt on every submission of assessment items. YOU MUST CHECK THAT THE RECEIPT CONFIRMS THAT SUBMISSION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.
- A valid Turnitin receipt will be the only evidence accepted if assessments are missing.ﾠWithout evidence, the assessment will receive the standard late penalty, or after 7 calendar days, will receive zero. In the case of a Blackboard outage, please contact the Course Coordinator as soon as possible so that they can confirm the outage with ITS.
- It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that they are submitting assessment items on a device that is capable of the task, and that appropriate internet bandwidth and speed is available. If you cannot be sure that your device or internet will enable you to complete or submit an assessment task, you must come onto campus and use one of the University Computers in the Library or Computer Labs.
- Plagiarism, and asking or paying someone else to do your work is cheating and constitutes academic misconduct. See ECP Section 6.1
- Feedback against the assessment criteria in the form of comments on your script will be provided through Turnitin or on your script directly.
- For information on assessment remarks see: https://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/exams-and-assessment/querying-result
Learning resources
You'll need the following resources to successfully complete the course. We've indicated below if you need a personal copy of the reading materials or your own item.
Library resources
Find the required and recommended resources for this course on the UQ Library website.
Additional learning resources information
The Course Blackboardﾠsite will include links to additionalﾠLecture Notes (summarising material from the Text), additional Tutorial Exercises, and Assessment Exercises.
Learning activities
The learning activities for this course are outlined below. Learn more about the learning outcomes that apply to this course.
Filter activity type by
Please select
| Learning period | Activity type | Topic |
|---|---|---|
Week 1 (24 Feb - 02 Mar) |
Lecture |
Week 1 We don't think like we think we think. An overview of how we think as opposed to common ideas of what goes on when we are thinking. Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03 |
Week 2 (03 Mar - 09 Mar) |
Lecture |
Week 2 What can go wrong? Cognitive biases and other blocks to effective thinking are explored and discussed. We also consider aspects of social cognition and collaborative reasoning. Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03 |
Week 4 (17 Mar - 23 Mar) |
Lecture |
Week 4 Tools of Logic I: Propositional logic, logical operators and truth tables Learning outcomes: L01, L03 |
Week 5 (24 Mar - 30 Mar) |
Lecture |
Week 5 Tools of Logic II: Conditionals and testing for validity Learning outcomes: L01, L03 |
Week 6 (31 Mar - 06 Apr) |
Lecture |
Week 6 Argumentation I: argument structure Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03 |
Week 7 (07 Apr - 13 Apr) |
Lecture |
Week 7 Argumentation II: analysing and evaluating arguments and introduction to argument mapping Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03 |
Week 8 (14 Apr - 20 Apr) |
Lecture |
Week 8 Argument mapping I: visualising thinking Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03 |
Week 9 (28 Apr - 04 May) |
Lecture |
Week 9 AI and argument analysis and evaluation Learning outcomes: L01, L03 |
Week 10 (05 May - 11 May) |
Lecture |
Week 10 Argument mapping II: Advanced argument mapping Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03 |
Week 11 (12 May - 18 May) |
Lecture |
Week 11 Fallacies of reasoning Learning outcomes: L01, L03 |
Week 12 (19 May - 25 May) |
Lecture |
Week 12 Thinking and Writing Learning outcomes: L01, L02 |
Week 13 (26 May - 01 Jun) |
Lecture |
Week 13 Rational systems: Connecting scientific methodologies and argumentation; pseudoscience Learning outcomes: L01, L03 |
Policies and procedures
University policies and procedures apply to all aspects of student life. As a UQ student, you must comply with University-wide and program-specific requirements, including the:
- Student Code of Conduct Policy
- Student Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure
- Assessment Procedure
- Examinations Procedure
- Reasonable Adjustments - Students Policy and Procedure
Learn more about UQ policies on my.UQ and the Policy and Procedure Library.