This document provides an outline for a course on logical reasoning, conceptualization, and critical thinking. It includes: 1. An overview of the course which aims to develop students' capacity for logical and critical thinking. 2. The course objectives which are to lay foundations for logical reasoning, develop critical thinking skills, and understand arguments. 3. Details of the course schedule, topics, and evaluation methods which involve assignments, quizzes and exams. 4. An introduction to the topic of Week 2 which is logical reasoning, including definitions of key terms and an exploration of statements, arguments, and the structure of good arguments.

1. 1
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND
MANAGEMENT STUDIES
CHAPTER 2: Logical Reasoning: Relevance, Obstacles
and Structure
PROGRAMME: ALL BSc
COURSE TITLE: Logical Reasoning, Conceptualization And
Critical Thinking
COURSE CODE: PAID311
TOTAL CREDITS: 3
BY
NGANG PEREZ (MAJOR 1)
PAN AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT
-WEST AFRICA (PAID-WA) BUEA
LECTURE NOTES FOR Logical
reasoning, conceptualization and
critical thinking

2. 2
COURSE OUTLINE FOR LOGICAL REASONING, CONCEPTUALIZATION AND CRITICAL
THINKING
PROGRAMME: ALL BSc
COURSE TITLE: Logical reasoning, conceptualization and critical thinking
COURSE CODE: PAID311
TOTAL CREDIT: 3
TOTAL LECTURE HOURS: 15
LECTURER: NGANG Perez (Major 1)
A. COURSE OVERVIEW AND OUTLINE
1. Course Description:
This course provides students with a general overview on the concept of critical thinking and
logical reasoning. It emphasizes the importance of attitudes and practice for good thinking in
today’s society. It establishes a balance approach to think more and think better be it politically,
culturally, economically and socially. Critical thinking is thinking clearly and rationally. It
involves thinking precisely and systematically, and following the rules of logic and scientific
reasoning, among other things. As such the study, equips students with the technical skills to a
tremendous force of constructive argument. Thus the topics understudy will include focal areas
such as; logic and reasoning, structure and parts of argument, the concept of critical thinking
amongst others.
2. COURSE OBJECTIVES: By the end of this course, student should be able to:
• Learning Objectives: By the end of this course, students should be able to:
➢ Lay down the foundational principles of logical reasoning and its relevance
➢ Develop their capacity to think logically and critically about any given situation
within their environment
PAN AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT-
WEST AFRICA (PAID-WA) BUEA

3. 3
➢ Bring out clearly the differences between logical reasoning and balanced
argument
➢ Understand how to identify cause-and-effect relationships
➢ Outline the Different Types of Values
➢ Understand Moral Values and Normativity
3. COURSE SCHEDULE AND TOPICS
This course will cover the following topics in 5 learning sessions with one session per week as
follows:
Week 2: Session 2/Chapter 2: Logical Reasoning: Relevance, Obstacles and Structure
Date:
Topics
• What is a statement?
• Relevance of logical reasoning
• Benefits in professional and everyday life
• Obstacles to logical reasoning
• What is an Argument?
• Characteristics of a good argument
• Conclusion and Summary
• Review Questions
4. GENERAL COURSE REVIEW AND FINAL EXAM PREPARATION
Date:
Topics
• Chapter 2: Logical Reasoning: Relevance, Obstacles and Structure
5. OTHER REQUIREMENTS
➢ Required Text Books or Articles
❖ Leo A. Groarke and Cristopher W, Tindale 2004. Good reasoning matters: A constructive
approach to critical thinking. (3rd Edition). New York, Oxford University Press
❖ Barbara Minto, 2008. The pyramid principle: Logic in writing and thinking (3rd edition).
Prentice Hall.
❖ Nemeth, C. and Ormiston, M. (2006). Creative idea generation: Harmony versus
stimulation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(3):524-535.
❖ Fang, X., Singh, S., and Ahluwalia, R. (2007). An examination of different explanations
for the mere exposure effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(1):97-103.
❖ Epstein, R. (1999). Critical thinking. Wadsworth, Belmont, MA

4. 4
➢ Important weblinks
1) https://www.skillsyouneed.com/learn/critical-thinking.html [accessed 25th
July 2019]
2) https://philosophy.hku.hk/think/critical/ct.php [accessed 25th July 2019]
3) https://thinkeracademy.com/critical-thinking-skills/[accessed 25th July 2019]
B. COURSE EVALUATION
• Written Assignment 15%
• Graded Quiz 10%
• Discussion Assignment 5%
• Final Exams taken on Campus 70% total 100%
C. LECTURE NOTES AND PRESENTATION (Next Page)

5. 5
WEEK 2:
SESSION 2/CHAPTER 2 LOGICAL REASONING: RELEVANCE,
OBSTACLES AND STRUCTURE
2.0 Brief Introduction
The definition of logic could be stated as the science of reasoning, proof, thinking or inference
(according to the Oxford Compact English Dictionary). It is the ability to reason that is central to
logical thinking. For many of us, these reasoning skills are often put to the test during arguments.
Being able to reason is clearly a valuable skill! But is it something that we should be "teaching"?
Do students learn how to form logical arguments within the home? Do fellow teachers encourage
their students to think logically? Or do we compel the students to “give back our notes (cram
work)” during exams? To what extend do tutor facilitate students to think out of the box (class
notes?). This is something very critical and we shall see its importance in this chapter as well as
the obstacles and structure.
2.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES
By the end of this session, students should be able to;
• Outline the relevance of logical reasoning in general
• Identify the benefits of logical reasoning in professional and everyday life
• Discuss the obstacles to logical reasoning
• Bring out the difference between logical reasoning and argument
• Understand the structure and parts of an argument
• Highlight characteristics of a good argument
2.2 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS
➢ Argument: In logic and philosophy, an argument is a series of statements (in a natural
language), called the premises and intended to determine the degree of truth of another
statement, the conclusion.
➢ Truth: Truth is the relationship between the mind and what it judges. When we say an
assertion is true, it means it is true to facts. That is, what a person says, express the existence
of some reality.
➢ Statement: Statements are what is said. More accurate, statements are things that are said that
are either true or false. They are also called claims. Here is one: “Neptune has the fastest winds
in the solar system.” A statement that is especially important to us might be called a
proposition, assertion, judgment, hypothesis, principle, thesis, or, in some situations, a law.

6. 6
2.3 THE MAIN CONTENT
Every argument contains at least one intended conclusion plus one or more supporting reasons,
called premises. However, in some sentences it is not easy to tell whether an argument occurs at
all, nor what the premises and conclusion of an argument really are, nor how other arguments in
the passage are related to that argument. This chapter explores all that.
2.3.1: What is a statement?
As already indicated in the key definitions, statements are what is said. More accurate, statements
are things that are said that are either true or false. They are also called claims. Here is one:
“Neptune has the fastest winds in the solar system.” A statement that is especially important to us
might be called a proposition, assertion, judgment, hypothesis, principle, thesis, or, in some
situations, a law. Statements have to be capable of being true or false. So, if you say, “Is it
midnight?” then you've not made a statement. Suggestions, commands, and proposals aren’t
statements either. The suggestion “I suggest we should get a new refrigerator,” and the command,
“Stand back!” and the proposal, “Let’s quit studying,” are not statements. It would be very odd to
call any of them “true” or “false.” The following are statements: “She suggested we should get a
new refrigerator,” and “He commanded us to stand back,” and “He proposed that we use the office
budget to buy a new refrigerator. “
Although there is a difference between a declarative sentence and the statement made with that
sentence, this lecture will often not honor that distinction and will speak of declarative sentences
themselves as being statements or claims.
2.3.2: Relevance of logical reasoning
In the first chapter, we said that logical reasoning is a reasoning process that follows a set of rules
that specify how we ought to derive conclusions. The laws of logic provide the standards against
which we assess the quality of someone’s reasoning. According to logic, conclusions are valid if
it necessarily flows from some statements that are acceptable as facts. Factual statements are called
premises. Conclusions that are not in accord with the rules of logic are illogical.
Critical thinking is the ability to evaluate arguments made by others and composing good
arguments of your own. When we think critically, we judge the accuracy of statements and the
soundness of the reasons that leads to conclusions. Critical thinking is a skill, it is not something
that you can just memorize overnight. It is judicious reasoning about what to belief and therefore,
what to do.
There are several benefits that is derived from being logical in our reasoning and thinking. Among
them we can think of the following:
❖ As you apply reasoning from logic, it improves your attention and observation to the things
that happens around you and what you encounter in your daily lives.

7. 7
❖ Reasoning logically, you become more focused in your reading. You do not take things,
ideas and statements at first value.
❖ It improves your ability to identify the key points in a text and enables you avoid being
distracted by less important ones.
❖ It gives you knowledge of how to get your own points across more easily. It also gives you
skills of analysis that you can choose to apply in a variety of settings.
2.3.3: Benefits in professional and everyday life
❖ Skills in logical reasoning brings precisions to the way you think and work. These skills
are useful in problem solving and project management. It enables you serve time because
you are able to identify the most relevant information more quickly and accurately.
❖ Logical reasoning skills leads to the development of other skills such as: Observation,
reasoning, decision-making, analysis, judgement, persuasion.
2.3.4: Obstacles to logical reasoning
❖ Our beliefs (culture, tradition, religion etc).
❖ Prejudice
❖ Common sense
❖ Bias
❖ Lack of methods and strategies
❖ Lack of practice
❖ Reluctance to criticize those with more expertise
❖ Mistaking information for understanding
❖ Insufficient focus and attention to details
❖ Misconception about the concept of critical thinking which many people think that to
criticize is to identify the negative elements in an argument. But critical thinking usually involves
both positive and negative aspects. It involves an objective assessment of an argument.
2.3.5: What is an Argument?
Arguments are at the heart of critical thinking because it is through them that people make their
ideas known to others. It is through arguments that the reasoning behind an idea can be understood
and evaluated. The concrete expression of logical reasoning is the argument.
An argument is a combination of statements that coveys the idea a person is trying to send across.
Through an argument, we are able to follow the reasoning of another person to be able to judge its
validity and reliability. An argument stands or fall to the extent that the reasoning it incorporates
is good or bad.
Statements that serve as reasons in an argument are also called premises. You’ve got nothing to
do with the yard sign that says, “Keep off the premises.” Any argument must have one or more
premises. And it will have one or more "inference steps" taking you from the premises to the

8. 8
conclusion. The simplest arguments have just one step. Here is an example of a very simple
argument that takes you to the conclusion in just one inference step from two premises:
• If it's raining, we should take the umbrella.
• It is raining.
• So, we should take the umbrella.
2.3.5.1: Structure and parts of an argument
An argument can be simple or complicated, and this depends on the number of statements it
contains. A simple argument is made up of two elements: a premise and a conclusion. A
complicated argument is that which contains more than two premises or statements. A premise is
the supporting statement. It is the starting point of an argument and contains the truth from which
the move towards an inference begins. A conclusion on its part if the supported statement that is
the statement that is accepted as true based on the premise. The most effective arguments are those
that are trying to make a single point. Arguments are motivated by the intentions of the arguer;
whose intention is to convince an audience that a given claim is acceptable. Look at the following
example below:
• All politicians are lairs (Major premise)
• Peter is a politician (Minor premise)
• Therefore, Peter is a liar (Conclusion)
The argument above contains two premises- a major and minor premise and a conclusion. This is
an example of the structure of a syllogistic argument. There are other types of arguments like
complex and simple arguments.
2.3.5.2: Characteristics of a good argument
To find out whether an argument is present, you need to use your detective skills. Ask yourself
whether the speaker gave any reason for saying what was said. If you get a satisfactory answer to
your own question, then you probably have detected an argument, and you’ve uncovered its
conclusion and premises. In detecting an argument, your main goal is to locate the conclusion,
then the reasons given for that conclusion, while mentally deleting all the other sentences and
phrases that are not part of the argument.
For any conclusion, the premises used directly to support it are called its basic premises. In a more
complicated argument, there may be reasons for the reasons, and so on. But these reasons for the
reasons are not part of the core. The core of the argument is the conclusion plus its basic premises.
Every argument has to start somewhere, so it is not a good criticism of an argument to complain
that all its premises have not been argued for.
Therefore, a good argument has two basic characteristics- that the premises are true and the
argument has a proper form.

9. 9
Example of a good argument
• Socrates was a human being
• All human beings are mortal
• Therefore, Socrates was mortal
If you look at the argument just presented, both premises are true “Socrates was a mortal human
being and all human beings are mortal.” The argument also has a proper form given that the truth
these premises is a good reason to think that the conclusion is true.
An argument is bad when it fails one or both of the two tests as will be seen in the example below.
• All Christians are Pentecostals
• All Pentecostals are righteous
• Therefore, all Christians are righteous
Conclusion: Arguments are central in logical reasoning and critical thinking processes. The
analysis of argument to distinguish correct from bad arguments from the statement of others and
ourselves, and our ability to construct good arguments places us on the good path to the art of
critical thinking.
2.3.5: Truth and validity
2.3.5.1: Truth
Truth is the relationship between the mind and what it judges. When we say an assertion is true, it
means it is true to facts. That is, what a person says, express the existence of some reality. For
example: “All frogs are amphibians”. This proposition is true because it tells us that frogs are
animals that are able to live both on water and on land.
2.3.5.2: Validity
For an argument to be valid, it means it conforms to the rules of right reason. To be invalid means
it does not conform to these rules. A valid argument is one where if the premises are true, then the
conclusion must be true also. This means that the premises are so related to the conclusions that
their truth involves that of the conclusion, which may be said to flow from them.
For example:
• No parents are children
• Some students are children
• Therefore, some children are not parents
An invalid argument is one which the conclusion may have no relation or close connection with
the premises. In other words, if the premises do not imply the conclusion, then we cannot reason
from the truth of the premises to that of the conclusion. This the argument is invalid. For example:
• All snakes are reptiles

10. 10
• Some animals are snakes
• Therefore, some animals are not reptiles
Note that the validity of an argument does not guarantee the truth of its conclusion.
For example:
• If Nelson Mandela were the American President, then he will be popular
• Nelson Mandela is not the American President
• Therefore, he is not popular
From the above argument, we observe that although the premises are true, the conclusion is false-
thus, it is invalid. The falsehood of the conclusion thus guarantees that either the argument is
invalid or at least one of its premises is false.
For an argument to establish the truth of its conclusion, it must be valid and all the premises must
be true. In logic, we are concerned with determining the validity or invalidity of arguments. In the
formal nature of an argument, we consider its content and form. We assess the truth of the
argument from the content and the form has to do with the way the argument has been structured.
Conclusively, validity has to do with the form and not the truth or falsity.
For example:
• All parents are children
• All she-goats are parents
• Therefore, all she-goats are children.
The truth or falsity of the conclusion does not determine the validity of an argument. Just as the
validity of an argument does not guarantee the truth of its conclusion. When an argument is valid
with its premises all true, we call it a sound argument. If the deductive argument fails to establish
the truth of its conclusion, it is termed unsound
• Example of a sound argument:
• No persons are adult
• All teachers are persons
Therefore, no teachers are adults
• Example of an unsound argument:
• No students are businessmen
• All traders are businessmen
• Therefore, no traders are students

11. 11
2.4 Conclusion
Therefore, it is the responsibility of the student now to understand the how of Picking out
arguments, formulating arguments, identifying the different parts of an argument, determining the
validity of arguments.
2.5 Summary
Truth is the relationship between the mind and what it judges. When we say an assertion is true, it
means it is true to facts.
For an argument to be valid, it means it conforms to the rules of right reason. A valid argument is
one where if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true also.
An invalid argument is one which the conclusion may have no relation or close connection with
the premises. In other words, if the premises do not imply the conclusion, then we cannot reason
from the truth of the premises to that of the conclusion.
For an argument to establish the truth of its conclusion, it must be valid and all the premises must
be true. In logic, we are concerned with determining the validity or invalidity of arguments. In the
formal nature of an argument, we consider its content and form. We assess the truth of the
argument from the content and the form has to do with the way the argument has been structured.
Conclusively, validity has to do with the form and not the truth or falsity.
The truth or falsity of the conclusion does not determine the validity of an argument. Just as the
validity of an argument does not guarantee the truth of its conclusion. When an argument is valid
with its premises all true, we call it a sound argument. If the deductive argument fails to establish
the truth of its conclusion, it is termed unsound
2.6 Review Questions
❖ What is the relevance of logical reasoning?
❖ Examine the benefits of logical reasoning in professional an everyday life
❖ What are the obstacles to logical reasoning?
2.7 References
❖ Barbara Minto, 2008. The pyramid principle: Logic in writing and thinking (3rd edition).
Prentice Hall.
❖ Mclnerny, D,Q. 2004. Being logical: A guide to good thinking. USA, Random House.
❖ Leo A. Groarke and Cristopher W, Tindale 2004. Good reasoning matters: A constructive
approach to critical thinking. (3rd Edition). New York, Oxford University Press
2.8 Task
❖ Read the notes on unit 2.3.5 (Truth and validity) and make a power point presentation of
not more 10 slides

12. 12
2.9: Reading Assignment/Suggested Readings:
❖ Read this article by Stunning Colman (1998), "Truth and Validity, Accessed from
http://wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/5909/6050951/MyLogicLab_ebook/MLL_Co
pi_13e_Ch01/0136141390_Ch01_06.pdf June 30, 2019
2.10 Reading Assignment Supplementary Source
❖ You Tube Video lecture: CRITICAL THINKING - Fundamentals: Truth and Validity.
❖ Video Highlights: This video explains the philosophical concepts of truth and validity
before going on to illustrate how truth and falsity, as well as validity and invalidity, can
appear in various combinations in an argument.
❖ Note: To access the video, copy and paste this Playlist
❖ URL: https://youtu.be/pCGnyaa5E5g?t=2.
❖ Source https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCGnyaa5E5g. Retrieved 30 June 2019.
2.11Written Assignment
❖ Construct a series of deductive arguments, on any subject of your choosing, each with
only two premises, having a valid argument with one true premise, one false premise, and
a false conclusion
2.12 Discussion Assignment
❖ Discuss, the characteristics of a good argument
2.13 Graded Quiz
❖
1. Would you consider an alternative name for statement to be a claim? Yes, or No
a. Yes
b. No
c. Yes, but it depends on the situation
d. A & C are correct
2. A statement that is very important to mankind, at some point or given situation could be
considered a law. What is your point of view?
a. I agree
b. I don’t agree
c. It is may be possible
d. I think it depends
3. Factual statements are called … Tick the most appropriate.
a. Premises
b. Conclusions
c. Claims
d. All of the above
4. A good argument has two basic characteristics. Tick the most appropriate combination.

13. 13
a. The premises are true and the argument has a proper form
b. The premises have a proper form and the argument are true
c. The arguments are true and reasoning is logical
d. The arguments are logical and the reasoning is true
5. - - - defines a relationship between the mind and what it judges. What could this be?
a. Premise
b. Validity
c. Truth
d. Opinion
6. A valid argument is one where if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be
true. Do you agree with the statement?
a. I agree
b. I don’t agree
c. It depends on the situation
d. A & C are correct
7. Does the validity of an argument, guarantees the truth of its conclusion? Yes, or No
a. Yes
b. No
c. Yes, but it depends on the context of the situation
d. A & C are correct
8. The concept of validity has to do with the form of an argument and not the truth or falsity.
Do you agree with the statement?
a. I agree
b. I don’t agree
c. It depends on the situation
d. A & C are correct