PHILOSOPHERS LOG JOURNAL RESPONSES

INSTRUCTIONS:
For the first 10 minutes of class, you will write a journal entry on a quote or
article provided at the front (overhead, board, or projector). When you enter
the classroom, sit down quietly and comment on the following:
1) What does the quote/article/question mean?
2) Provide at least one example of a life experience that relates to the
quote/article.
You are to hand in your complete and insightful journals at the end of the
unit (please date them).
Remember, this is a quiet and reflective exercise. Please refrain
from talking to your peers, and enjoy the alone time.
Criteria
Communication
/50
LEVEL 4
Responses are full and complete. Entries are insightful
and perceptive, connecting personal experience to the
text and making inferences and judgements. There is a
thoughtful interpretation of what was read, heard, or
viewed.
LEVEL 3
Responses are full, but are missing some entries due to
absences. Some entries are insightful and perceptive,
connecting personal experience to the text and making
inferences and judgments. There is a thoughtful
interpretation of what was read, heard or viewed.
LEVEL 2
Journal responses are incomplete because a large
number of classes have been missed. Entries are
unclear, or show little effort or insight. The writer
occasionally makes observations or predictions but
these are vague and unsupported. Entries are often
simply summaries.
LEVEL 1
Journal responses are incomplete because a large
number of classes have been missed. Entries are
unclear, or show little effort or insight. The writer
occasionally makes observations or predictions but
these are vague and unsupported. Entries are often
simply summaries.
Name: _________________________

Comments:

Socratic Dialogue Activity

INSTRUCTIONS:
1) You are to write a Socratic style dialogue between you and Crito (or
some other ancient Greek sounding name) on either `What is
knowledge` or `How do we come to know something`
2) This must be written in the style of the Plato`s Socratic dialogues, but
in English
3) The dialogue you create must clearly and logically discuss the
epistemological question you have chosen above and demonstrate a
clear knowledge of at least three of the various theories we have
studied in class.
4) The idea is to have a little fun with his assignment while
communicating your understanding of the topic.
5) The dialogue should be no more than three typed pages will be graded
according to the rubric given below.
6) Creativity counts!

What is a Socratic Dialogue and How do I Write One?

Socratic dialogues are philosophical conversations between two or more
people in which Socrates asks a series of questions that lead the other
person, through discussion, to an answer. This answer is always something
that proves Socrates right. Socrates rubs this in at the end of every dialogue
by asking a question along the lines of So I was right wasnt I? to which the
other person, at this point, can only answer Yes.
Socratic Dialogue Rubric
Categories

Level 4

Level 3

Level 2

Level 1

Knowledge and
Understanding
accurately
demonstrates an
understanding of
epistemological
question: `How

-defines the
theories of
knowledge with
a limited degree
of success

-defines the
theories of
knowledge with
some degree of
success

-defines the
theories of
knowledge with
a considerable
degree of
success

-defines the
theories of
knowledge with
a high degree of
success

do we come to
know things`
Thinking
insightfully
evaluates the
question`s
strengths and
weaknesses,
using the
Socratic Method

-uses the
Socratic Method
to evaluate the
question`s
strengths and
weaknesses
with a limited
degree of
success

-uses the
Socratic Method
to evaluate the
question`s
strengths and
weaknesses
with some
degree of
success

Communicatio
n
clearly
formulates own
ideas about
knowledge, and
explain and
defend those
ideas creatively
in philosophical
dialogue

-formulates own
ideas about
knowledge, and
creatively
explains and
defends those
ideas in
philosophical
dialogue with a
high degree of
success

Application
effectively
explains views
and displays use
of philosophical
reasoning skills
in a dialogue

-explains views
and displays use
of philosophical
reasoning skills
in a dialogue
with a high
degree of
success

-formulates own
ideas about
knowledge, and
creatively
explains and
defends those
ideas in
philosophical
dialogue with a
considerable
degree of
success
-explains views
and displays use
of philosophical
reasoning skills
in a dialogue
with a
considerable
degree of
success

Name ____________________________________
Comments:

-uses the
Socratic Method
to evaluate the
question`s
strengths and
weaknesses
with a
considerable
degree of
success
-formulates own
ideas about
knowledge, and
creatively
explains and
defends those
ideas in
philosophical
dialogue with
some degree of
success

-uses the
Socratic Method
to evaluate the
question`s
strengths and
weaknesses
with a high
degree of
success

-explains views
and displays use
of philosophical
reasoning skills
in a dialogue
with some
degree of
success

-explains views
and displays use
of philosophical
reasoning skills
in a dialogue
with a limited
degree of
success

-formulates own
ideas about
knowledge, and
creatively
explains and
defends those
ideas in
philosophical
dialogue with
limited of
success

The Matrix Movie Critique

INSTRUCTIONS:
Neo is a young software engineer and part-time hacker who is singled out by
some mysterious figures who want to introduce him to the secret of the
matrix. The cops also seem to be after him, and he takes a chance on
discovering what he has always suspected: that the world is not quite what it
seems to be and a sinister conspiracy is at work. While you are watching the
movie The Matrix, respond to the following questions in detail in your journal
responses.
1. The Matrix has obvious connections to the Evil Genius theory of Rene
Descartes. Explain how the movie relates to this theory (including Descartes
idea of I think, therefore I am) and describe what the evil genius is in this
movie.
2. At one point in the movie the character Cypher is having dinner, in the
Matrix, with Agent Smith. During the meal he states that so long as it tastes
juicy, an illusory steak is real enough for him. What theory of perception and
truth is Cypher using and explain why?
3. Suppose you are a person living in the real world outside the Matrix. Use
the correspondence, coherence and pragmatic theories of truth to determine
which world (either the outside real world or the one inside the matrix) is
actually the true world. Explain each answer.
4. Neo goes to the Oracle to find out if he is the one. While there he speaks
with a boy who is bending spoons. The boy says it is not the spoon that

bends it is only yourself that bends. There is no spoon. Using each theory of
Perception and Truth explain whether or not there is a spoon and whether
Neo can bend it. (Common-sense realism, Representative theory, Subjective
Idealism, Phenomenalism)
5. At the end of the film Morpheus is watching Neo take part in the films
final battle and says that he (Neo) is starting to believe. It could be said
that Neo finally understands Descartes idea of I think, therefore I am.
Explain how this knowledge of himself and of the world affects the final
culminating battle.

Summative Debate
In this culminating activity, you are going to work in groups of 2 to learn
more about the ideas of one particular philosopher and their ideas on
epistemology. The debates will have an audience either grade 10s or 11s
and will also be videotaped
You are to select ONE philosopher or philosophical school to focus on. Each
group has to select a unique topic. You can choose from any of the thinkers
we have discussed in this unit (Descartes, Locke etc.) OR you can choose
your own philosopher, with my approval. PLEASE check with me before you
begin your research.
This project will take place over 5 days. In the first two days, we will be in the
library researching our topics. We will spend two days debating various
epistemological topics and then one day will be spent editing the video of
the event.
Questions to be discussed during the debate include:
- I know that one plus one is two
- I know that the sky is blue
- I know that I exist
- I know I am here right now
- I know that there is a God

You will be marked on evidence of your research along with your

participation in the actual debate. I will be looking for you to debate
enthusiastically! You will be required to submit your research notes to me
after the debate. Please ensure that you not only research YOUR philosopher,
but that you also research the other philosophers being represented in order
to prepare counter arguments.
After the debates, we will be holding a secret ballot vote to see who won
the debate.

Group Debate Organizer

Name of Philosopher:
One plus one is two

The sky is blue

I exist

I am here right now

There is a God

Potential Counter Arguments

1)

2)

Debate Rubric
Criteria
Opening &
Closing
Statements
( /10)

Level 4
-Extremely
thorough,
wellorganized
presentations
of arguments
and evidence
-Opening
statement
engages the
interest of
the judge;

Level 3
-Wellorganized,
complete
presentation
of arguments
and evidence
-Opening
statement
successfully
frames the
issue; closing
statement

Level 2
-Somewhat
organized
presentation
of arguments
and evidence
-Opening
statement
outlines or
lists
arguments
and evidence
but does not

Level 1
-Arguments are
unorganized,
incomplete, or
completely
lacking
evidence
-Opening
statements
closing
statement do
little more than
state the

closing
statement
leaves no
unanswered
issues

summarizes
many
arguments
made in the
debate

generate
interest;
closing
statement
does not
reflect
remarks
made during
debate
Rebuttals
-Responds to -Responds to -Responds to
issues raised issues raised issues raised
( /10)
by opponents by opponents by
with concise, with accurate opponents
accurate,
and
with
logical
generally
Generally
answers
concise
accurate
-Effectively
-Challenges
answers
challenges
the
-Offers
the
arguments
arguments,
arguments
made by
but no
made by
opponents;
evidence, to
opponents
Challenges
counter the
with
are generally arguments
argument
effective
made by
and evidence
opponents
Effective use of
Demonstrate Demonstrate Demonstrate
philosophical s a
sa
s a basic
evidence/
sophisticated sophisticated and accurate
content
understandin understandin understandin
knowledge
g of the
g of the
g of the
issues,
issues,
issues,
( /40)
events, and
events, and
events and
facts
facts
facts
relevant to
relevant to
relevant to
the topic
the topic
the topic
Demonstrate Demonstrate Demonstrate
s thorough
s thorough
s the ability
and accurate and accurate to make

position of the
team

-Seems to be
caught offguard by
opponents;
offers tentative,
somewhat
accurately, but
possibly vague
or illogical
responses
-Attempts to
challenge
arguments of
opponents

-Demonstrates
a generally
accurate
understanding
of relevant
issues, events
and facts, but
my exhibit
misunderstandi
ngs
-Seems to
understand
general ideas,
but do not
support their

Performance
( /10)

understandin
g of details
as well as the
ability to
make original
connections
and
interpretatio
ns
-Exhibits
confidence,
energy, and
passion in
the course of
the hearing
-Maintains
respectful
tone
-Accesses
preparation
materials
with ease

understandin
g of details
as well as
the ability to
make original
connections
and
interpretatio
ns
-Exhibits
confidence,
energy in
the course of
the hearing
-Maintains
respectful
tone
-Uses
preparation
materials
with ease

Group name: ____________________________

Participant: _____________________________
Comments:

basic
connections
between
facts and
concepts

-Appears
nervous, yet
somewhat
confidence,
before the
judge
-Maintains
respectful
tone
-Use of
preparation
materials
does not
distract

ideas with
relevant facts;
OR seem to
understand
facts but are
unable to
connect them
into coherent,
arguments
-Lacks
confidence
-Maintains
respectful tone
-Use of
preparation
materials
distracts from
quality of
performance