Thinking Outside the Box Marwan Al-Edrus

Marwan Al-Edrus

Group Members

  • Zoe Grout
  • Duc Huynh
  • Paschalis Economou (Concussion)

Date: Feb 10th to Feb 24th

WOK: Reason


Table of Contents

  • Journal Entries
  • Reflection on Journal Entries
  • Presentation Video Link
  • Our Knowledge Question
  • Other Essential Questions
  • Supplementary Imagery
  • RLS and Elective Readings
  • Extension Proposals

Journal Entries

Reason Reflection Day 1:

Goals for presentation: I want to confuse the audience. I want to make it so that they can’t trust their senses, and the only way to get through it is by using reason. I want to prove that reason can be more reliable than say sense perception. I don’t know what form the presentation will ultimately take however. It’s just hard for me to understand how we can make an experiment out of reason. Perhaps we’ll do a quiz of some sort. The whole thing generally is still up in the air

Reason Reflection Day 2:

What’s your plan for the project? Restate your main point

I still don’t have plans for the project. That’s what we’ll be coming up with today hopefully. Our essential question for this presentation that we’ll be exploring is “How reliable is inductive reasoning?” We’re essentially going to point out that it has a couple flaws, but I also want to show it’s merits and advantages against other forms of knowing. Generally, I want to end up confusing the audience.

What is the main point about your WOK that you want to make in your Badge Project?

I still want to do a sort of project that would show reason as being more reliable than a WOK like sense perception, memory, or something of the sort. I want to show them how useful Rationalism could be. Over the time from the last class until now, our group didn’t really work on it because it is still a long ways away from the presentation. Over the course of today however, I’m hoping we can finalize an idea, instead of waiting until the last day to work on one.

What did you learn today about Reason?

That it is mostly instinctual, not learnt. In fact, we’re building our project around that idea now. We’re going to ask riddles to kids and parents, and we’re hypothesizing that these specific questions will be hard for the adults but not for the children due to the adults mania for overcomplicating things at times.

How prepared are you for your badge project?

Somewhat. We have a lot of work to do, especially presentation wise. Knowledge wise, I consider myself knowledgeable in Reason right now.

What’s left to do? Be Specific.

We have to start our project in general. We need to start gathering data for our experiment. But to do that, we have to write down what questions and things we’ll be quizzing the people on.

Reason Reflection Day 3 (Presentation Day):

Thoughts on the presentation: I think we should have explained the riddles to Duc better. I don’t think he properly understood the necessary phrasing for both questions. That hindered our ability for the people he interviewed to properly answer the riddles. I think I should have instead interviewed the teachers, and he should have just worked on compiling it into a video instead. Either way, the presentation did not turn out so bad. I probably should not have connected one of the riddles to equivocation. That wasn’t my initial intent. Don’t have much else in terms of areas of improvement.


Reflection on Journal Entries

This presentation and WOK went much smoother than the first one, so that's an improvement. We had one less day than the first one as well, on top of spreading our time between a second WOK. In that sense, I am proud of what we achieved. The presentation could've been smoother, but it certainly wasn't enough to warrant a redo.

Presentation Video

Our Knowledge Questions

Is reasoning instinctual or learnt?

Other Knowledge Questions

  • How reliable is deductive reasoning?
  • How reliable is inductive reasoning?
  • How effective are syllogisms in finding Truth?

Supplementary Imagery

Elective Readings

This really illuminated me to the nature of reason. Basically, this video highlights a paradox concerning a particular fallacy in reasoning, Ad Ignorantium. This fallacy is the idea that something can't be wrong until it's proven false. This video is an exploration of that idea, with Carl Sagan deflecting all sensory-perception premises one could make about this dragon in his garage. Not only that, this helped us come up with our initial ideas for our presentation, as Zoe, Duc, and I were having trouble trying to find an exploration or experiment for Reason as a Way of Knowing.

Extension Proposals

Circular Reasoning: Explained

A Rhetorical Analysis of Donald Trump

Made with Adobe Slate

Make your words and images move.

Get Slate

Report Abuse

If you feel that this video content violates the Adobe Terms of Use, you may report this content by filling out this quick form.

To report a Copyright Violation, please follow Section 17 in the Terms of Use.