SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL  

Introduction to 
the Philosophy of 
the Human   
Person  
Quarter 1 – 
Module 2.2  
Methods of 
Philosophizing  
Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person – Grade 11
 
Alternative Delivery Mode
Quarter 1 – Module 2: Methods of Philosophizing
First Edition, 2020

Republic Act 8293, section 176 ​states that: No copyright shall subsist in any work of
the Government of the Philippines. However, prior approval of the government agency or
office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit.
Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of
royalties.

Borrowed materials (i.e., songs, stories, poems, pictures, photos, brand names,
trademarks, etc.) included in this module are owned by their respective copyright holders.
Every effort has been exerted to locate and seek permission to use these materials from their
respective copyright owners. The publisher and authors do not represent nor claim ownership
over them.

Published by the Department of Education

Secretary: Leonor Magtolis Briones
Undersecretary: Diosdado M. San Antonio

Development Team of the Module

Writers: ​Neofidel Ignacio B. Ramirez, Gener C. Irinco, Michael S. Bernal,
Paciano B. Ferrer, Nastasia V. Besin, Jessie De Vera

Editor: ​Amalia C. Solis, Education Program Supervisor

Reviewers: ​Michael S. Bernal, Paciano B. Ferrer, Gener C. Irinco,
Nastasia V. Besin, Ernie Ronel Tirol Mabahague (Content)
Laira Janelle C. Apurillo (Language)

Illustrator:
Layout Artist:
 Management Team: ​Malcolm S. Garma, Regional Director
Genia V. Santos, CLMD Chief
Dennis M. Mendoza, EPS In Charge of LRMS
Regional ADM Coordinator
Maria Magdalena M. Lim, CESO V Schools Division Superintendent
Aida H. Rondilla, CID Chief
Lucky S. Carpio, EPS In Charge of LRMS

Printed in the Philippines by ________________________

Department of Education – National Capital Region

Office Address: ____________________________________________

____________________________________________
Telefax: ____________________________________________ E-mail
Address: ____________________________________________

11

Introduction to 
the Philosophy 
of the Human 
Person  
Quarter 1 – Module 2.2  
Methods of Philosophizing

Introductory Message  
For the facilitator:  
Welcome to the ​Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person ​Alternative 
Delivery Mode (ADM) Module on ​Methods of Philosophizing  
This  module  was  collaboratively  designed,  developed  and  reviewed  by  educators 
both  from  public  and  private  institutions  to  assist  you,  the  teacher  or facilitator in 
helping  the  learners  meet  the  standards  set  by  the  K  to  12  Curriculum  while 
overcoming their personal, social, and economic constraints in schooling.   
This  learning  resource  hopes  to  engage  the  learners  into  guided  and  independent 
learning  activities  at  their  own  pace  and  time.  Furthermore,  this  also  aims  to  help 
learners  acquire  the  needed  21st century skills while taking into consideration their 
needs and circumstances.  
In addition to the material in the main text, you will also see this box in the body of 
the module:  
  
Notes to the Teacher  
This contains helpful tips or strategies that   
will help you in guiding the learners. 

As  a  facilitator  you  are  expected  to  orient  the  learners  on  how  to  use  this  module. 
You  also  need  to  keep  track of the learners' progress while allowing them to manage 
their  own  learning.  Furthermore,  you  are  expected  to  encourage  and  assist  the 
learners as they do the tasks included in the module.   

4
For the learner:  
Welcome to the Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Alternative 
Delivery Mode (ADM) Module on ​Methods of Philosophizing​!  
The  hand  is  one  of  the  most  symbolized  part  of  the  human  body.  It is often used to 
depict  skill,  action  and  purpose.  Through  our  hands  we  may  learn,  create  and 
accomplish. Hence, the hand in this learning resource signifies that you as a learner 
is  capable  and  empowered  to  successfully  achieve  the  relevant  competencies  and 
skills at your own pace and time. Your academic success lies in your own hands!  
This  module  was  designed  to  provide you with fun and meaningful opportunities for 
guided  and  independent  learning  at  your  own pace and time. You will be enabled to 
process the contents of the learning resource while being an active learner.  
This module has the following parts and corresponding icons:  

What I Need to Know ​This will give you an idea of the skills or 
competencies you are expected to learn in 
the   
module.   
 What I Know This
​ part includes an activity that aims to check what 
you already know about the   
lesson to take. If you get all the answers   
correct (100%), you may decide to skip this   
module.   
What’s In This
​ is a brief drill or review to help you link the current 
lesson with the previous one.  

What’s New In
​ this portion, the new lesson will be introduced to you in 
various ways such as a   
story, a song, a poem, a problem opener, an   
activity or a situation.  
What is It This
​ section provides a brief discussion of the lesson. This 
aims to help you discover and   
understand new concepts and skills.  
What’s More This
​ comprises activities for independent practice to 
solidify your understanding and   
skills of the topic. You may check the   
answers to the exercises using the Answer   
Key at the end of the module.  
What I Have Learned ​This includes questions or blank 
sentence/paragraph to be filled in to process   
what you learned from the lesson.  
What I Can Do ​This section provides an activity which will help you 
transfer your new knowledge or skill   
into real life situations or concerns. 

Assessment ​This is a task which aims to evaluate your level of mastery 

in achieving the learning   
competency.   
Additional Activities In
​ this portion, another activity will be given to 
you to enrich your knowledge or skill of the   
lesson learned. This also tends retention of   
learned concepts.  
Answer Key ​This contains answers to all activities in the module.  

At the end of this module you will also find:  

 References T​ his is a list of all sources used in developing this module. 

The following are some reminders in using this module:  

1. Use the module with care. Do not put unnecessary mark/s on any part of the 
module. Use a separate sheet of paper in answering the exercises. 2. Don’t forget 
to answer ​What I Know ​before moving on to the other activities included in the 
module.  
3. Read the instruction carefully before doing each task.  
4. Observe honesty and integrity in doing the tasks and checking your answers. 
5. Finish the task at hand before proceeding to the next.  
6. Return this module to your teacher/facilitator once you are through with it.  
If  you  encounter  any  difficulty  in  answering  the  tasks  in  this  module,  do  not 
hesitate  to  consult  your  teacher  or  facilitator.  Always  bear  in  mind  that  you  are 
not alone.  
We hope that through this material, you will experience meaningful learning and 
gain deep understanding of the relevant competencies. You can do it!  

What I Need to Know  

This  module  was  designed  and  written  with  you  in  mind.  It  is  here  to  help  you  in 
internalizing  the  methods  of  philosophizing  starting  with  the  dialectic  method,  the 
pragmatic  method,  and  the  phenomenological  method.  The  scope  of  this  module 
equips  you  with  skills  in  philosophical  reasoning  and  critical  analysis  of  situations 
you encounter in your daily life leading to acquiring wisdom. Moreover, the module  
also  orients  you  into  distinguishing  erroneous  or wrong reasoning. We acknowledge 
that  language  should  be  diverse  to  meet  the  vocabulary  level  of  students  including 
yourself.  However,  since  philosophy  is  a  mental  subject,  we  employ  some 
vocabularies  for  you  to  be  familiarized  with  philosophical  terms  which  could  be 
useful  in  your  interaction  with  people.  The  lessons  are  arranged  to  follow  the 
standard sequence of the course.  
The module is divided into two lessons, namely:  
∙ ​Lesson 1- Methods of Philosophizing  
∙ ​Lesson 2– Different Fallacies  

MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING COMPETENCIES  

1. Distinguish opinion from truth;   
2. Realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and truth 
After going through this module, you are expected to:  
1. Explore some of the methods of philosophizing that philosophers employed. 
2. Identify and give examples of different fallacies.  
3. Evaluate truth from opinions in different situations using the methods of 
philosophizing​. 

What I Know  
Select the keyword that best fits the statement in each item. Write the chosen letter 
on a separate sheet of paper.  
1. Which fallacy literally means hitting the person below the belt instead of 
focusing on the issue at hand?  
a. mora licensing  
b. equivocation  
c. argumentum ad baculum  
d. ad hominem   
2. According to Husserl, the success of natural science lead to the gradual 
scientific rejection of__________.   
a. spirit  
 b. matter  
c. nature  
d. existence   
3. Who institutionalized the pragmatic method of philosophizing? 
a. John Dewey  
b. Socrates   
c. Ludwig Wittgenstein  
d. George Hegel  
4. What is Husserl’s point of view with regards to consciousness? a. The 
study of consciousness is the same as the study of nature b. The 
study of human consciousness differs from the way scientists study 
nature.  
c. It does not matter whether we study consciousness similarly or 
differently than the way scientists study nature.  
d. Husserl was not interested in the study of consciousness.  
5. This fallacy is committed when one reaches a generalization based on 
insufficient evidence.   
a. ad misericordiam  
b. false analogy  
c. hasty generalization  
d. post hoc 

8
6. Which among these headlines presented information that are fair, objective, 
and moderate?  
a. It’s time to consider other means of cash aid distribution  
b. Other countries around the world have much better means in cash 
aid distribution   
c. Government vows to faster distribution of coronavirus aid d. We can 
also learn lesson from Vietnam how they distribute their cash aid  
7. Which among these headlines has no errors in terms of spelling, grammar, 
and content?   
a. Robredo Chides Government for Unclear Communication on New 
Quarantine Rules   
b. Robredo Blames the Government as They Don’t Have Clear Rules in 
Quarantine  
c. Robredo Charge the Government as Culprit of Confusion in Quarantine 
d. Robredo blames those in Executive Branch for Communication’s 
Unclear  
8. Which among the following statements contain substantiated 
generalizations?  
a. “Drug war a massive failure”—Robredo  
b. Robredo lies to world, shames the nation and herself in UN message 
c. The real albatross on Leni Robredo’s neck  
 d. Let Leni plan on her own drug war  
9. Which among the following authors could be the most credible according to 
his or her Twitter account’s background?   
a. Banat By – ​Simpleng tao na mahilig bumanat  
b. Atom Araullo- Journalist. @ UNHCPPh Goodwill Ambassador c. 
AkoNgaSY Lyco- Speak now or be silent forever. Follow me I will not 
follow you  
d. Senyora- Full time haciendera and professional husgadera  
10.Which among the following publishers pose no particular agenda or 
bias? a. Bulag Ang ABS-CBN sa Katotohanan by Antonio Brigas  
b. ABS-CBN Naipasara Sanhi ng Di Pagrenew ng Prangkisa by GMA 
News  
c. Nararapat Lamang na Huwag ng Magbukas ang ABS-CBN by Balat 
Sibuyas   
d. Bye Bye Kapamilya by the Avengers 

Lesso Methods of Philosophizing 

n​ ​1 
Truth  is  one  of  the  significant  lessons  in  philosophy.  It  has  been  a  topic  of 
discussion  in  its  own  right  for  many  years.  Moreover,  its  value  and  influence  to 
man’s life cannot be denied.  

What’s In  
ACTIVITY: Unscramble Letters ​(Critical Thinking)  
Directions: Unscramble the following letters to identify the concept being described.  
UNSCARMBLED LETTERS   DESCRIPTION   ANSWER: 
LWKEDNGO It  is  a  mental  grasp  of  reality  reached   
either  by  perceptual  observation  or  by  a 
process  of  reason  based  on  perceptual 
 observation. 
EGLYEIOSPTMO This  is  a  science  devoted  to  the  discovery   
of  the  proper  method  of  acquiring  and 
validating knowledge. 
NCPTEOC It is an abstract or generic idea generalized   
from particular instances. 
RUTHT This knowledge is validated which means   
that it is highly based on the facts of 
reality. 
NTGRUAEM It  is  a  group  of  statements,  one  or more of   
which  (the  premises)  is  claimed  to  provide 
support  for,  or  reason  to  believe one of the 
others (the conclusion) 

Notes to the Teacher  

The  teacher  should  give  a  hint  that  methods  of  philosophizing  would 
equip  them  with  knowledge  and  skills  in  acquiring  wisdom  and  truth. 
Unlike  science,  which  uses  observations  through  experiments  in 
proving  a  theory,  philosophy  utilizes  “​pure reasoning”​   to  investigate  a 
certain reality or phenomenon to arrive at a certain truth. 

10

What’s New  
ACTIVITY: Comic Strip ​(Critical Thinking, Communication, Character) 
Directions: Analyze the comic strip and answer the following questions.  

Source: ​https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1513293938691384&type=3 
1. Look at the comic strip. Do you agree with the reasoning of the person inside 
the car? Why or why not?  
___________________________________________________________________________ 
 ___________________________________________________________________________ 
___________________________________________________________________________  
2. If you are the biker, how would you react to the remarks of the person inside 
the car?   
___________________________________________________________________________ 
___________________________________________________________________________ 
___________________________________________________________________________  

What is It  
Philosophers  generally  believe that reason is the road to wisdom. However they have 
different  interpretations  of  what  reason  consists  of  and  some  philosophers  even 
challenge the pre-eminence of reason in the pursuit of wisdom.  
I. METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING   

Here,  we  are  going  to  explore  some  of  the  methods  of  philosophizing  that 
philosophers  employ.  According  to  Wilber  (2006)  Think  of  wisdom  as the summit of 
the  mountain  with  different  paths  to  get  there.  We  are  going  to  study  the  different 
paths to wisdom the philosophers offer.  

11
1. The dialectic method   called the good   
This method of philosophizing was 
conceived by the Greek philosopher 
Socrates, (born 470 BCE) one of the 
great philosophers of the ancient world. 
Unfortunately, he did not leave any 
written words and everything people 
know about him came from the 
Dialogues written by his famous 
student, Plato.   SOCRATES  

Socrates’ aim was to achieve what he 

life  which  is  based  on  the  proper  care  of  one’s  soul  (psyche  in  Greek).  The 
soul,  according  to  Socrates,  can  be  properly  taken  care  of  if  we  make  it  as 
good  as  possible (Stumpf 2008). Since by its very nature the soul’s activity is 
to  know,  the  soul  can  only  be  good  if  we employ it in the activity of having a 
clear  awareness of the meaning of some words (Stumpf 2008). When we have 
a  clear  awareness  of  what  justice  is,  we  harm  our  soul  if  we  act  contrary  to 
what we know, like harming others (which is the opposite of being just).  

However, how can we achieve a clear understanding of words? We can 

achieve this by an act of “disciplined conversation” (Stumpf 2008) which 
Socrates compared to an intellectual midwife. Socrates called this method 
dialectic. The method appears simple but anyone subjected by 
Socrates to this method eventually felt its intense rigor.   
The method starts with eliciting the definition of a   
certain word from a person who appears to be   
familiar (or “pretends” to be familiar) with its   
meaning. Socrates then points out the   
imperfections of the understanding of the person   
through a series of questions. What Socrates desires  
is for the person to realize his ignorance and   
correcting his own mistakes and 
GEORGE HEGEL  arriving at a complete knowledge of   
contradictions, and thereby 
the true meaning of the word.  
The method, however, does not sit well with the ruling elites of Athens (the 
city where Socrates lived). They accused him of not worshiping the Greek 
gods   

12
and  corrupting  the  youth.  His  defense  (which  was  dramatically  recorded  in 
Plato’s  dialogue  the  Apology)  was  a  model  of  “forceful  argument”  (Stumpf 
2008)  but  it  fell  on  deaf  ears.  In  the  end,  he  was  forced  to  drink  poison. 
Socrates was the first philosopher to die fighting for truth.   
The  Socratic  Method  was  modernized  and  treated  in  a  different  way  by 
George  Wilhelm  Hegel,  a  German  philosopher.  Hegel  was  an  idealist.  He 
believed  that  the ideas of the human minds have access of what the world is 
like.  People  are  social  beings  and  could  be  completely  influenced  by  other 
people’s  ideas.  An  individual’s  mind  is  influenced  by  means  of  a  common 
language,  customs  of  one’s  society,  and  the  cultural  institutions  that  one 
belongs  to.  Hegel  refers  this  to  “Spirit”  as  the  collective  consciousness  of  a 
society which is responsible for honing one’s consciousness and ideas.  

Hegel  also  believed  that  the  Spirit  is  constantly  changing  and  evolving. 
According  to  Hegel,  the  spirit  changes  through  dialectic.  First,  there  is  an 
 idea  about  the  world  (much like a thesis), which has a natural characteristic 
of having errors which give rise to the antithesis.   
The  thesis  and  antithesis  can  be  eventually  resolved  by  creating a synthesis 
which  is  a  new  idea  comprised  of  the  essentials  of  both  the  thesis  and  the 
antithesis.  
To  Hegel,  society  and  culture  follow  this  design,  and  one  could  understand 
all  of  human  history  without  the  use  of  logic  or  empirical  data  simply  by 
using logic (Klein, 2013). 

 
13
2. The Pragmatic Method  
Hundreds  of  years  after  the  death  of  Socrates,  a  new  philosophy  emerged  as 
inspired  by  the  idea  of  change  initiated by the evolutionary thoughts of Hegel 
and  Darwin  in  19th​   ​century  America.  This  philosophy  became  known  as 
pragmatism.  It  was  started  by  Charles  S.  Pierce  (1839-1914),  popularized  by 
William  James  (1842-1910)  and  institutionalized  in  American  culture  by 
John Dewey (1859-1952).   

We will explore this briefly to complete the methods since   

a thorough presentation of this theory was already   
provided in module 2.1.  
According to the pragmatists, philosophy seems to offer   
a set of beliefs about human beings and his relationship   
to the world. Pragmatists offer no such beliefs. Rather,   
they seek to make philosophy relevant by solving real life   
JOHN DEWEY ​substance.   method and not of  
problems. It is purely a philosophy of 
 What  pragmatism  aims  is  to  test  the  dogma  of  science,  religion  and 
philosophy  by  determining  their  practical  results.  The  pragmatic  test  is:  if  I 
practice  this  belief,  will  it  bring  success  or  failure?  Will  I  solve  problems  or 
create  problems?  Successful  experience  is  the  verification  process  of  truth 
for the pragmatists (Stumpf 2008).   

3. The Phenomenological Method  

The phenomenological method was 
conceived by   
Edmund Husserl (born in 1859), one of 
the greatest   
intellects of of the 19th​ ​century. His 
ideas and   
method influenced the thoughts of some 
of the 20th​   
century philosophical giants: Martin 
Heidegger,   
Jean-Paul Sartre, and Maurice Merleau-Ponty   
among others.  
EDMUND HUSSERL 
What prompted Husserl to develop phenomenology? To answer this, we have 
to look back at Husserl’s time and place: the 19th​ ​century Europe. At that 
time,   

14
science  was  on  the  ascendancy  prompted  by  the  great  discoveries  of  Galileo, 
Newton,  and  Darwin  among  others.  Husserl  himself  was  impressed  by  the 
achievements  of  science.  Unfortunately,  according  to  Husserl,  science  brings 
a  certain  attitude  which  is  counterproductive  to  the  human  soul:  the 
naturalistic attitude (or simply naturalism).  

Naturalism  in  this  context  is  the  idea  that  everything  can  be  explained  in 
terms  of  matter  or  the  physical. Since man is not only physical (i.e. body) but 
also  spiritual,  this  naturalistic  attitude  brings  a  distorted  view  of  man  by 
banishing  the  spiritual  from  the  world  which  includes  the  banishment  of 
ideas, values, and cultures (Husserl, 1965).  
 To  counter  the  naturalistic  tendency,  Husserl  returned  to  the  idea  of  the 
thinking  self  which  was  given  preeminence  by  the  17th​   ​century  French 
philosopher,  Rene  Descartes.  More  specifically,  the  layman’s  term  given  to 
the thinking self is “one’s immediate experience.”  

Husserl’s  main  purpose  was  to  build  a  philosophy  free  from  any  biases  or 
preconceived  ideas.  One  can  only  do  this  if  one  returns  to  immediate 
experience.  Husserl  said  that  he  was  only  looking  to  “things  and  facts 
themselves,  as  these  are  given  in  actual  experience  and intuition” (quoted by 
Stumpf  2008).  This  experience  is  not  the  objective  world  of  science  separate 
from us, but the world as it appears to us or (borrowing the term of the 18th​   
century German philosopher Immanuel Kant) the phenomenal world - hence, 
the term phenomenology.   

However,  our  beliefs  about  human  beings  and  the  world  prevent  us  from 
seeing  clearly  this  immediate  experience  which  he  calls  “pure  subjectivity”. 
Thus,  to  know  the  truth,  we  have  to  put  aside  one  by  one  all  our  limiting 
beliefs  about  the  world  which  represents  our  biases.  Husserl  calls  this 
process  phenomenological  ​epoche ​(epoche is the Greek word for bracketing). 
Bracketing  is  not  ignoring.  It  is  an  act  of  stepping  back  at  our  biases  and 
prejudices  to  make  sure  that  they  do  not  influence  the  way  we  think.  Only 
facts provided by immediate experience must influence us. 

15
4. The Primary and Secondary reflections  
Another influential intellectual movement which had its roots in the 19th​  
century ideas of Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) and Friedrich Nietzsche 
(1844-1900) was existentialism.  

Kierkegaard’s ideas were in part a reaction against the overly ambitious 

system building the philosophy of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 
(1770-1831). On the other hand, Nietzsche’s ideas were a 
reaction   
against the religious and rational value system still   
prevalent in 19th​ ​century Europe (Stumpf 2008).   
While Kierkegaard was religious and Nietzsche was   
 atheistic (atheism is the denial of the supernatural),   
they both grounded their philosophy on the personal   
choices of the individual which becomes one of the   
important tenets of existentialism.  
In the 20th​ ​century, Jean-Paul Sartre 
GABRIEL MARCEL  (1905-1980)   
and  his  partner,  Simone  de  Beauvoir  (1908-1986)  popularized  atheistic 
existentialism  while  Gabriel  Marcel  (1889-1973)  and  Karl  Jaspers 
(1883-1969)  promoted  religious  existentialism.  Religious  existentialists  saw 
certain  parallels  between  existential  ideas  and  religious  themes  like  the  fall 
of  Adam  and  Eve  which  can  be  compared  to  the  theme  of  inauthentic 
existence in existentialist philosophy (Stumpf 2008).  
After  that  brief  overview  on  existentialism,  let  us  focus  our  attention  on  one 
existentialist  method  identified  by  Gabriel  Marcel:  the  ​primary/secondary 
reflection.  

For  Marcel,  reflection  is  not  just  a  disinterested  look  at  experience.  It 
emerged  when  something  valuable  is  at  stake.  Marcel  gave  an  example  of  a 
watch.  Suppose  you  try  to  take  a  watch  from  your  pocket. To your surprise, 
the  watch  that  you  expect  to  be  there  is  not  there.  A  break  from  your 
ordinary  routine  happened.  From  this  break,  reflection  appears  in  the  form 
of  a  question:  Where  is  my  watch?  Then,  a  host  of  questions,  connected  to 
the  first  one,  followed:  Where  was  the  last  time  I’ve  seen  my  watch?  Was 
there  a  hole  in  my  pocket?  You  try  to  retrace  your  steps  from  this  moment 
back to the time when you last saw your watch.  

16
From this example, you will see that reflection arise when there is a 
disruption from your normal routine and when something valuable is at 
stake. Then, Marcel identified two levels of reflection: primary reflection and 
secondary reflection. Marcel applied these two levels of reflection to the most 
fundamental question: Who am I?  

Nowadays,  we  try  to  answer  this  question  by  filling  up  a  form  given  by  our 
school  for  example.  The  form  asked  us  to  write  our  name,  age,  gender, 
address,  name  of  parents,  etc.  To  answer  this,  of  course  we  have  to  think  to 
distinguish  who we are (the self) against other things (the non-self or objects). 
This is the primary reflection.  
 Yet,  we  had  an  uneasy  feeling  that  all  the  information  we  put  on  the  form 
(although  true)  do  not  fully  capture  who  we really are (Marcel 1970). We view 
that  our  self  is  bigger  and  more  expansive  than  what  is  there  on  the  form. 
Thus, we are not merely thinking but we are thinking about thinking and  
about the process we perform in answering the form. This is the secondary 
reflection.   

The  result  of  secondary  reflection  is  a  more  expansive  view  of  the self until it 
embraces  the  world.  Thus,  the  separation  of  the  self  and  the  world  brought 
about by primary reflection were united by the secondary reflection.  

5. The Analytic Method  

Another reaction to the Hegelian system 
building   
philosophy is the analytic approach initiated 
by   
philosophers at Cambridge University 
(England):   
George Edward Moore (1873-1958), Bertrand 
Russell   
(1872-1970) and Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951).  
The task of analytic approach is not to create another   
system of ideas to counter the Hegelian system but   
LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN 
to clarify how philosophers used 
words through an   
analysis  of  language  (Stumpf  2008).  As  quoted  by  Stumpf,  Wittgenstein  said 
that  ‘the  object  of  philosophy  is  the  logical  clarification  of  thought’  so  that 
‘the  result  of  philosophy  is  not  a  number  of  philosophical  propositions,  but 
to   

17
make  propositions  clear”. Analytic philosophers employed various methods of 
linguistic  analysis  such  as  the  principle  of  verification  and  logical  analysis 
(Rudolf Carnap). What we are going to use is the method of Wittgenstein.  

We  can  divide Wittgenstein’s philosophy in to the earlier Wittgenstein and the 

latter  (or  the  new)  Wittgenstein.  The  earlier  Wittgenstein  followed  the  idea  of 
his  mentor  and  close  friend  Bertrand  Russell  who  view  language  in  only  one 
way:  stating  facts.  Wittgenstein’s  first  book  (the  only  one  published  during 
his lifetime) Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1919) reflected this idea.   
 However  he  soon  realized  that  words  had  multiple  functions  depending  on 
the  context  to  which  it  occurs.  Wittgenstein  used  the  analogy  of  “tools  in  a 
tool  box” (Wittgenstein 1968). If we look at the tools inside a tool box ‘there is 
a  hammer,  pliers,  a  saw,  a  screw  driver,  a  ruler,  a  glue  pot,  glue  nails  and 
screw.  The  functions  of  words  is  as  diverse  as the functions of these objects’ 
(quoted by Stumpf 2008).  

What  Wittgenstein  wants  is  to  analyze  language  in  the  way  actual  people 
used  it  in  ordinary  situations  and  not  to  construct  an  ideal  language  based 
on logic and mathematics like what Russell seems to be doing.  

To  analyze  language,  we  have  to  realize that it follows rules. If there are rules 

in  every  aspect  of  life,  there  are  certainly  rules  on  how  we  put  together  and 
communicate  words.  Wittgenstein  believed  that  these  rules  are  like  the  rules 
of  games  (Wittgenstein  1968)-language  games.  For  example,  the  usage  of 
words  like  “demand”,  “supply”,  “money”,  “price”  in  the  context  of  economics 
differ  from  its  usage  in  everyday  life.  These  are  technical  words  and  they 
follow  certain rules (i.e. the language game) within that discipline that affects 
the way these words are used.  

18

Lesso DIFFERENT FALLACIES 

n​ ​2 
You  have  just  learned  that  it  is  not  enough  to  acquire  knowledge  but  you 
should  analyze  if  that  knowledge  you  have  acquired  is  truthful  or  not. 
Philosophizing  involves  the  gift  of  speech  and  the  gift  of  intelligence that enable us 
to  reason  out  and  detect  the  falsity  or  truthfulness  of  a  statement.  When  one 
reasons out, he/she  
expresses  his  opinion  and  when  others  disagree,  then  argument  begins.  In 
philosophical  parlance  ​argument  i​ s  not  an  emotional  reptilian  word  war  or  a 
territorial  show  of force between persons but a philosophical method in knowing the 
truth  of  a  certain  phenomenon  or  reality.  It  is  a  set  of  statements  which  includes 
the  premises  and  conclusion  (the  latter  is  the  one  that  claims  the  truth  of  the 
premises) (Cornejo & Ebia, 2017).   
However,  there  are  arguments  that  are  erroneous  or  based  from  faulty 
reasoning  called  ​Fallacies (​ Abella,  2016).  Unconsciously,  we  are  culprits  of  this  in 
our  daily  interaction  with  people  including  our  families  and  friends.  Even  TV 
commercials  intentionally  employ  some  faulty  reasoning  to  convince  their  target 
market  to  purchase  their  products.  Lawyers  outwit  each  other  by  employing  some 
fallacies  to  defend  their clients. I am sure you are familiar with the famous “Flip Top 
Battles”  group  in  today’s  digital  world.  Shall  we  say  a  modern  dialectical  approach 
which  appeal  not  only  to  the  mind  but  also  to  our  aesthetic  sense?  They  entertain 
audience  and  it  is  awesome  how  they  display  their  wit  to  outsmart  each  other  in  a 
poetic  manner.  It  becomes  an  art  and  aesthetically  superb,  but  if  you  go  beyond 
entertainment  and  analyze  their  statements  there  are a lot of faulty reasoning going 
on.  Below  are  some  of  the  Fallacies  which  we  believe  you  need  to  be  aware  of. 
Abella,  Roberto  D.  in  his  book  “Introduction  to  the  Philosophy  of  the  Human 
Person” laid down some of these fallacies: 

19
FALLACY   Short Description   Examples 
1.Argumentum ad  Hominem ​came  from  Latin  word  “​How  can  we believe 
Hominem   “homo”  which  means  man.  This  him  when  he  talks 
“Attacking the  fallacy  literally  means  hitting  about  social 
Person”  the  person  below  the  belt  distancing,  he  is  a 
instead of  focusing on the issue  lawyer who is a liar.” 
at hand.  
2. Argumentum ad  Baculum i​ s  a  Latin  word  which  “​TV Patrol is the best 
Baculum   means  scepter  or  stick.  A  news program on TV. If 
(Appeal to Force)  scepter  is  a  symbol  of  you don’t believe me,  
I
authority.  Normally  it  is  the  won’t  let  you  watch 
Pope  who  carries  it  in  his  the TV.  
hands.  This  is  committed  when 
a  person uses threat or force to 
advance an argument. 
3. Argumentum ad  Misercordiam c​ ame  from  Latin  “Forgive  me  officer, 
Misercordiam   word  ​Misericordia ​which  means  there  are  lot  of 
(Appeal to Pity)  pity  or  compassion.  A  person  boarders  in  this 
uses  emotion  such  as  pity  to  apartment  including 
convince someone  myself. Only the owner 
was  issued  a 
quarantine  pass. We 
don’t  have  food, we 
can’t give our  ATM to 
the owner. That’s  why 
I went out. So  
I did not 
violate the  Bayanihan 
Act Heal as One.” 
4. Argumentum ad  Populum ​is  the  Latin  word  for  “I’m sure you want to 
Populum   people.  Most  of  TV  commercials  have  an  i  phone. 
“Appeal to people”/  are  guilty  of  this  argument  Almost  80% of your 
Bandwagon fallacy  which  exploit  people’s  vanity,  schoolmates  are using 
desires, etc.  it.” 
5. Argumentum ad  Traditio  ​means  tradition.  All of us in the family, 
Tradition    Advancing  an  idea  since  it  has  from our ancestors up 
“Appeal to Tradition”  been practice for a long time.  to  now,  are  devout 
Catholics, so it is only 
right that you will be 
baptized as a Catholic.  
6. Argumentum and  I​gnorantiam  a​   Latin  word  for  According  to  Zecharia 
Ignorantiam   ignorance.  Whatever  has  been  Sitchin,  the  author  of 
“Appeal to Ignorance”  proven  false  must  be  true  and  the  book  “Cosmic 
vice versa  Code,  “Adam was the 
first  test  tube baby. 
Since  nobody  proves 
otherwise,  therefore it 
is true.” 
7. Petitio Principii   According to Merriam Webster’s  “God exists because 
(Begging the  dictionary (​www.merriam-  the Bible says so. The 
Question)  Bible  

20
 webster.com>dictionary>petitio is inspired. Therefore 
pr​ i​ ncipii​)   we know that God  
,  it  is  a  fallacy  in  which  a  Exists.” 
conclusion  is  taken  for  granted 
in  the  premises.  Also 
called-“circular argument.” 
8. Hasty    This  fallacy  is  committed  when  Our neighbor who is a 
Generalization  one  reaches  a  generalization  police  officer  was 
based on insufficient evidence  convicted  of  being  a 
drug  dealer, therefore, 
all  police officers are 
drug dealers.  
9. Cause and Effect   Assuming that the effect is  “My teacher didn’t  
related to a cause because both  collect the 
events occur one after the  homework two 
other.  weeks in a row  
when my friend 
was absent. 
Therefore, my 
friend being absent 
is the reason why 
my  
teacher doesn’t 
collect the 
homework.” 
10. Fallacy of  Infers that something is true of  “You are a doctor,  
Composition  a part, is true of a whole  therefore you came 
from a family of 
doctors.” 
11. Fallacy of  Infers  that  something  is  true  of  “Your family is 
Division   the  whole,  must  also  be  true on  smart, therefore 
its parts  you are  
smart.”  
12. Fallacy of  Using the same term in a  “Humans walk by 
Equivocation  different situation with  their legs. The table 
different meaning.   has legs. Therefore 
the table  
walks by its legs.” 

FACTS VERSUS OPINION: FOCUS ON INFORMATION LITERACY T​ oday's students, 

many of whom do most of their research online, are able to access a nearly limitless 
supply of information -- much of it came from unknown sources. In fact, the very 
nature of the medium allows anyone with an Internet provider and a small amount 
of skill to disseminate whatever information he or she chooses. The result is a 
World Wide Web of overflowing information, on the other hand, it also contains 
inadvertent ignorance and blatant biases.  

A. IDENTIFYING THE FACTORS OF A QUALITY WEBSITE 

21
Michigan State University reference librarian Terry Link suggests examining the 
following factors when evaluating the quality of a Web site:  
∙ ​Authority: ​Who is the author and what are his or her qualifications? Who is the 
publisher and what is the purpose of the site?  
∙ ​Verifiability: ​Are sources provided?  

∙ ​Timeliness: ​Is the information current? When was it posted and/or last updated?  

∙ ​Relevance: ​Does the material contain unsubstantiated generalizations? ​∙ ​Bias: ​Is 

the language emotional or inflammatory? Does the information represent a single 
opinion or a range of opinions?  
∙ ​Orderliness: ​Is the page arranged in an order that makes sense? Are underlying 
assumptions identifiable? Is the information consistent?  
∙ ​Clarity: ​Is the information clearly stated? Does the author define important 
terms?  
∙ ​Validity: ​Do the facts presented support the conclusions?  

Likewise, when we critique sources, we must first understand the difference 

between ​ ​fact and opinion.  
FACT   OPINION 
A fact is a statement that can be  An  opinion  is  a  statement  of  belief 
proven ​ ​true or false.  which   ​may  or  may  not  be  backed  up 
by facts,  ​but cannot be proven true or 
false. 
Is objective   Is subjective 
Is discovered   Is created 
States reality   Interprets reality 
Can be verified   Cannot be verified 

B. THE EVALUATION PROCESS  

In  considering the kinds of sources or sites, ​Robert Harris, a professor of English  
 at  Southern  California  College  ​suggests  that  students  should  ask  themselves, 
"Which  sources  are  likely  to  be  fair,  objective,  lacking  hidden  motives,  showing 
quality  control?"  Harris  recommends  selecting  sites  that  include  as  many  of  the 
following as possible:  
∙ ​the author's name, title, and/or position.  
∙ ​the site's organizational affiliation, if any.  

∙ ​the date the page was created or updated. 

22
∙​ contact information, such as an email or snail-mail address. Once 
students have located sources that ​appear a​ ppropriate and credible, Harris advises 
students to subject the sites to the ​CARS ​checklist for informational quality. The 
four components of the CARS checklist are:  
∙ ​C​redibility: What about this source makes it believable?  

∙ ​A​ccuracy: Is the information provided up-to-date, factual, detailed, exact, and 

comprehensive?  
∙ ​R​easonableness: Is the information fair, objective, moderate, and consistent? ​∙
S​upport: Can the information be corroborated?  

C. HOW DO I KNOW?  
Harris suggests that, when evaluating those four components, students examine the 
sites based on the following:  
∙ ​Type  ​--  determine  whether  the  URL  includes  .gov  (government),  .edu  or  .ac 
(educational/academic),  .com  (commercial),  .org  (nonprofit  organization),  or.  ~ 
(personal page).  
∙ ​Publisher ​-- determine whether the organization, agency, school, business, or 
individual maintaining the site is likely to have a particular agenda or bias. ​∙ ​Author 
-- determine the author's education, training, and background to find out whether 
he or she is a trained expert, an experienced enthusiast, or an uninformed 
observer.  
∙ ​Structure ​-- determine whether the format is clear, logical, and easily navigable. ​∙
Language ​-- determine whether the text contains emotional, inflammatory, 
profane, or confusing language. Count the number of spelling, grammatical, and 
typographical errors. Too many mistakes can indicate carelessness and suggest 
informational errors as well.  
∙ ​Dates ​-- determine when the information was published and/or updated. If 
possible, check the publication dates of supporting data.  
∙ ​Graphics  ​--  determine whether images and animations take up a  disproportionate 
amount  of  space  in  relation  to  their  informational  value.  Decide  whether  the 
 graphics  convey  information,  add  interest,  provide  interactivity,  or  simply 
distract.  
∙ ​Links ​-- determine whether the site's bibliography and/or links contain both 
supportive and contradictory information. 

23

What’s More  
ACTIVITY 1: FACT VS. OPINION ​(Critical Thinking)  
Directions: Analyze the following statements. Write F if it is FACT and O if it is 
OPINION. Write your answer before the number.   
1. According to the latest survey, families are purchasing more household items on 
credit.   
2. You can hear all the news you need to know from the BBC Radio 1 news team. 3. 
The professor argues that the effect of carbon emissions on the surrounding 
environment will only get worse.   
4. The research team has discovered a new method for conducting this chemical 
analysis.   
5. The latest poll shows a marked increase in employee dissatisfaction. 
6. I think public opinion will change over time.   
7. This book is an enjoyable story of life in a small village.   
8. The use of computers at the college has increased and the stationery budget has 
doubled in the last few years.  

ACTIVITY 2: I-BILIB ​(Critical Thinking, Communication,)  

Directions:  Analyze  the  following  pictures.  Write  ​BILIB  ​if  the  picture followed CARS 
(Credibility,  Accuracy,  Reasonableness,  and  Supported)  and  write  ​NOT  ​if  it  did  not 
follow CARS according to Robert Harris. Afterwards, explain your answer.   
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
 __________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________

24

__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________

_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________

ACTIVITY 3: LET’S APPLY ​(Critical Thinking, Character)  

Directions:  Fill  in  the  table  below  with  the  main  proponents  of  methods  of 
philosophizing.  For  each  method,  answer  the  questions:  “​How can you find truth 
using  this  method?”  a​ nd  ​“On what real-life situation can you apply this 
method?”  
Methods of    Main    How can you  On what 
Philosophizing  Proponent(s)  find truth  real-life 
using this  situation can 
method?  you apply this   
method? 

25
 1. Dialectic       

2. Pragmatic       

3. Phenomenological       

4. Primary and         
Secondary   
Reflections 

5. Analytic       

What I Have Learned  

ACTIVITY: IMPORTANT POINTS TO PONDER   
(Critical Thinking, Character, Communication)  
Direction: Complete the statements below:   
I learned that Truth is_______________________________________________________ 
__________________________________________________________________________________ 
__________________________________________________________________________________  
I feel that Truth is important because________________________________________ 
__________________________________________________________________________________ 
__________________________________________________________________________________  
I  commit  to uphold the truth by __________________________________________________ 
__________________________________________________________________________________ 
__________________________________________________________________________________ 

26
 What I Can Do  
ACTIVITY 1: WIN AN ARGUMENT ​(Communication, Critical Thinking, Character, 
Collaboration)  
Directions: By using the graphic organizer of dialectic method below, answer the 
question: ​How do you criticize someone’s opinion/argument in a way that makes 
sense and is respectful? T​ ry to talk or interview two persons that have contrasting 
idea about the question, then write your own synthesis to their answers.   

ANTI ​
THESIS THESIS

SYNTHESIS

27
ACTIVITY 2: COMIC CON   
(Critical Thinking, Character, Communication, Creativity)  
Directions: Draw a comic strip that portrays ONE type of fallacy. Explain your work.   
     

     

Explanation:_______________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________

28

Assessment  
Select the keyword that best fits the statement in each item. Write the chosen letter 
on a separate sheet of paper.  
1. What type of fallacy is present in the statement, “Before we begin the debate, 
everyone here should know that my opponent is a convicted felon”? a. mora 
licensing  
b. equivocation  
c. argumentum ad baculum  
d. ad hominem   
2. According to Husserl, the success of natural science lead to the gradual 
scientific rejection of__________.   
a. spirit  
b. matter  
c. nature  
d. existence   
3. When Husserl described human experience as the immediate data of 
consciousness, he meant _________________.   
a. Pure subjectivity  
b. Pure objectivity  
c. materialism  
d. dualism  
4. What is Husserl’s point of view with regards to consciousness? a. The 
study of consciousness is the same as the study of nature b. The 
study of human consciousness differs from the way scientists study 
nature.  
c. It does not matter whether we study consciousness similarly or 
differently than the way scientists study nature.  
d. Husserl was not interested in the study of consciousness.  
5. What type of fallacy is present in the statement, “My father smoked four 
packs of cigarettes a day since age fourteen and lived until age sixty-nine. 
Therefore, smoking really can’t be that bad for you”?  
a. ad misericordiam  
b. false analogy  
c. hasty generalization  
d. post hoc 

29
6. Which among these headlines presented information that are fair, 
objective, and moderate?  
a. It’s time to consider other means of cash aid distribution  
b. Other countries around the world have much better means in cash 
aid distribution   
c. Government vows to faster distribution of coronavirus aid d. We can 
also learn lesson from Vietnam how they distribute their cash aid  
7. Which among these headlines has no errors in terms of spelling, grammar, 
and content?   
a. Robredo Chides Gov’t for Unclear Communication on New Quarantine 
Rules   
 b. Robredo Blames the Government as They Don’t Have Clear Rules in 
Quarantine  
c. Robredo Charge the Govrnment as Culprit of Confusion in Quarantine 
d. Robredo blames those in Executive Branch for Communication’s 
Unclear  
8. Which among the statements contain substantiated generalizations? 
a. “Drug war a massive failure”—Robredo  
b. Robredo lies to world, shames the nation and herself in UN message 
c. The real albatross on Leni Robredo’s neck  
d. Let Leni plan on her own drug war  
9. Which among the following authors could be the most credible according to 
his or her Twitter account’s background?   
a. Banat By – ​Simpleng tao na mahilig bumanat  
b. Atom Araullo- Journalist. @ UNHCPPh Goodwill Ambassador c. 
AkoNgaSY Lyco- Speak now or be silent forever. Follow me I will not 
follow you  
d. Senyora- Full time haciendera and professional husgadera  
10.Which among the following publishers pose no particular agenda or 
bias? a. Bulag Ang ABS-CBN sa Katotohanan by Antonio Brigas  
b. ABS-CBN Naipasara Sanhi ng Di Pagrenew ng Prangkisa by GMA 
News  
c. Nararapat Lamang na Huwag ng Magbukas ang ABS-CBN by Balat 
Sibuyas   
d. Bye Bye Kapamilya by the Avengers 

30

Additional Activities  
ACTIVITY: EVERYDAY FALLACIES ​(Critical Thinking, Communication, Character)  

Directions:   
A. Observe conversations of your parents and identify three (3) common fallacies​.  
B. Watch commercials on TV and news and take note of the fallacies committed. 
Identify 5 fallacies and write your answers on a separate sheet of paper.   
Critical Thinking Questions:  
1. In your relationship with your family, what common fallacy or fallacies you 
commit as an alibi for any wrongdoing? Narrate at least two occasions.   
2. Do you think Fallacy can help us in finding the truth? Why or why not?  
3. What methods of philosophizing do you think are most useful in finding the 
truth? Explain? 

31
References  
Books  
Abella, Roberto D. (2016). Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person. 
Quezon City: C&E Publishing  
Binswanger, Harry. (2014). How We Know. New York: TOF Publications.   
Copi, Irving M. and Cohen, Carl (2002). Introduction to Logic (11th​ edition).
​
New 
Jersey: Prentice Hall  
Cornejo, N. & Ebia, E. ​Philosophy of Human Person.​ Mindshapers Co., Manila.2017  
Hurley, Patrick J. (2011). A Concise Introduction to Logic (11th​ edition).
​
Boston: 
Cengage Learning  
Klein, Paul S. (2013). Philosophy 101. California: Adams Media   
Mabacquiao, N. (2017). Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person. 
Quezon City: Phoenix Publishing.  
Peikoff, Leonard (1990). Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. New York: Dutton   
Rand, Ayn (1990). Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (2nd
​ ​edition). New York: 
Meridian   
Stumpf, Samuel Enoch & Fieser, James (2008). Socrates to Sartre and Beyond (8th​  
edition). New Yok: McGraw Hill  
Wilber, Ken (2006). Integral Spirituality. Boston: Integral Books  

Websites  

Biography.com Biography of Edmund Husserl (July 2020). Retrieved 

from: ​https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edmund-Husserl  
Biography.com Biography of John Dewey (July 2020). Retrieved 
from: ​https://www.biography.com/scholar/john-dewey  
Britanica. Biography of Ludwig Wittgenstein (July 2020). Retrieved from: 
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ludwig-Wittgenstein  
Britanica. Biography of Socrates (July 2020). Retrieved from:   
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Socrates  
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Gabriel Marcel (July 2020). Retrieved 
from: ​https://www.iep.utm.edu/marcel/ 

32
Lazarus C. (2017). Facts, Truths, Beliefs, Opinions, and "Alternative Facts". 
Psychology Today. Retrieved from:  
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201703/facts-truths 
beliefs-opinions-and-alternative-facts  
Merriam-Webster. July 17, 2020, (n.d.). Petitio principii. In ​Merriam-Webster.com 
dictionary​. Retrieved from:  
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/petitio%20princip  
St. Joseph’s College (2019). Evaluating Sources: Fact Checking, Fake News, and 
Bias: Fact vs Opinion. Retrieved from:  
https://brooklyn.sjcny.libguides.com/c.php?g=648836&p=4692986  
Starr L.(2009). Fact, Fiction, or Opinion? Evaluating Online Information. Education 
World. Retrieved from:  
https://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr194.shtml 
 33
For inquiries or feedback, please write or call:

Department of Education - Bureau of Learning Resources (DepEd-BLR)

Ground Floor, Bonifacio Bldg., DepEd Complex

Meralco Avenue, Pasig City, Philippines 1600

Telefax: (632) 8634-1072; 8634-1054; 8631-4985

Email Address: [email protected] * [email protected]