My draft right now
Module 1. Epistemology -> an anthology
Module 2. Project --> Psychophilosophical biographical research paper on Adolf Hitler
Module 3. Applied logic
Module 4. Semantics
Module 5. Genre Anthology
Does anyone have any ideas?
This would be a Philosophy course, not an English course.
I’m going to go out on a limb and presume that you’re a kid, not an adult?
Why not get though college before you start teaching high school?
@eeyore123 English is applied philosophy; they should be taught together.
@bjkmom I’m a 12th grade student who finds college classes easy. This is for my own independent study.
No it isn’t. Just like Physics isn’t applied Math. They use some of the same tools, but one is not a subset of the other.
@eeyore123
Applied means “put to practical use instead of being theoretical”. English is just applied psychology, sociology, and philosophy once you get past the basics.
Components of typical higher level English :
- Literary theory and critical theory
- Rhetoric
- Research
- Composition
- Other types of evaluation
Physics is applied math because theory could not exist (i.e. quantum mechanics) without the math.
@Waterborne I’d say that English can employ psychology, sociology, and philosophy, but that doesn’t mean it’s reducible to those fields. It’s like how you often use logic in mathematics, but that doesn’t mean mathematics is just logic.
Regarding your curriculum, what kind of logic are you thinking of? Modal? Propositional? First-order? Non-monotonic? I personally find first-order logic to be the most useful for any type of study.
For semantics, are you referring to something like the generative/interpretive debate in linguistics or something like formal semantics? If it’s the latter, I’d combine it with your logic study.
What are you covering in your epistemology anthology?
I plan on studying metalogic.
The sociology of semantics is primarily what I intend to study.
I am analyzing historical readings in my epistemology anthology at the moment. The topics include: perception, memory, reason and the a priori, testimony, inference in general, inductive inference, the architecture of knowledge, the analysis of knowledge, and skepticism.
If this is just for your own enjoyment and enrichment, why does it need to be so structured? When I teach myself things, it’s very loose and free-flowing.
So I can have an end in mind. I plan on deviating from the outline, but without structure I would end up wasting a lot of time.
That is wrong in so many ways. Math is just one of the tools that is used. It is not a requirement.
@Eeyore123
That is partially correct. After a certain level, it is a requirement because it becomes more difficult to conceive more abstract mathematical concepts merely conceptually alone. This is a Nirvana fallacy; just because physics does not always explain its concepts through mathematics does not mean that it is not applied math. Try to provide me some counterexamples that does not have math as at least a covert requirement.
We really should take this to PMs though.
If you want to study these topics on your own then do it, noone’s stopping you.