The 14th Edition of Introduction to Logic, written by Copi, Cohen & McMahon, is dedicated to the many thousands of students and their teachers - at hundreds of universities in the United States and around the world - who have used its fundamental methods and techniques of correct reasoning in their everyday lives. To those who have not previously used or reviewed Introduction to Logic we extend the very warmest welcome. Please join us and our international family of users Let us help you teach students the methods and principles needed in order to distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning. For, Introduction to Logic is a proven textbook that has been honed through the collaborative efforts of many scholars over the last five decades. Its scrupulous attention to detail and precision in exposition and explanation is matched by the greatest accuracy in all associated detail.

For more than six decades, and for thousands of students, Introduction to Logic has been the gold standard in introductory logic texts. In this fifteenth edition, Carl Cohen and Victor Rodych update Irving M. Copi's classic text, improving on its many strengths and introducing new and helpful material that will greatly assist both students and instructors. In particular, chapters 1, 8, and 9 have been greatly enhanced without disturbing the book's clear and gradual pedagogical approach. Specifically: Chapter 1 now uses a simpler and better definition of "deductive validity," which enhances the rest of the book (especially chapters 1 and 8-10, and their new components). Chapter 8 now has: Simpler definitions of "simple statement" and "compound statement" More and more detailed examples of the Complete Truth-Table Method. Chapter 9 now has: A detailed, step-by-step account of the Shorter Truth-Table Method (with detailed step-by-step examples for conclusions of different types) A more complete and detailed account of Indirect Proof A detailed justification for Indirect Proof treating each of the three distinct ways in which an argument can be valid A new section on Conditional Proof, which complements the 19 Rules of Inference and Indirect Proof Explications of proofs of tautologies using both Indirect Proof and Conditional Proof A new section at the end of the chapter explaining the important difference between sound and demonstrative arguments. The Appendices now include: A new appendix on making the Shorter Truth-Table Technique (STTT) more efficient by selecting the most efficient sequence of STTT steps A new appendix on Step 1 calculations for multiple-line shorter truth tables A new appendix on unforced truth-value assignments, invalid arguments, and Maxims III-V. In addition, a Companion Website will offer: for Students: A Proof Checker Complete Truth Table Exercises Shorter Truth-Table Exercises A Truth-Table Video Venn Diagram Testing of Syllogisms Hundreds of True/False and Multiple Choice Questions for Instructors: An Instructor's Manual A Solutions Manual www.routledge.com/cw/9781138500860

For courses in Introduction to Logic or Critical Thinking. Fundamental, Fresh, Focused. Rendered from Copi/Cohen's Introduction to Logic, the most respected introductory logic text on the market, this concise version explains all concepts and techniques clearly, accurately, and thoroughly, bringing them to life using a wealth of contemporary examples. Essentials of Logic was created in response to a need in the market for a book that effectively covered the fundamental issues in logic. The first edition of Essentials of Logic was abridged from Copi and Cohen's Introduction, 11th edition, with an eye to including all and only those elements that most logic teachers would consider essential. In the second edition, new topics have been added based on readers' suggestions. For example, indirect and conditional proof techniques have been added and many examples have been thoroughly revised and rewritten. The result is a book that closely reflects what users deem essential and does so in a way that is sensitive to the needs of today's students.

From landmark court cases on affirmative action to their consequences, a study on why such preferences are morally wrong, unlawful, and indefensible.

Training manual to enhance cultural competency in nursing homes

"No state . . . shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." So says the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, a document held dear by Carl Cohen, a professor of philosophy and longtime champion of civil liberties who has devoted most of his adult life to the University of Michigan. So when Cohen discovered, after encountering some resistance, how his school, in its admirable wish to increase minority enrollment, was actually practicing a form of racial discrimination--calling it "affirmative action"--he found himself at odds with his longtime allies and colleagues in an effort to defend the equal treatment of the races at his university. In "A Conflict of Principles" Cohen tells the story of what happened at Michigan, how racial preferences were devised and implemented there, and what was at stake in the heated and divisive controversy that ensued. He gives voice to the judicious and seldom heard liberal argument against affirmative action in college admission policies.

In the early 1970s, as a member of the Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union, Cohen vigorously supported programs devised to encourage the recruitment of minorities in colleges, and in private employment. But some of these efforts gave deliberate preference to blacks and Hispanics seeking university admission, and this Cohen recognized as a form of racism, however well-meaning. In his book he recounts the fortunes of contested affirmative action programs as they made their way through the legal system to the Supreme Court, beginning with "DeFunis v. Odegaard" (1974) at the University of Washington Law School, then "Bakke v. Regents of the University of California" (1978) at the Medical School on the UC Davis campus, and culminating at the University of Michigan in the landmark cases of "Grutter v. Bollinger" and "Gratz v. Bollinger" (2003). He recounts his role in the initiation of the Michigan cases, explaining the many arguments against racial preferences in college admissions. He presents a principled case for the resultant amendment to the Michigan constitution, of which he was a prominent advocate, which prohibited preference by race in public employment and public contracting, as well as in public education.

An eminently readable personal, consistently fair-minded account of the principles and politics that come into play in the struggles over affirmative action, "A Conflict of Principles" is a deeply thoughtful and thought-provoking contribution to our national conversation about race.

Ethical Issues in Biotechnology is the first textbook of its kind, written collaboratively by a philosopher and a biologist to provide undergraduate students with a comprehensive, accessible introduction to the ethical and scientific fundamentals of biotechnology. Engaging the ethics and the science side by side, the text addresses pressing questions in agricultural, food, and animal biotechnology; human genetics; gene therapy; human cloning; and stem cell research. A general introduction to both the moral philosophy and fundamentals of genetics is enhanced throughout the text with section-specific introductions addressing the particular philosophical and scientific challenges posed by the topic under consideration. Diagrams and drawings, study cases, liberal use of practical examples, and suggestions for further reading make the text an ideal resource for a broad range of students interested in issues and questions lying at the intersection of philosophy and genetics.

Do all animals have rights? Is it morally wrong to use mice or dogs in medical research, or rabbits and cows as food? How ought we resolve conflicts between the interests of humans and those of other animals? Philosophical inquiry is essential in addressing such questions; the answers given must have enormous practical importance. Here for the first time in the same volume, the animal rights debate is argued deeply and fully by the two most articulate and influential philosophers representing the opposing camps. Each makes his case in turn to the opposing case. The arguments meet head on: Are we humans morally justified in using animals as we do? A vexed and enduring controversy here receives its deepest and most eloquent exposition.