Our knowledge of how the mind works is growing rapidly. One area of particular interest to philosophy teachers is research on reasoning and decision making processes. I explore one model of human cognition that offers new ways of thinking about how to teach philosophical skills. The bulk of the paper is dedicated to exposition of the model and the evidence that supports it; at the end of the paper, I suggest ways these findings might be incorporated into the classroom.

In this paper, I describe a variety of psychology experiments that may be used in introductory philosophy courses not only to grab students’ attention, but also to generate philosophical discussion or to make a philosophical point. The experiments attempt to capture students’ interest in two ways: (1) by posing interesting challenges to students, thereby provoking more active thought in class and (2) by doing something different, thereby increasing attention that naturally follows from change. Although the experiments are psychology experiments, they may still be used to emphasize certain philosophical points or to introduce philosophical topics. The philosophical import of each experiment is quite general, so these exercises are most appropriate for students enrolled in introductory courses.

I advocate the use of small group learning in the philosophy classroom because it engages a broad cross-section of students and because it proves to be an effective way to teach critical thinking. In this article, I suggest small group activities that are useful for developing philosophical skills, and I propose methods for circumventing common logistical problems that can arise when implementing small group learning in the classroom. Ultimately, I show that small group learning is a pedagogically powerful and logistically feasible supplement to traditional teaching methods.

Four anthologies covering the modern period are reviewed here and assessed with respect to whether anthologized selections and supplementary materials are useful to teachers and undergraduate students. With the exception of one anthology, each volume makes conservative choices in representing the modern period. Such choices reinforce a history of the modern period increasingly out of step with current scholarship and discourage scholarly teachers from presenting a history deeply embedded in science, psychology, education, economics, religion, mathematics, and social, political and moral philosophy. Each of the volumes has significant strengths when used in a curriculum guided by this more conservative canon, but the canon itself is problematic as an organizing principle for anthologies and curricula covering the modern period.