"Sociology, Philosophy and Literature are better alternatives."

Yes,but not for kids. You won't teach any of these subjects to kids, even if they are better for logical thinking. But if you show them an interesting way to start programming,they will see a very clear connection between what is being said and what happens = logic. Then it can be extended later in life, but this article specifically targets kids.

And I have the exact opposite view to yours - I think there is not enough logic in our lives. Our society might be addicted to digital works, but it does not mean they understand how it all works.

>Yes,but not for kids. You won't teach any of these subjects to kids

Really? Why? We have been doing it for millenia.

No. We make kids at school read countless books, and trying to convey to them the meaning that's inside these books. Most kids don't care though, because I really don't think that you can read some of mature works at the age of 14 and understand the deep philosophical context inside them, even if your teacher serves it to you on a silver plate. It's not to say that kids are stupid - far from it. My point is, that literally throwing literature and philosophical dilemmas at kids it not going to achieve much. Sure, we've been doing it for millenia - but it does not automatically make it right.

> I don't believe computer programing is a good way to teach logical thinking. Sociology, Philosophy and Literature are better alternatives

That makes no sense. I've taken literature, I've read hundreds of books on my own. Most of them are full of illogical things. At best they are OK to teach morals, not logic.

Philosophy is closer.

Computer programming is pretty much pure logic and problem solving.

The only better way to teach logic is to teach logic.

> teaching agriculture or other physical goods producing craftsmanship to kids would make them better at real world challenges

Computers and code are real world, and they solve real world challenges.

If you want to teach logical thinking, you need to teach biases, rationality, probability, etc. Programming is teaching "if this, then that".

What you just said is simply not true. Programming does teach you all 3 things that you mentioned.

How on earth does programming teach you biases?

Heuristic algorithms are pretty much exclusively about biases.

In which heuristic algorithm did you learn about the fundamental attribution error, hindsight bias, or confirmation bias?

Programming doesn't teach you cognitive biases. You don't become more aware of yourself by programming. You learn more about human logic by reading "Thinking, fast and slow" than by programming for your entire life.

I'm not sure why people think programming us the pinnacle of problem solving. Just about any trade involves just as much logical thinking and problem solving.

Really? Any trade? Car salesmen are sitting and solving logical problems?

Programming is very close to logic.

Of course, there are other fields that require logic and problem solving. Engineering, science, for instance.

I'm talking about what are commonly called the skilled trades [0]. Some of the most analytical thinkers I know were trained in a trade. Masons and cabinet makers that have an intuitive understanding of geometry and trigonometry that most people just don't grasp. I learned most of my problem solving skills from my father who was trained as an industrial electrician. Spend a day on a job site and you'll hear the same things you hear programmers bitching about. Most people complain about the engineers and architects not understanding how the real world works just like programmers always bitch about software architects.

It's a real shame that most people seem to look down on the trades as somehow being inferior to white collar work. This is what Mike Rowe has been preaching about for the past 4 or 5 years. Just listen to his TED talk [1].

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradesmen

[1] http://www.ted.com/talks/mike_rowe_celebrates_dirty_jobs.htm...

>Car salesmen are sitting and solving logical problems?

If they aren't then they will be unsuccessful as car salesmen. Apart from "how can I sell more cars?" there is "what is the optimal number of cars I can fit in my showroom?", "how shall I present my most profitable deal to its most likely demographic?", "which aspects of my communication skills can be improved?"...the list is endless. Point being there are logical challenges to be solved everywhere.

> That makes no sense. I've taken literature, I've read hundreds of books on my own. Most of them are full of illogical things. At best they are OK to teach morals, not logic.

Not trying to be snarky, but what level literature classes did you take?

I was an English major for a few semesters and I found that there were a league of differences between an introductory course which was little better than reading something on my own (plus a professor's gospel, which we were asked to support or comment but never refute) -- and an upper-level course, which was more centered around research: diving inside of a text and an author, plumbing for patterns and arguments much like one would dive into JavaDocs.

Yes, but we're not talking about encouraging people to become an English major, we're talking about introducing people to these subjects. Do you think people would learn more logical thought doing a year of coding or a year of reading?

Teaching kids to make them better understand what's going around them?

"Say Kitty move right, Kitty move left and do this about 5 times." is not about logic. This logic, that you can teach with programming is only mathematical logic. "If a > b and a is negative then b should be negative". Real world logic does not work like that. There is not only 1's and 0's, blacks or whites. There are also shades of gray and reds, purples, blues. Some fractions, doubles.

Everyday you make many decisions. Some are easy yay/nay decisions, some are hard decisions like "what to wear today" or "Voting that candidate or this?" or "Should I ask her out, but what if it's too soon?". Many things affect them; Human interactions, weather conditions, light conditions, feelings... So many unknowns. Maybe just some luck? Murhpy laws?

We can not or have not yet deducted them into pure mathematical logic.

So giving kids programming as logical thinking aid would help, but maybe in a wrong way. It would teach them an illusionary version of logical thinking where everything is 1 or 0.