Teaching logic typically falls under the areas of argumentation and research, as students are taught the importance of "logos," or logical appeals, in their pursuit of an original point. Cohesive, cogent arguments--devoid of logical fallacy--produce more compelling points, and teachers take great strides in pointing to the problems of oversimplification, hasty generalization, or faulty cause-effect reasoning. Today's students of rhetoric--particularly in courses with heavy doses of nonfiction--also discover how "logos" is part of larger rhetorical frameworks. Aristotle's approach to textual analysis includes "ethos" and "pathos," or appeals to credibility and emotion, respectively. These appeals commonly appear with "logos" as a three-part umbrella by which to determine the ways in which a text is communicated. If teachers consider the study of logic as part of a larger discourse on "all" text--fiction or nonfiction--they can extend the study of "logos" past its common and somewhat limited focus on persuasive writing. In this article, the author uses the syllogism and the idea of reasonableness to study a Platonic dialogue, make extensions to contemporary literary works, and develop students' critical-thinking and writing skills.