Customer Reviews

The Art of Reasoning

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Although I originally learned logic using Hardegree's _Symbolic Logic_, Kelley's book is a vastly superior text for teaching logic to students and inspiring interest in the subject. Many academics complain that you can't teach Critical Reasoning without covering Aristotelian & symbolic logic; they then complain that Aristotelian & symbolic logic is of no importance or interest to non-philosophy majors, and so that it would be preferable to teach Critical Reasoning.

David Kelley accomplishes something incredible in this book: he teaches BOTH, and he shows how they are connected. He starts the reader off with a general discussion of concepts, definitions, and propositions. Then he shows the reader how to analyze the basic structure of arguments, using op-eds and Supreme Court decisions as illustrations. He then moves into Aristotelian logic, venn diagrams, and the informal Fallacies. After this, he discusses sentential logic and the canonical patterns of inference. In the next section, he introduces the Russell/Frege predicate calculus (and Fred Sommers' term logic) and shows how it expands the precision of argumentative analysis. Finally, he discusses inductive logic, including how to generalize correctly, how to evaluate arguments by analogy, and how to form and test hypotheses.

This is a perfect introduction to logic because it teaches one how to think clearly ("in a straight line," as Flew once put it) about issues that one encounters in ordinary life. At the same time, it equips the student who wants to go further in philosophy with the powerful (Russell/Frege) analytic techniques appropriate to that task. There is NO CHANCE that a student who reads this book will be left wondering about the importance of logic. In addition, Kelley is an expert communicator, and he explains away many of the confusions that people have about reason and logic in our "postmodern" age.

David Kelley's book is a well-conceived introduction to logic. I think that the first few chapters, on concepts and definitions, are a nice way to begin thinking about what is involved in thinking. These chapters, as well as subsequent ones, are clear at the same time that they are rigorous. I have used this as a textbook for introductory logic classes, and while there are many others that cover the same material, I have yet to find one that surpasses its basic accessibility without sacrificing rigor. There are however, it should be mentioned, a few typos in the exercises.

I would also like to point out with respect to the reviews above that criticize the book on the basis of Kelley's interest in objectivism, that if the reviewer(s) had read the book, they would have been able to recognize at least two fallacies implicit in their review: ad hominem & poisoning the well. In any case, as far as I can tell, Kelley's views on objectivism have nothing to do with the presentation or content of the text.

This is really a wonderful introductory text on reasoning. I believe that it is particularly noteworthy in two key areas: breadth and accessibility. The only plausible criticism to offer would be to say that this book lacks depth. But to make an issue out of that is rather silly because this book is an introductory text.

The first few chapters introduce some useful ideas about thinking. The chapters on classification, definitions, and propositions prepare the reader by introducing them to the basic tools of critical thinking. This is extremely important and useful because from the beginning Kelley has the reader thinking very carefully about words. And when it comes down to it, the study of arguments is the study of what we mean by the words we use and what can be inferred from how we put string them together.

The later chapters on classical and modern deductive logic offer what should be the center of any introductory course in logic. There's little sense in me listing all that is covered, as you can easily take a look at the table of contents of this book and see what the book covers. In essence, all the topics are here that should be covered in an introductory logic class. While there are other books that I prefer for some of these topics I don't believe there is anything necessarily lacking in Kelley's presentation.

The contents that I most enjoy in this book are found in Part V, Inductive Logic. This section covers the "critical thinking" skills that I believe are really the most needed by students. These are issues such as causality (and distinguishing it from correlation), as well as the proper use of analogies and statistics in arguments. This is all very practical stuff and the topics from logic that I wish more people had some familiarity with. In political debates there are all sorts of improper uses of statistics and analogies; very rarely are there improper uses of Venn diagrams and truth tables.

The most noteworthy quality of this book is its accessibility. This is a book from which the motivated student can teach himself to become a better thinker. While this book is intended to be a textbook for a college level class my guess is that if you're reading this review on Amazon you're probably not a college instructor (if you are, just contact the publisher and obtain a review copy!), but rather someone who is looking to improve his or her thinking skills. More than any other introductory book on logic or critical thinking that I've seen, this book excels at being one that a motivated learner can use to learn from on their own.

Are there "better" books on logic available? If by better you are referring to depth, the answer is "sure!" You can find all sorts of books on logic that are more rigorous. Logic has many sub-fields and obviously more specialized books can offer more depth on symbolic logic or Aristotelian logic, for example. It's simply unfair to try to compare this book with those books. This is a book that will open the doors to all sorts of more advanced books, and I believe it does it better than any other introductory text that I've come across.

An outstanding book by an outstanding teacher! Five stars (*****) for his treatment of concepts, classification and definitions.

Even though I'm familiar with the material, I expect to reread Kelley's book many times. I especially enjoy his
simple, down-to-earth language
excellent examples
concise discussion of essentials
coverage of every important topic

Every reader will benefit from his
highlighting
summary boxes
chapter summaries
minimum of technical jargon

This is an excellent introduction to non-symbolic logic, with interesting and intelligent exercises for students. Kelley's textbook is well-organized and lucidly written. It's one of the very best books on critical thinking.

And contrary to what a previous reviewer has said, Kelley's personal Randian philosophy does not intrude on his pedagogy. He chooses his examples from all across the political spectrum and makes a strenuous effort to be fair and impartial in his analyses. What more can one ask of a philosopher?

David Kelley illustrates the essentials of logic with a lucid exposition of the methods of right reasoning. Professor Kelley offers a guide to this crucial and - given the nature of much of the material that rolls out of our printing presses - often neglected science, that is accessible to the uninitiated reader. The section in his book on the term logic of philosopher Fred Sommers, an Aristotelian alternative to the Fregean, mathematical approach to symbolic logic, is especially interesting. I highly recommend this work.

As a per course instructor at Missouri State, this textbook is a good one, but my students and I have both found it a little tedious in places. One might assume that is the fault of the material, and in some instances it is. However, the presentation itself sometimes seems a little more dense than it could, some of the earlier chapters very well written, all adequate, but some seeming somehow to lack, like Kelley's book is in need of refinement and further print editions.

One nice thing about teaching at the college level is that those who peddle textbooks often give us free samples. One such gift was Irving M. Copi and Carl Cohen's Introduction to Logic (13th Edition) (MyLogicLab Series). The book is a bit more pricey--around $100 on Amazon--but it is also more interesting and less dense, stroke for stroke. If you are are an instructor looking for a good critical thinking course text, may I recommend Introduction to Logic instead? Compare the two if you don't believe me: Copi and Cohen have put together a text that is better in almost every way than Kelley's while covering substantially the same material. That is not to insult Kelley; perhaps it is because theirs is in its 13th edition, whereas Kelley only published this one? As I said, Kelley's text is adequate, but theirs is phenomenal.

My one regret is that I was so caught up in trying to explicate Kelley's text, that I did not get around to perusing Copi and Cohen's until after the deadline for the spring semester's book orders had passed. If I teach critical thinking again in the fall, this will be my textbook of choice, along with the very accessible Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking (8th Edition) by M. Neil Browne and Stuart M. Keeley, a smooth, easy-reading, common-sense introduction to primarily inductive reasoning that suitably holds the attention of non-philosophy majors: it makes a good read to start off the course in a non-threatening manner.

My goal was to teach a course with a dual focus: something for the person merely passing through to fulfill a one-time general elective requirement as well as preparation for the philosophy majors and minors: my goal, in other words, was to teach real-world critical thinking skills as well as to provide an academic primer for the 300-level course in symbolic logic. Had I been using both texts all along, I would have achieved a nearly perfect blend. The latter book I recommend above is a smooth read appealing to the former, the former book a smoother read than Kelley's appealing to the latter, with a lot more real-world examples drawn from science, a more cohesive prose style, and a lot of tasteful and useful illustrations as well. Copi and Cohen's Introduction to Logic is better arranged--the prose itself, that is--more relevant, and overall more contemporary than Kelley's ("contemporary" not in the sense of "hip," but in tapping into the broader, up-to-date world of research and the sciences while simultaneously being more tied to the philosophy classroom by providing brief histories of where many aspects of modern logic derive--what thinker, a few factoids about the person, and a relevant quotation or two).

However, as I said, don't take my word for it: get your hands on a review copy of all three texts and see for yourself.

Unlike much of the popular "critical thinking" literature this text has the precise, flawless structure of a gemstone. The first four chapters introduce and bind together the most fundamental elements of thought. Each subsequent chapter fits neatly into place, at once expanding and consolidating the body of knowledge. By the end, that body is elegantly coherent and transparent yet utterly impervious to error.

Dr. Kelley has resisted the urge to invent. The concepts in this book are not new, but it's hard to imagine they could be more effectively arranged or more clearly stated.

The paperback edition I have is very nicely put together. Heavy but flexible; it lays open to any page. It has held-up well to 3 years of heavy use.

I am happy with the condition of the book but I am very unhappy with the shipping date that it was received. I ordered it Jan. 1 and did not receive it until Jan. 28. I could not believe it took that long to get to me. i have ordered many books through Amazon and never have I been so unhappy. I am usually very satisfied with both the book condition and the date I receive it. I know I would never order from this seller again.

David Kelley is best known for his advocacy of Objectivism, a demonstrably correct term for the thought of Ayn Rand. He is not particularly well-known in academia for his work as a logician or philosopher. In my opinion, this book is clear proof why.