Customer Reviews

Duck That Won the Lottery

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I like Julian Baggini's writing style. If you're unfamiliar with his works, he's possibly Britain's best-loved contemporary philosopher, and his work encompasses a wide range of interests and styles. He was awarded a PhD from University College London for his thesis on the philosophy of personal identity in 1996, then went on to found 'The Philosophers' Magazine' with Jeremy Stangroom, supporting himself with a portfolio of jobs that included teaching and, increasingly, journalism and writing.

His writing bore fruit in 2002, when five books he wrote, co-wrote or co-edited were published. In his newest offering The Duck That Won the Lottery, he presents us with a series of brief, thought-provoking and usually entertaining philosophical ideas to ponder. This is said to be the companion piece to his 2006 offering The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten, an excellent book that I reviewed earlier. This one is a sequel that continues his exploration of philosophical problems through interesting sketches and thought experiments.

His focus this time is on the 'bad arguments' that people use all the time, in the media, on the 'Net, in politics, and in everyday life. There are a hundred of them, and each entry takes an example of questionable logic as its origin, from which the author examines the argument, then invites the reader to do the same with other examples, and he manages to do it with his characteristic precision and sense of humor.

The title alludes to 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' misleading notion that if you touched a lucky paper duck in a Chinese restaurant, then won the lottery, it was therefore the duck made you win. The 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' term is Latin for "after this, therefore because of this", and is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) which states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one."

And this analogy reminds this reader of a particular and familiar quotation:

"Even the skeptical mind must be prepared to accept the unacceptable when there is no alternative. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands."
~ Douglas Adams, in 'Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency'

But isn't also possible to suppose that the duck was just a decoy?

Read this book, explore the examples, and become skilled at spotting 'un-flagrant contradictions', 'gambler's fallacies' and 'false dichotomies'. You'll be able to recognize media people (and spin doctors) carrying out the 'fallacy of the complex question' and 'implicit redefinitions of words.' You'll catch your associates 'loading the dice', and add 'slippery slopes', 'straw men' and 'post hoc fallacies' to your rhetorical arsenal.

Baggini's chapters may be familiar ground to some of his regular readers, especially in the UK. Many of them are based on ideas that the author wrote on the 'Butterflies and Wheels' Website, and still appear in their Dispatches section in his columns entitled "Bad Moves", where the author wrote columns on bad argumentative moves, noting that it was "an essential resource for detecting woolly arguments in all their guises."

If you find books like this stimulating, then you might also wish to look into some of his other works:

* What's It All About?: Philosophy and the Meaning of Life
* The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten
* Welcome to Everytown: A Journey into the English Mind
* Making Sense: Philosophy behind the Headlines


Skepticism abounds here in 'The Duck That Won the Lottery', and affable criticism is dished out, mainly to journalists and others in the media, along with bloggers and 'Net mavens. Dr. Baggini offers us the chance to come across the trick of the spin doctors under controlled conditions, so that we might better recognize them in their natural environments, including in the politicians' speeches that abound today.

It's a worthwhile read, and remember, if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's possible that it could be a decoy... or it just might be a duck.

I really enjoyed The Duck That Won the Lottery from beginning to end. Julian Baggini lists exactly 100 statements and explains why they're logically questionable or even flat-out fallacies. He writes in an educational but entertaining way; this book is basically an enjoyable Logic 101 class, which I didn't think was possible. Baggini spares no one,even heroes, from his criticism of bad arguments.

There are no political or religious biases in the book; Baggini even praises Donald Rumsfeld at one point! His only bias is against poor reasoning. This is by far the best book on this neglected, but crucial, subject I have seen.

This is book is a really good book and easy to follow, I liked the author's sense of humor in presenting his thoughts and at the same time conveying a helpful message. The book has 100 entry; each one talks about a different example of a bad arguement or fallacy. It really helps the reader learn how to catch a bad argument. He also relates political issues to everyday life experiences and that makes it applicable to use what you are reading in your own life. It teaches valuable lessons about the world, my favorite was about wishful thinking and people justifying their actions by saying that "if i didnt do it, someone else would've done it". from that I learned that I should be positive even if everything around me is corrupted. Yes, it's hard sometimes to think that I can change the whole world by a small action, but at least I'll be satisfied with my own actions. I would recommend that book to anyone who wants to look at the world and people's thoughts deeply.

MUST READ! Say what you mean and mean what you say. This book helps you detect a bad arguement the moment it is spoken. It gives a perspective of everyday situations of people from all walks of life and the arguments they are trying to prove. Fallacies are errors in reasoning, that often seems valid to many people. Julian Baggini points out the fallies related to the arguments. This is an easy book to read, one story at a time relating to issues of foreign policy, social issues and just everyday nonsense that we all come across in our lives on a daily basis. It makes you think of what is the truth and who should be held accoutable for not telling the truth.

this book was an easy read and had alot of good valid arguments. deffinitely contains information to take from. i really enjoyed the quotes, some of which are very famous (or infamous) but some were from nobodys. the book does have a bit of a negative tone to it but for the most part inspires the reader to think more critcally of what is being said in any situation. overall i would title this a great bathroom reader.

Julian Baggini's overall performance on writing The Duck Who Won The Lottery is amazing. Baggini wrote this book in such fashion that no one would ever expect. Baggini uses 100 different fallacies in which he criticizes in a professor setting but using humor at the same time to twist your brain right out of your head. With him using a humorous tone it makes the book that more appealing to readers. Whether your choice is to use this as an everyday book to read or using it as toliet material, its a great book of choice. Baggini expresses in his writings in this book in which he thinks is the proper way of how things should be dealt with. Julian himself states that in this book there could fallacies as well, stating he is not perfect himself. Everyone in this world could be a critic, but Baggini does his is such fashion that makes him hard not to like. The only weakeness of this book I would have to say that at some times he seems very opinionated, which in reality, its a book of opinions. With the way Baggini presents this book it is hard not to like what he offers, his humor made this book what it is today. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a brain twister with nothing but the truth and humor. The best part is how he gives both sides on every fallacy, so its not leaving you thinking that he only criticizes people one way. He gives you both sides with vivid description and detail. Julian Baggini's material in this book is great, and overall I thought this was an excellent choice for him to write.

I thought this book brought light to the arguements that normal everyday people seem to either believe, go along with, or are stumped as to how to refute them. The arguements the Baggini details and disects are arguments that ive heard in everyday life that I never knew had actual and obvious flaws. I enjoy that Baggini begins every new chapter with a quote that demostrates each new argument then disects it and gives reasonable flaws as well as at the end of each section gives other sections that relate to the topic being discussed. If somebody is looking for a good to either help them become a better arguer or just want to see these illogical arguments made by famous people in history this book is for you. The only down side to this book is that at some point the reading is a bit dry if you arent interested in a certain topic, person, or moment in history but other than that this book offers insight into the illogical in the seemingly logical.

The Duck That Won the Lottery by Julian Baggini. The book focuses on fallacies and mistakes people make in their reasoning when making an argument. It gives specific examples of statements said by people and examines them thoroughly and points out their flaws. These statements are made by usually famous well known people that talk about current issues. Before reading the book I had learned about fallacies in my high school American Problems class and later in our philosophy lectures. Julian Baggini is very helpful in explaining each fallacy with real world material and asks questions at the end of each section so that you can go into depth by yourself and learn what he is actually trying to show you. Mistakes are made in reasoning every day if you are educated on these fallacies. With this I will be able to use it in my life to find out what is right and what just seems right. I will be able to see through weak arguments and be able to debate and defend my own views with as little flaws as possible.

When I first read about the book, I was less than interested. Having already learned about fallacious arguments, I imagined that it would be plodding and that I'd be lucky to even reach the end. Upon cracking it open, however, I found myself to be pleasantly surprised. Author Julian Baggini takes an interesting look at fallacious arguments, and how they can be used in everyday life without anyone being the wiser. The author's use of actual quotes is to be commended, as they have an impact that a made-up scenario could not. Baggini demonstrates his knowledge of philosophy throughout the book, picking apart the quotes with a solid attention to detail and rather decent explanations that gives the reader a good idea of just how the arguments shown in the quote are faulty. The fact that the book remains easy to understand throughout the dissection is also something of note, as Baggini uses rather breezy language that helps add a bit of spice to what would otherwise come off as somewhat dull. This tone is one of the books biggest draws, as it means that someone who has only a passing knowledge of psychology could pick it up and understand without the need of having a dictionary at hand.

This use of language doesn't mean the book is meant solely for newcomers, however. As mentioned before, Baggini does a solid job at diving into detail and slowly picking apart each of the quotes until only fallacies remain. It's obvious that he knows his stuff, and the number of fallacies presented is remarkable, each one boasting quotes in order to slowly bring the reader in. As mentioned before, these quotes are probably the best part of the book. Not only do they serve as a solid attention-getter, but they also correlate the books contents to the real world and let the reader realize just how important fallacies are in the real-world.

However, the book certainly isn't without its flaws. The main issue is repetition, as though the knowledge presented is quite solid, the book has a habit of dragging on after a certain amount of times. The author makes no attempt to change up the way the book works, and in turn you can expect the same from each and ever section. This, in turn, means reading in short bursts is generally a good idea. However, it could also be argued that this is a case of "If it's broken, why fix it?" as the manner in which Baggini writes the book is solid enough.

Despite the flaw though, the book is certainly a solid read. It's good at helping newcomers dive in, and can also help those already familar with the subject expand on their knowledge by a bit. Either way, it certainly is an eye-opener and will almost certainly let you view the world in a different light.

Although at first I was a little unhappy with this book it is simply because I misunderstood what the book was trying to portray. Trust me, after just a few chapters (which are all short and easy to read) it will be hard to put this book down. I promise you, you can relate to 99% of the content in this book. The author explores common fallacies used through everyday life. Through 100 different examples, the author essentially cuts down different quotes that have been used by relatively influential, and explains why what is being said is a poor argument. Overall a good read.