Most Helpful Customer Reviews
71 of 73 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
May Not Be What You're Looking For . . ., July 29, 2003
By A Customer
This review is from: Thinking From A to Z (Paperback)
The title is too broad for what the book is essentially about: providing brief explanations of logical reasoning and fallacies. The "A to Z" is basically the format of the book, starting with such "A" terms like the ad hominem fallacy and moving to "Z". This format may be cute and useful when you need to know a specific definition, but generally unhelpful at giving you a brief introduction to logic. This book is very slim, resembling a pocket dictionary -- but in this case, it's a pocket guide to informal logic terms and fallacies. Each little definition of a term is very brief, with usually only one small example illustrating how the term is used correctly or incorrectly. Quite honestly, I found Anthony Weston's "A Rulebook for Arguments" more effective as a concise book on logical arguments. This book seems more like a nifty little gift you'd give to a philosophy major, rather than a handy reference material you'd depend on. At the cover price, I would think that most people would rather invest in Weston's book as a reference guide. I hope this clears up any confusion about the contents of this book. If you're still not sure, I'd advise you to check the book out at the library or bookstore before buying.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
19 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The ABC's of Analysis and Argumentation, January 25, 2002
I believe it was P.T. Barnum who said "You'll never go broke underestimating the public." Barnum was speaking hyperbolically (I hope), but it is true that many otherwise intelligent people will fall prey to the most outlandish fraud and manipulation. In addition to protecting the reader against conmen, this little book will serve as an antidote to fuzzy thinking in general. "Thinking" is set up like a dictionary, with alphabetical entries and boldfaced cross references. This arrangement makes the work somewhat user-unfriendly. You can't analyze an argument by looking it up in the book. You won't know what entry to look under. Reading the book straight through from A to Z makes the presentation somewhat disjointed because related ideas are scattered throughout the book depending on what letter of the alphabet they begin with. A good way to attack the book is to start at A and read the entries in alphabetical order, stopping to look up and read each cross reference as you come to it. Thus you'd read "Absurd consequences move" first, and then skip to "reductio ad absurdum," "refutation," and the other terms cross referenced in the entry. Then you'd read the next alphabetical entry and all its cross references, and so on until you come to the end of the book. If you follow this procedure with each alphabetical entry, re-reading every term each time it is cross referenced, by the time you get to "Zig-zagging," you will have a good handle on all types of logical and illogical arguments. You'll also be able to analytically dissect advertisements, newscasts, op-ed pieces, and political speeches. "Thinking," gives an excellent grounding in rhetorical analysis that will serve you well the next time someone tries to pull the wool over your eyes.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent and concise!, June 20, 1999
It succinctly explains generally the aspects of argument. What is modus ponnens or afirming the antecedent? How do you recognize the gamblers fallacy? It is in alphabetical order with the various subjects explained in the most simple terms possible, with many helpful examples. Well worth the price.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
