Rating: 
Summary: Perhaps the Most Powerful Book I have read. Brilliant
Review: For those with a desire to increase their skill at argumentation, from formal debates to quiet negotiations at home to shouting matches in the street, this book offers some of the most powerful and effective weapons you will ever add to your arsenal. I question anyone who didn't find it of help, since the techniques held in this manual you do not use....you wield! I recommend "How to Win an Argument" By Michael Gilbert for those new to argumentation, as "Deception" will make much more sense with foreknowledge of the subject. Then move on to "Deception" and prepare to enter a training ground that will give you weapons and techniques so powerful, so devastating that they may be more than you even wanted. The strategies here are incredibly powerful, and are remarkably effective. Each chapter you will grow stronger and stronger until by the end you will be able to win or draw every argument you will face, and tear some people to pieces in the process. Believe me when I say that I have made people scream in fury at me, scream that they hate me after dismantling them with what I learned in this book. In some ways the book is too powerful. In some ways you will not even know your own strength after reading it. I recommend using Dale Carnegie techniques most of the time in life, but when you need to defend yourself in a verbal battle or lock up with another in a good old fashion argument, then "The Art of Deception" will provide you with an invaluable arsenal that will ready you for war. Watch in pleasure and even disbelief as you feel yourself roll effortlessly over your opponent, picking them apart like a bug, and watch in delight as they finally lose their temper and begin screaming in defeat. Ready yourself for the very fast paced types of arguments where you seem to be unable to even get a word in, but God help them when it's your turn, for you will usually be able to defeat your opponent in thirty seconds or less in this situation. Please be careful however, because some of the artillery that this book provides is so devastating that you can crush even a good friend in an argument easily and make them very angry, and you may not even mean to.
Learn the basic argument structures such as valid and sound syllogisms which form the building blocks of argumentation. Learn how to build and present a nearly invincible case. Learn how to refute an opponent's argument, and defend you own from attack. Then learn how to catch people in fallacies and tear them apart by identifying weak points in their case. Be trained how to attack and defend brilliantly from any front and direction. Additionally, one of the most devastating weapons, learn how to use fallacies themselves as valid weapons and watch your hapless opponent writhe in agony and drown in a pool of defeat. If you're going to get into verbal confrontations in the future, this is the next best thing to punching them in the face. Become invincible in argumentation, read the masterpiece, "The Art of Deception"
Rating:
Summary: Very straightforward
Review: I am really glad that I bought this book. It is very straightforward and makes perfect sense. Examples are great, although sometimes kind of shocking. Probably, you will need to read it more than once (like me) in order to memorize the material for the use in everyday life. Nevertheless, it's an easy read, I grasped the concept after the first time. Now just polishing the "art of deception", working on details.
Rating: 
Summary: I found the book to be quite good.
Review: I am reordering the book because a friend lost my copy. I found the book to be quite good. It succeeds in presenting logic and logically thinking in a unique and interesting manner. I was surprised to see the low ratings from your survey. I wonder if some people weren't expecting more of a manual on actually how to deceive others.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Intentions, Faulty Execution
Review: I appreciate what the author was trying to do: teach logic and rhetoric in a fun how-to-succeed format. I don't think it works very well, though. It's too disjointed to be helpful to the beginner and too familiar to be interesting to more advanced students.For the beginner: To learn logic, start out with David Kelley's "The Art of Reasoning" and Irving Copi's "Introduction to Logic". To learn rhetoric and argumentation, try David Zarefsky's audiotape course on "Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning" and his books on public speaking. More advanced students will want to check out Chaim Perelman's books on rhetoric and Douglas N. Walton's studies of informal fallacies. An excellent but out-of-print book is William J. Brandt's "The Rhetoric of Argumentation" which gives detailed analyses of effective and ineffective rhetorical strategies in essay-writing.
Rating: 
Summary: This book is absolutely terrible
Review: I bought this book because I had read several good reviews of it. I thought that it would be able to help me improve my arguing skills using legitimate methods. However, the book has turned out to be an absolute waste of my time and money. It is hardly an "Introduction to Critical Thinking" as it claims to be. The author advocates using ambiguity, trickery, and insulting your opponent to try to win arguments. For example, he states that you should not use the words "all" or "some" or that you should use vague terms so that later on you can claim any of a number of different meanings. He also states that you must have a deep voice in order to be successful at arguing, so I guess if you are a woman then you will be unsuccessful. He even has some ridiculous suggestions, like if you don't agree with certain ideas, then you should attack all knowledge in general, and claim that there is a conspiracy among those people who support those ideas. In addition, he often suggests that you attack your opponent rather than their argument. This might be a good strategy for elementary school kids, but not for adults! He also states that you should never admit defeat, and you should refuse to be convinced of your opponent's argument. It really sounds like the author has an ego problem. If you are able to communicate your ideas to your opponent and are able to analyze and understand their ideas and you still lose, then so be it. The presentation of your ideas and the analysis of your opponent's ideas are the key aspects of arguments. Unfortunately the book does not understand that.
Rating: 
Summary: Accurate title, but weak presentation
Review: I give this book 3 stars because the information in the book is consistent with the title, and I neglected to give it the remaining 2 stars due to the weak presentation. As you could infer from the title, this book is about deceiving others in a debate type scenario. This book runs into a problem, however, because the tricks that he advocates are rather elementary from even a semi-educated point of view. I am only 15 years old, but I am really into logic, and had read some logic books prior to this one. With the knowledge I had gleaned from an introductory level logic book, I was able to see through most of the tricks he shows in this book. The vast majority of his deceptive tricks are basic logical fallacies. For this reason, I find the book an interesting read, but due to the almost primal simplicity of his deceptive tools, I would not advise anyone to take his methods seriously. If anyone tried to use his methods against any intelligent person, they would almost certainly be crushed without a fight. To summarize, buy the book, but not with the intent of taking it to heart, but rather as an exercise in exposing logical fallacies.
Rating:
Summary: Don't let title deceive you
Review: I read the book. As a lawyer, I'm always looking to improve my skills. I believe it was Aristotle (or some dead Greek) who warned about bad men in command of good rhetoric, and I suppose the same could be said about intentionally deceptive people, as Capaldi illustrates. (Without `fingering' any particular public person from the last few years.)
"It takes one to catch one," as the saying goes regarding thieves. If you want to catch someone not `playing' fairly, for example, a prosecutor condemning the heinous crime of murder, when the issue is the guilt or innocence of the defendant, this book illustrates things you need to keep in mind. I thought the intent of the title was obvious but it was apparently not clear to some readers.
I did not understand him to advocate the use of deceptive logic; however, of course one can be a sophist with logic. I believe all Capaldi does is try to provide the rules and then show how they are broken. He points out that even after taking his course many students still can't spot simple informal logical fallacies. In sum, even if you are a `straight shooter'--or try to be--that doesn't mean the other guy is.
After a careful re-reading of this book, I believe it allows you to at least make a choice in the new year whether you want to be `good' (dazzle 'em with logic) or `bad' (baffle 'em with, well, you know).
USA! (ad populum)
Rating:
Summary: Weak Intro to Critical Thinking
Review: I would like to second the reviews by Mr. Patten and Mr. Gorman. "The Art of Deception" is itself deceptively titled. The author takes a pseudo-Machiavellian tack and tries to promote elementary critical thinking skills in the guise of a handbook for unscrupulous debaters. Cute idea, but it sort of defeats itself. Sadly, it could actually be used as a handbook for the unscrupulous--and probably has been. And, as others have pointed out, the book is alternately sketchy and tedious. I, too, would have been baffled by several discussions in the book if I hadn't already taken several college courses in logic and rhetoric. For a much better book on this subject, read Howard Kahane's "Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric".
Rating:
Summary: There are better writings on this subject
Review: I would not like to be the author of a book and have to read a review of it like the one I feel I must write on this one. However, I am a learning addict, particularly an audiobook addict (well spent car time) on professional and personal growth. While there are undeniably excellent points made and material covered in this book, I found it to be presented in a manner which brought out the worst attention deficit in me. This reader is that memorable professor who's monotone lectures bored you and put you to sleep in college. No question the man is an authority on the topic(s) that this book intends to address for our gain. However, given his writing and reading style, I believe his own mastery would be better served if used for his own personal and career benefit rather than for his attempt to pass great wisdom on to us who choose which book or books to spend our money and time on to gain or strengthen these skills. I continue (thus far unsuccessfully) to seek an audiobook on the topic of debate. There are hundreds in print and apparently none currently on audio worth your or my money.
Rating:
Summary: Good Points; Somewhat Disjointed
Review: Ironically, this book's TITLE can be deceptive to the unsuspecting reader. This book does not attempt to extoll the virtues of deception or dispense Machiavellian thought to the masses. Instead, the book is meant as a comprehensive guide to the finer points or argumentation and debate. A persevering reader may leave this book with a deeper appreciation for the art of argumentation. Unfortunately, I do not believe that the same holds true for the average reader. A few interesting points are left scattered in a book that is often too long and too confusing. I would imagine that this book would appeal to logicians, philosophers, and lawyers who have labored in the fields of logic, debate, and argumentation throughout the majority of their adult lives. But for others who would like to become more eloquent speakers, I recommend that you look elsewhere.
|
