Rating: 
Summary: Good book except¿
Review: This book seems to cover the topic well and has been helpful. I would tend to agree with the other positive reviewers. However, while the core of the book is good, the author's liberal biases show blatantly in his choice of examples of bad reasoning and also his own rebuttals to the examples.While the examples of bad reasoning are indeed bad reasoning, it would seem (from the book) that it is almost always conservatives who are guilty of this. It would not have been hard to come up with at least as many examples of bad reasoning on the liberal side. While the core of the book is good, it does seem that it has also been used as a vehicle to disseminate the liberal world view. This is unnecessary and degrades its overall quality. I suspect that a little more balance would help readers from both sides to overcome their biases and present better arguments.
Rating:
Summary: liberal biases?!?!?!
Review: This is a good text to use as a suppliment for a Critical Thinking class. I would tend to rely more heavily upon a text that taught not only fallicious arguments, but the construction of good arguments. And to help set the record straight, those who have talked in various other reviews about a "liberal bias" are obviously in need of such a course as Critical Thinking: for it remains beyond the author's responsibility that the conservative right so often commits the informal fallacies addressed in this book.
Rating: 
Summary: A Unified Theory of Fallacies and Arguments
Review: This is one of the first texts on critical thinking to incorporate traditional logical fallacies in a unified theory of fallacies and arguments. Damer lists four criteria of a "good argument," then defines a "fallacy" as a violation of one or more of these criteria. He then groups all of the traditional fallacies by the criterion that they violate. Thus, the readers are not just learning a list of fallacies in an intellectual vaccuum; they are learning a holistic system that makes sense intuitively and logically, and will enable them not only to critique flawed arguments, but to construct logically sound arguments of their own.
Damer also includes "A Code of Conduct for Effective Rational Discussion," twelve principles for civilized, intelligent discussion of issues. These twelve principles include the four criteria of a good argument, thus connecting all the ideas of the book in one logical and easily understood structure. It's noteworthy that the author includes a discussion of ethics, and the "right" and "wrong" way to argue. He even has strategies on how to point out flawed arguments without being judgemental or intellectually condescending. Knowledge is power, after all, and intellectual might doesn't necessarily make right.
It's refreshing to see a critical thinking text acknowledge the ethical responsibility that comes with superior critical thinking skills. Damer takes this responsibility very seriously, and encourages readers to seek truth over victory. This is apparent in the Code of Conduct, which includes "The Fallibility Principle," "The Truth-Seeking Principle," and "The Principle of Charity."
The author includes numerous, excellent examples of the fallacies, taken from a wide variety of contexts. He also gives examples of three different methods for attacking fallacies: logical deconstruction, counterexamples, and absurd examples. The absurd example is a particularly powerful method which is easy to understand and effective with even the most subtle fallacies. Damer excels in demonstrating this method with many effective examples.
If you only buy one book on critical thinking, make it this one! This is the closest thing I've seen to a critical thinking "Bible," incorporating ethical principles, and a practical definition of a good argument, and wrapping it all up with the traditional fallacies in a sensible and intuitive logical structure.
Rating:
Summary: A Unified Theory of Fallacies and Arguments
Review: This is one of the first texts on critical thinking to incorporate traditional logical fallacies in a unified theory of fallacies and arguments. Damer lists four criteria of a "good argument," then defines a "fallacy" as a violation of one or more of these criteria. He then groups all of the traditional fallacies by the criterion that they violate. Thus, the readers are not just learning a list of fallacies in an intellectual vaccuum; they are learning a holistic system that makes sense intuitively and logically, and will enable them not only to critique flawed arguments, but to construct logically sound arguments of their own.
Damer also includes "A Code of Conduct for Effective Rational Discussion," twelve principles for civilized, intelligent discussion of issues. These twelve principles include the four criteria of a good argument, thus connecting all the ideas of the book in one logical and easily understood structure. It's noteworthy that the author includes a discussion of ethics, and the "right" and "wrong" way to argue. He even has strategies on how to point out flawed arguments without being judgemental or intellectually condescending. Knowledge is power, after all, and intellectual might doesn't necessarily make right.
It's refreshing to see a critical thinking text acknowledge the ethical responsibility that comes with superior critical thinking skills. Damer takes this responsibility very seriously, and encourages readers to seek truth over victory. This is apparent in the Code of Conduct, which includes "The Fallibility Principle," "The Truth-Seeking Principle," and "The Principle of Charity."
The author includes numerous, excellent examples of the fallacies, taken from a wide variety of contexts. He also gives examples of three different methods for attacking fallacies: logical deconstruction, counterexamples, and absurd examples. The absurd example is a particularly powerful method which is easy to understand and effective with even the most subtle fallacies. Damer excels in demonstrating this method with many effective examples.
If you only buy one book on critical thinking, make it this one! This is the closest thing I've seen to a critical thinking "Bible," incorporating ethical principles, and a practical definition of a good argument, and wrapping it all up with the traditional fallacies in a sensible and intuitive logical structure.
Rating:
Summary: A Unified Theory of Fallacies and Arguments
Review: This is one of the first texts on critical thinking to incorporate traditional logical fallacies in a unified theory of fallacies and arguments. Damer lists four criteria of a "good argument," then defines a "fallacy" as a violation of one or more of these criteria. He then groups all of the traditional fallacies by the criterion that they violate. Thus, the readers are not just learning a list of fallacies in an intellectual vaccuum; they are learning a holistic system that makes sense intuitively and logically, and will enable them not only to critique flawed arguments, but to construct logically sound arguments of their own.
Damer also includes "A Code of Conduct for Effective Rational Discussion," twelve principles for civilized, intelligent discussion of issues. These twelve principles include the four criteria of a good argument, thus connecting all the ideas of the book in one logical and easily understood structure. It's noteworthy that the author includes a discussion of ethics, and the "right" and "wrong" way to argue. He even has strategies on how to point out flawed arguments without being judgemental or intellectually condescending. Knowledge is power, after all, and intellectual might doesn't necessarily make right.
It's refreshing to see a critical thinking text acknowledge the ethical responsibility that comes with superior critical thinking skills. Damer takes this responsibility very seriously, and encourages readers to seek truth over victory. This is apparent in the Code of Conduct, which includes "The Fallibility Principle," "The Truth-Seeking Principle," and "The Principle of Charity."
The author includes numerous, excellent examples of the fallacies, taken from a wide variety of contexts. He also gives examples of three different methods for attacking fallacies: logical deconstruction, counterexamples, and absurd examples. The absurd example is a particularly powerful method which is easy to understand and effective with even the most subtle fallacies. Damer excels in demonstrating this method with many effective examples.
If you only buy one book on critical thinking, make it this one! This is the closest thing I've seen to a critical thinking "Bible," incorporating ethical principles, and a practical definition of a good argument, and wrapping it all up with the traditional fallacies in a sensible and intuitive logical structure.
Rating:
Summary: Liberal bias?
Review: To say that this is a good book except that the examples are all about conservative views and that this makes the book stilted in any way is itself logically fallacious. Bad logic is bad logic period. It is unfortunate that the conservative cause is so riddled with bad reasoning like this.
|
