6 ms·

What I would have liked is a book that presented the bad arguments in a neutral and fun way so that I could recommend it as a neutral and fun way to learn about

What I would have liked is a book that presented the bad arguments in a neutral and fun way so that I could recommend it as a neutral and fun way to learn about these things for anyone. A sort of coffee book primer on logical fallacies. What I got is a bunch of back-handed cartoon insults towards the groups the author dislikes. Still nicely done though, and the pictures are great.

vince_refiti 12y ago
"What I got is a bunch of back-handed cartoon insults towards the groups the author dislikes." Ad hominem?
- baddox 12y ago
  Nope, definitely not ad hominem. That sentence doesn't even contain an argument.
zxcdw 12y ago
Which groups exactly and which insults?
mda 12y ago
Nice ad hominem + straw man combo you had there.
- baddox 12y ago
  That comment contained neither an ad hominem nor a straw man.
rahimnathwani 12y ago
Check out 'Straight and crooked thinking' by Robert Thouless. http://www.amazon.com/dp/1444117181 http://www.amazon.com/dp/1444117181
Niten 12y ago
I agree that the topical references were pretty conspicuous, but they were also fair and served a purpose in my opinion. I think there is value in illustrating fallacies not merely in the abstract, but also by allusion to real-world examples—especially when the author's stated goal is to prepare his readers "to identify and avoid them in practice". For the most part, those examples are actual arguments I've encountered people make: that anthropogenic climate change must not be real because addressing it now could hurt the economy, or that Christianity is true because the Bible says so. Orthogonal to the ultimate truth value of global warming or religion, these particular arguments are objectively fallacious, and it is both fair and illuminating to call them out as prominent examples. Maybe one could argue that the author is himself erecting a straw man by (for another example) lumping together UFO conspiracy theorists with the appeal to ignorance. However, one would have to show that (1) the appeal to ignorance is not actually representative of the kind of arguments most often put forth by UFO enthusiasts (it is, in my experience), and (2) that the author's objective with that passage was to discredit UFO enthusiasts, whereas I believe his objective was simply to demonstrate the fallacy of a specific type of argument which just happens to be most commonly employed (and which the audience will most readily recognize) in that context. Rinse and repeat for all the other allusions. Great illustrations, though: yes, I think we can all agree on that :)
gorhill 12y ago
> back-handed cartoon insults towards the groups the author dislikes Did you read page 42? Excerpt: "... circumstantial ad hominem, is any argument that attacks a person for cynical reasons, by making a judgment about their intentions ..."
- baddox 12y ago
  That comment contained no ad hominem. There was no argument that attacked a person for cynical reasons, by making a judgement about their intention.
  - gorhill 12y ago
    He attributed pettiness to the author ("back-handed cartoon insults"), motivated by supposed "dislike" of unnamed groups. In short, focusing on perceived flaws in the author's character.
- Natsu 12y ago
  Fallacies apply to statements about the truth or falsehood of something, not to criticism in general. They did not say that the book was untrue in any way due to that, but rather that they disliked that aspect of the book.
MartinCron 12y ago
What I got is a bunch of back-handed cartoon insults towards the groups the author dislikes. You over-sensitive liberals just need to grow a thicker skin...
- Gigablah 12y ago
  Quick! Which fallacy does MartinCron's reply represent?
  - MartinCron 12y ago
    I was trying for appeal to hypocrisy, but I can see others working, too.
- nmrm 12y ago
  This comment is fairly comical, since most of the groups singled out in the book are typically associated with conservative politics (religious arguments are singled out several times, for instance). I agree with grandparent for pragmatic reasons -- suggesting this book to a religious friend could easily be misconstrued by said friend as a back-handed insult.
  - MartinCron 12y ago
    "fairly comical" is a good expression for a joke that just didn't land.
vacri 12y ago
I don't see the groups that the cartoons are insulting. Who do you see as insulted by the cartoons?

vince_refiti 12y ago

"What I got is a bunch of back-handed cartoon insults towards the groups the author dislikes." Ad hominem?

baddox 12y ago
Nope, definitely not ad hominem. That sentence doesn't even contain an argument.

zxcdw 12y ago

Which groups exactly and which insults?

mda 12y ago

Nice ad hominem + straw man combo you had there.

baddox 12y ago
That comment contained neither an ad hominem nor a straw man.

rahimnathwani 12y ago

Check out 'Straight and crooked thinking' by Robert Thouless. http://www.amazon.com/dp/1444117181 http://www.amazon.com/dp/1444117181

Niten 12y ago

I agree that the topical references were pretty conspicuous, but they were also fair and served a purpose in my opinion. I think there is value in illustrating fallacies not merely in the abstract, but also by allusion to real-world examples—especially when the author's stated goal is to prepare his readers "to identify and avoid them in practice". For the most part, those examples are actual arguments I've encountered people make: that anthropogenic climate change must not be real because addressing it now could hurt the economy, or that Christianity is true because the Bible says so. Orthogonal to the ultimate truth value of global warming or religion, these particular arguments are objectively fallacious, and it is both fair and illuminating to call them out as prominent examples. Maybe one could argue that the author is himself erecting a straw man by (for another example) lumping together UFO conspiracy theorists with the appeal to ignorance. However, one would have to show that (1) the appeal to ignorance is not actually representative of the kind of arguments most often put forth by UFO enthusiasts (it is, in my experience), and (2) that the author's objective with that passage was to discredit UFO enthusiasts, whereas I believe his objective was simply to demonstrate the fallacy of a specific type of argument which just happens to be most commonly employed (and which the audience will most readily recognize) in that context. Rinse and repeat for all the other allusions. Great illustrations, though: yes, I think we can all agree on that :)

gorhill 12y ago

> back-handed cartoon insults towards the groups the author dislikes Did you read page 42? Excerpt: "... circumstantial ad hominem, is any argument that attacks a person for cynical reasons, by making a judgment about their intentions ..."

baddox 12y ago
That comment contained no ad hominem. There was no argument that attacked a person for cynical reasons, by making a judgement about their intention.
- gorhill 12y ago
  He attributed pettiness to the author ("back-handed cartoon insults"), motivated by supposed "dislike" of unnamed groups. In short, focusing on perceived flaws in the author's character.
Natsu 12y ago
Fallacies apply to statements about the truth or falsehood of something, not to criticism in general. They did not say that the book was untrue in any way due to that, but rather that they disliked that aspect of the book.

MartinCron 12y ago

What I got is a bunch of back-handed cartoon insults towards the groups the author dislikes. You over-sensitive liberals just need to grow a thicker skin...

Gigablah 12y ago
Quick! Which fallacy does MartinCron's reply represent?
- MartinCron 12y ago
  I was trying for appeal to hypocrisy, but I can see others working, too.
nmrm 12y ago
This comment is fairly comical, since most of the groups singled out in the book are typically associated with conservative politics (religious arguments are singled out several times, for instance). I agree with grandparent for pragmatic reasons -- suggesting this book to a religious friend could easily be misconstrued by said friend as a back-handed insult.
- MartinCron 12y ago
  "fairly comical" is a good expression for a joke that just didn't land.

vacri 12y ago

I don't see the groups that the cartoons are insulting. Who do you see as insulted by the cartoons?