Mastering Logical Fallacies: The Definitive Guide to Flawless Rhetoric and Bulletproof Logic Kindle Edition

It started out to be interesting, but then the author almost appears to lose interest in his own argument, or has gotten distracted by politics. Instead of continuing to present his material, he goes off on political quips. The book becomes more about why he dislikes Christians and Republicans. This happens about 1/4 the way into the book. Is this a book about debate tactics, or just an excuse to express his distain for his political opposites? Less politics. More subject matter. It is disappointing.

content is no better than you could get anywhere on the web for free.the pervasive political bias is especially offensive since intent of the book is to foster rationality.go to wikipedia if you want to study the subject -- you'll also find a neutral point of view

This book should be titled Dr. Michael Withey's Biased and Unexamined Fallacious Arguments Against Things He Doesn't Like. It would be funny in a raw ironic sense except that the good doctor takes himself so seriously. Don't waste your money on this one.The author should consider that he's a poster child for the Dunning-Kruger effect.

I found this book in a search for a resource to help me improve my logical discourse. After reading several reviews, I decided this was the one.I really like this book and the style of writing. It has motivated me to look more into the subject. The fallacies and errors listed are discussed in accessible language and a perfectly abbreviated format (i.e. not too long, not too short). Nice, real-world examples are given to make the discussion very clear. My only reservation with giving this 5 stars is that the fallacies are listed in alphabetical order. That's great for an encyclopedia but awful for someone trying to learn. Many fallacies and errors are related and should be grouped together in chapters. In the ebook version, related fallacies, when referenced in order to show how they are similar or dissimilar, are hyperlinked. However, I find this very distracting and difficult to navigate. A second edition with the fallacies grouped together in a cognitively-meaningful way would get 5 emphatic gold stars from me.Also, a note on other reviews. Many reviewers gave this low ratings because it has a "liberal bias." I find that the book was well-balanced with real-world fallacies from both sides of the aisle, if they fall on either side of the political aisle at all. Furthermore, anyone who has read this book for understanding would know that just because a fact makes you feel bad doesn't make it any less true.Give this book a go. It would be a great reference for those who have a little bit of experience with logical discourse and, if organized by a talented teacher, could easily be used in high school or college for any class that seeks to improve a student's logical reasoning abilities.

The outline is good but the book falls apart about page 50. For a book on logical fallacies and lecturing the reader about making poor arguments the book is riddled with them. The author uses a Nixon reference argument after warning the reader against the strategy. The author is regularly over his skis on topics and informed reader can easily ferret the error. It was a tiresome read by page 80. There is some editing problems midbook as well. The author tries to shoehorn current examples and his bias on subjects into the book to remain relevant. If you are a liberal, atheist, anti-trump, anti-gun, beginner in forming proper arguments, this is the book for you.

The best thing about this book is the attractive cover. On its inside, however, the book is devoid of real substance. Each entry (detailing one of the fallacies) is *extremely* brief and unsatisfying. While some entries are reasonably done, most are so sloppy and casual that you could imagine the author rushing to meet the publisher’s deadline, not even bothering to revise the draft. Most importantly, however, is the ever-present, acerbic, and derogatory commentary against religion in general (and Christianity specifically) or against conservatives. Several other reviewers give some examples. Ultimately, the author himself commits numerous fallacies, as he lets fly ad hominem attacks and political bias.Don’t waste your money on this book.There are much, much, much better books out there about logic and rhetoric. Highly recommended are: A Workbook for Arguments (Morrow & Weston); Logic as a Liberal Art (Houser); and The Trivium (Joseph). To see great classical examples of logic in practice, read Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas, or various political and philosophical works of the 1700s and 1800s. I do recommend starting with verbal logic and saving symbolic logic for a second course.

I got a copy of this book for my 10 year old. Then I decided that I needed to read it myself, in part as a reaction to having been in far more conversations around recent political events where some of the arguments made no sense to me. The book helped me understand how to recognize and address those kinds of arguments. It also has helped me to take a step back in discussions in other domains, including technical discussions at work.Having a framework for understanding these kinds of fallacies can help you to put a conversation in context, and be able to (more) calmly address the issues people are raising, rather than react emotionally and perhaps commit the same kind of fallacies yourself.While I can’t speak fully to the thoroughness of the discussion of the fallacies I found this to be a really good bit of background. My one complaint is that some of the examples are a bit forced, but the author still makes his point most of the time.Reading this book is a tool that can help you navigate conversations (especially political ones) be they on Facebook or in person.

I bought for my 11 year old. The author commits logical fallacies faster than he aurgues against them. Plus it aurgues why vaping is good. A very poor choice. The fallacy detective is far better.

This book is boring. I persevered through 40% of it before speed-reading the rest to the end. Each of the arguments is laid out one by one in a way that makes you feel like you are reading a dictionary. Some of the examples given were vaguely interesting but will become completely irrelevant in a few years as it heavily borrows from what is current in the news right now. If you want very detailed technical examples of logical fallacies with lots of jargon then you might like it, but this book doesn't relate to 'real life' very well and gets way too bogged down in academics.

Hard to get your head around

Esse é um dos melhores livros introdutórios para o estudo das falácias. O livro dá vários exemplos fáceis de entender e que podem ser transferidos para o contexto brasileiro em que, nos últimos anos, nunca se ouviu tanta falácia. Após ler esse livro recomendo "Nonsense" de Robert Gula e "Lógica Informal" de Douglas Walton.

I gave a 4 instead of a 5 as I think it would have been even more instructive with more real life examples of each fallacy. The author was quite opinionated himself on numerous topics so it was fun to work out the fallacies in his own thinking.

Excellent little book. All students (especially prospective journalists) should have a copy. I wish I'd read it years ago.