|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
 Posted - 03/02/2004 : 08:29:13
|
Informal Logic : A Handbook for Critical Argument
by Douglas N. Walton
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0521379253/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/002-6651690-7850458?v=glance&s=books&vi=customer-reviews
Just finished this book over the weekend and found it to be a decent read. The book can be very dry and repetitive, but is fairly short so it isn't as painful to read :>
The book sets out to outline how to construct good arguments, avoid making bad ones, and criticizing bad ones as well. It is meant to be a practical handbook of applying logic to everyday arguments and not a technical overview of logic.
From this point it does a decent job of covering the grounds. It describes the different types of discussions/arguemnts one can enter (persuasion dialog, inquiry, legalistic debate, etc.) and how the rules of debate can vary between them. It covers in detail the basic rules of dialog that all participants should honor (such as answering questions directly as possible without being evasive, etc.)
The middle chapters cover the various types of arguments (ad hom, appeal to authority, appeal to emotion, etc) and their strengths and weaknesses, when they are appropriate and when they are not (they are not always fallacies), and how to critically examine them to see if they are fallacious.
The last 2 chapters were the best in the book IMO. The next to last chapter covered inferential arguments based on statistics and did a good enough job without delving into the statistics at all that an average reader after reading this could better evaluate various statistical claims. It also covered the basics of inferential science and how it works as opposed to direct experimentational science.
The last chapter covered various points related to language and argumentation. Things such as vague definitions, changing definitions, changing conditions of quality, etc.
Overall the book is a good read but can be dull for pages at a time. Sometimes the examples are so mind dulling simple that they are painful to read (but they do get their point across), other times they are intriguing and interesting. Overall a B-
|
|
Topic Locked
