Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.72 AVERAGE
3.72 AVERAGE
informative
reflective
relaxing
fast-paced
I'm going to buy this book for my grandchildren if I have any.
Had a friend recommend this so I read it on line and am happy to have done so. Clear, concise and funny.
This short little book is a good look at some of the most common fallacies. It has good use of illustrations and does a very good job conveying the information.
The explanations were good, but I was a little disappointed in the illustrations. Sometimes they were just confusing.
Probably more like 2.5.
Logical fallacies can be difficult to define and explain in laymen's terms. In my experience in various composition classes, it's not until we get to the examples of the fallacies that it finally clicks. I was hoping that, since this was a short book, it would word things in a way that were less technical and easier to understand. Essentially something that dumbed things down a bit for the sake of shortness.
However, this book, sadly, is no different than many textbook chapters on the topic. The author uses lots of "jargon" that had me reading and rereading the descriptions to try and understand what was trying to be defined. It wasn't until the example(s) were given that I understood "OH, you mean this kind of argument/statement!" Although they were short definitions, I had to read everything slowly, out loud, to really focus on the definitions. I understand that, while many fallacies may be easy to recognize or understand, they can be difficult to put into words. But that doesn't mean that the only way to describe and define them is with the technical terms--it may be proper, but it's not the only way. It seems as if the book itself is a bit of a fallacy!
That all being said, this was an enjoyable refresher on fallacies, and it gave some great examples. While I certainly wouldn't say that this should be required reading for every English class, it would be fun to see it used in some instances. Fallacies always seem to me a bit of a paradox--like, arguing something is a fallacy by using a fallacy--and I do enjoy learning about them, despite the sometimes confusing definitions.
The illustrations were fun, but it was their captions--not the actual pictures themselves--that gave another example of the fallacy. And despite the inclusion of pictures, this definitely isn't written as a kids book. Which is unfortunate, because politicians could definitely use something like this. They helped bump the rating up a half star.
I read this online: https://bookofbadarguments.com/#
Logical fallacies can be difficult to define and explain in laymen's terms. In my experience in various composition classes, it's not until we get to the examples of the fallacies that it finally clicks. I was hoping that, since this was a short book, it would word things in a way that were less technical and easier to understand. Essentially something that dumbed things down a bit for the sake of shortness.
However, this book, sadly, is no different than many textbook chapters on the topic. The author uses lots of "jargon" that had me reading and rereading the descriptions to try and understand what was trying to be defined. It wasn't until the example(s) were given that I understood "OH, you mean this kind of argument/statement!" Although they were short definitions, I had to read everything slowly, out loud, to really focus on the definitions. I understand that, while many fallacies may be easy to recognize or understand, they can be difficult to put into words. But that doesn't mean that the only way to describe and define them is with the technical terms--it may be proper, but it's not the only way. It seems as if the book itself is a bit of a fallacy!
That all being said, this was an enjoyable refresher on fallacies, and it gave some great examples. While I certainly wouldn't say that this should be required reading for every English class, it would be fun to see it used in some instances. Fallacies always seem to me a bit of a paradox--like, arguing something is a fallacy by using a fallacy--and I do enjoy learning about them, despite the sometimes confusing definitions.
The illustrations were fun, but it was their captions--not the actual pictures themselves--that gave another example of the fallacy. And despite the inclusion of pictures, this definitely isn't written as a kids book. Which is unfortunate, because politicians could definitely use something like this. They helped bump the rating up a half star.
I read this online: https://bookofbadarguments.com/#
A good coffee table book to reference when helping my brood of impressionable minds prepare for debates at their skrewls full of ideologues (both teachers and students). I like the concept of this book, but it would have been improved with some focus groups and/or usability testing. “However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.”
This is basically an expanded discussion of logical fallacies, but couched in this weird rabbits vs. badgers metaphor. The rabbits and badgers were so distracting! What's the point? On page 72, Almossawi cites a quote by Bobby Kennedy and introduces the quote as follows: "In a 1961 broadcast, an ex-attorney general, brother to the then-president, says." Then, directly after said quote, the author quotes James Baldwin who explicitly names (guess who?) Bobby Kennedy! Why this whole vague, faux-neutral language in the first place? I see no benefit to re-labeling groups as animals, and the illustrations add nothing to the impact of the book.
Additionally, the author often attributed quotes to "a paper of note" instead of just ... naming the publication. It's been printed--why not cite it properly?
Additionally, the author often attributed quotes to "a paper of note" instead of just ... naming the publication. It's been printed--why not cite it properly?
The book is interesting but far shorter than I expected.
funny
informative
lighthearted
fast-paced