Scan barcode
A review by theonionboy
The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine
2.0
I skimmed through the reviews looking to see if any other readers felt as I did about this book. Mostly all I found were either Christians who disliked it because they disagreed with his conclusions, or atheists/agnostics/deists who liked it because they agreed with his conclusions. I land somewhere in between. I consider myself a former Christian, now studying to see if I am an agnostic or deist. So I agree with many of this author's conclusions. But the logic in his arguments is ridiculous.
Have you ever seen a book or article on all the types of logical fallacies often used in debates? They explain terms like ad hominem attack, poisoning the well, appeal to authority, appeal to emotion, wishful thinking, and straw man attack. Well, I feel like this book can be the textbook of examples for those errors. It seems he employed every style of incorrect argument, and rarely made a point without one. It seems to me like the author's knowledge of Christianity and the Bible are second-hand at best. He continually made points that are easily refuted with plausible defenses. Again, this is coming from someone who does not disagree with his conclusion.
It was difficult to get through this book because his logic was so poorly supported. I only completed it so I would have grounds to express my thoughts on it. There were occasional gems in the book, but overall I feel it more useful to his opponents than his cause. I cannot recommend this book in any way.
Have you ever seen a book or article on all the types of logical fallacies often used in debates? They explain terms like ad hominem attack, poisoning the well, appeal to authority, appeal to emotion, wishful thinking, and straw man attack. Well, I feel like this book can be the textbook of examples for those errors. It seems he employed every style of incorrect argument, and rarely made a point without one. It seems to me like the author's knowledge of Christianity and the Bible are second-hand at best. He continually made points that are easily refuted with plausible defenses. Again, this is coming from someone who does not disagree with his conclusion.
It was difficult to get through this book because his logic was so poorly supported. I only completed it so I would have grounds to express my thoughts on it. There were occasional gems in the book, but overall I feel it more useful to his opponents than his cause. I cannot recommend this book in any way.