An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments PDF Ï Book of

An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments PDF Ï Book of

An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments [Download] ➻ An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments ✤ Ali Almossawi – This book is aimed at newcomers to the field of logical reasoning particularly those who to borrow a phrase from Pascal are so made that they understand best through visuals I have selected a small se This book is aimed at newcomers to the Book of PDF Ç field of logical reasoning particularly those who to borrow a phrase from Pascal are so made that they understand best through visuals I have selected a An Illustrated Kindle - small set of common errors in reasoning and visualized them using memorable illustrations that are supplemented with lots of examples The hope is that the reader will learn from these pages some of the most Illustrated Book of PDF É common pitfalls in arguments and be able to identify and avoid them in practice.

  • Hardcover
  • 56 pages
  • An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments
  • Ali Almossawi
  • English
  • 10 October 2015
  • 9780989931205

About the Author: Ali Almossawi

Ali Almossawi is the author of An Illustrated Book of PDF Ç Book of Bad Arguments a book on computational thinking and The Point of Pointless Work His books have been read by million readers translated into An Illustrated Kindle - languages and have sold over a uarter of a million copies in print He lives in San Francisco with his wife and daughter.

10 thoughts on “An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments

  1. Darwin8u Darwin8u says:

    The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool Richard P Feynman I bought this book shortly after I bought Randall Munroe's Thing Explainer Complicated Stuff in Simple Words and What If? Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical uestions and at the same time I purchased Joyce's The Cats of Copenhagen So I guess I was going through a nerd graphic need for pictures with my words I've always liked logic books on logical fallacies debate and rhetoric I figured this might be an interesting book to get for my kids What isn't to like? Logic presented by anthropomorphized suirrels and badgers? Sign me up The problem is however the book was aiming for a couple different audiences and missed them all Is this a primer on logic? I'm not sure if the way it is laid out and introduced will prime my kids to either be a interested in logic or b better at logic The book itself suggests this is their primary audience on page 1 under the title Who is this book for? This book is aimed at newcomers to the field of logical reasoning particularly those who to borrow a phrase from Pascal are so made that they understand best through visualsIs this aimed unofficially at those who love logic and are searching for a coffee table book or nontraditional text? Well I can't speak for the whole universe of logic lovers but in my case I found BOTH the words and drawings a bit too messy and almost incoherent Ugh The author claims in the Preface that he wanted to create unlike Lewis Carroll and George Orwell a narrative that ties the illustrations together There just seemed to be a larger void between the wish and the execution with this book I applaud the attempt but perhaps the idea reuired a bit thought I don't think the author was misinformed about logic or illustration's ability to aid in education but it just seemed to me that either because of brevity or arrangement the idea didn't work Is this aimed at those who love picture books? Perhaps but again as I pointed out above BOTH the pictures and the text were a bit of a disappointment Probably the only piece of this whole thing I enjoyed without reserve was the drawing of the logical family tree which showed how logical fallacies broke down into formal and informal fallacies etc But this part should have provided hints that some internal book logic was missing This graphic appeared near the beginning of the book but the arrangement of chapters for the 19 examples of bad arguments didn't fit the graphic and the table of contents was several pages earlier Talk about missing an easy hit Finally it was a bit irritating to have the author describe the book's illustrations as memorable and lively I get that the author is perhaps tipping his hat to his illustrator Alejandro Giraldo but still I'll be the judge of how lively and memorable the illustrations are OR book is thank you very muchLooking back on casual purchase of introductory books about logic I guess I just prefer jokes with my logic instead of visuals with my logic see Plato and a Platypus Aristotle and an AardvarkNow that I think of it this book seems to be interesting as an example of modern book marketing slick website an affinity for number of web visitors donations metrics etc Anyway don't take my word for it You don't even need to buy it or hell go ahead and buy it I don't care just go to the book's website Oh and here is the real rub I was irritated enough with the whole book I actually went through the process of returning it to They asked why I gave them a uick answer They refunded my money and said PLEASE DON'T SEND IT BACK I know they were just being logical in an economic sense The 10 I paid for it after prime shipping it to me made it basically economical to just give me my money back rather than shipping it out again Again that was logical but part of me just FELT like even they didn't want it

  2. Anton Anton says:

    One of the worst books about argumentation I’ve ever read But apparently I’m the only one to think so since many people say this book should be on every school curriculum Let me explain why this would be a disasterFirst although this book can be downloaded freely and is nicely illustrated it would be a terrible way to introduce children to the study of reasoning The main reason for this is that the subject is introduced with a section titled ‘Definitions’ which is way too uninviting dense and technical for children Why could Almossawi not explain some important principles of reasoning in ordinary English and leave these definitions for an appendix? Further many of the examples of the fallacies that are treated hardly appeal to the world of children The illustrations are of little aid here either They are not helpful to those who ‘understand better through visuals’ since the visuals don’t do much explaining; it is the texts that are written under them that give just another example of the fallacy Also many of those textual examples feel made up rather than taken from the real world which contributes to the impression that the study of informal logic has no non fictitious applications Finally a proper educational book on fallacies would include exercises in spotting and repairing arguments This book does notSecond the book is neither suited as an introduction to the field for any adolescent or adult either Even for them the ‘Definitions’ section will be too abstract to grasp right away Moreover many of the notions introduced there are not reinforced later in the book or even mentioned This adds to the feeling that this book is nothing than a mishmash of information that you can find just as easily on Wikipedia Most importantly I always found that the true joy of reasoning is uickly extinguished if you make it look like a minefield of fallacies Reasoning is in the first place not about prohibitions but about possibilities Thinking creatively about how you can make some proposition plausible and falsify another This reuires thinking about persuasion verification falsification confirmation argumentation schemes proof strategies induction deduction abduction etc And practice of course There is none of that in this book If you are an adult and interested in informal logic please read some book by Douglas Walton Frans van Eemeren or Alec Fisher If you are a kid and interested in informal logic unfortunately I do not know of any book suited for you This book certainly isn’tTo finish things up a short appendix with a list of some of the mistakes and infelicities I noticed while reading I have little doubt that I would notice if I would read the book again I hear this book will appear in print as well Maybe these comments can be of use to the editors Chapter 1 ‘validity of propositions’ is a category mistake; there is no attempt to distinguish the invalid argument from conseuences from the valid reductio ad absurdum Chapter 2 the anti evolution example is very uncharitable the common ancestry of primates and humans can be considered irrelevant if our common ancestors were sufficiently monkey like and did swing from trees Chapter 3 there is no attempt to distinguish authority from testimony; arguments from authority are strictly speaking always fallacious but this is not made clear; in fact the distinction between deductive validity and inductive strength is never taken seriously outside of the ‘Definitions’ section Chapter 4 the example shows it is precisely the uestion whether ‘faith’ is used ambiguously here or not so discarding the argument from the start seems too hasty Chapter 5 notions of bivalence and vagueness are not dealt with; the picture example is misleading Chapter 6 the simple fact that correlation or temporal precedence do increase the chance of two random events to be causally related is ignored; over often they are our best tools to make causal judgements Chapter 7 the examples are bad; the appeal to fear might reduce as a subtype of the argument from conseuences Chapter 8 the notion of representativeness carries all the weight but is not elaborated upon Chapter 9 Sagan’s example makes a caricature of even the stupidest ufologist; the complicated notion of the burden of proof is only glanced over Chapter 10 this fallacy reduces to circular reasoning Chapter 11 the genesis of beliefs and arguments can in many ways be relevant to their assessment Chapter 12 this type of reasoning may also reduce to other fallacies; it can sometimes be a useful form of in the words of Arne Naess if I recall correctly ‘symptomatic argumentation’ Chapter 13 the picture is misleading; the truth of the conseuent may still increase the probability of the antecedent Chapter 14 inconsistent behaviours and standards can often be rightly criticised Chapter 15 a slippery slope is often a useful inductive reasoning tool even though it is not deductively valid Chapter 16 this whole chapter is confused Chapter 17 the example contradicts the picture in the appeal to authority chapter; the circumstantial ad hominem may reduce to the genetic fallacy Chapter 18 the TV show example is not charitably interpreted Chapter 19 I find it hard to see the relevance of the picture to the text; the text examples are so far from any real world reasoning that you are glad that the book is over

  3. Becky Becky says:

    This book is not at all what I expected When I saw it online I thought it would be a cute and uirky little book illustrating logical failures kind of like Crackedcom did with its article on internet argument techniues But this was not really that Yes it's a little book and it's illustrated but it's not really as successful as it tries to be It's both too complex and too short so it makes a lot of logical leaps I think It attempts to briefly explain concepts that reuire a good bit of explanation and it just feels rushed to conclusions about the particular argument being explained That being said it isn't a bad book but I think it would have benefited from a little breathing room door each argument type The text is dense and the drawings while cute don't always explain the conceptStill I like that it offers a uick reference for me to have in hand for the next presidential debate Maybe I'll make spotting the bad arguments a drinking game Or not I like my liver

  4. Yousif Al Zeera Yousif Al Zeera says:

    The book is aimed at the public who have no or little knowledge in logical fallaciescognitive biases The language used is very simple suitable for non native English speakers but anyway the book is translated into 17 languages just in caseI actually liked the simplicity as these type of subjects logiclogical fallaciescognitive biases are usually found written in complicated language Even the examples used are very simple and most are common to everyday lifeThe big plus in Almossawi's book is that every logical fallacy is accompanied with a wonderful illustration These nice illustrations in addition to the book's size and design makes the book a great choice for gifting non readers

  5. Tim The Enchanter Tim The Enchanter says:

    an entertaining and basic guide to types of bad arguments In my opinion a must read for the avid Facebook expert This is by no mean an academic study on the subject but really just a basic primer

  6. হাঁটুপানির জলদস্যু হাঁটুপানির জলদস্যু says:

    This was awesome Please go to and read it and spread it

  7. Hawra habib Hawra habib says:

    The book discussed different types of argument fallacies arguments that we encounter every other day but yet we are unaware of it Although insightful I didn`t really get how can I benefit from solely knowing about the types of arguments Nonetheless the illustrations were nice some of them were hard to relate to the text but in general it was a light book that reuires a second reading I guess

  8. Peter Derk Peter Derk says:

    I wish everyone would read this before the upcoming election Because my god this thing reads like a preventative guide for most and a tactics manual for political debates Here's my impression of presidential debatesModerator Candidate Buttface tell us about your opinion on immigrationCandidate Buttface I'll tell you all you need to know which is that my opponent Candidate Fartface has the same opinion on immigration as our current president President ButtButt And look at the state of family valuesModerator Candidate Fartface your responseCandidate Fartface Abortion am bad Guns I have a feeling about those that agrees with a tiny minority who unfortunately vote in numbers Death panels How do they work? Right to life Gays are getting married and what are the effects on pizza parlors who hate gay people Small business I worked on a farm one summerModerator Stirring words indeedcut back to Fox News studiosAnd now we have this fuckface who pops the collar on his stupid polo shirts and interviews women with their boobs out Fuckface Thanks Bill You you have your boobs out and are celebrating Mardi Gras Can I ask you a uestion about Obamacare and then wink at the camera like 'See this drunk idiot? With her boobs out?'Boobs Out Lady Um says something frustratingly stupid that makes me mad every time because it's like can't ONE drunken party person tell this guy he's an assholeFuckface winks at camera Back to you Bill Bill Back to the debateModerator Thank you candidates for listening to me ask a uestion hearing the Charlie Brown teacher voice and then basically talking about whatever the fuck you felt like talking about What a rich and wonderful tapestry we have distant sound of gunfire as I end my own lifeFIN

  9. Onaiza Khan Onaiza Khan says:

    It really wasn't what I expected I wouldn't recommend it to anyone mostly because I felt it was uite hard core and kinda pointless Although the illustrations were really great hence the rating

  10. Fatima Ali Fatima Ali says:

    The book talks about the ways for argument in a particular discussion and how people react to different opinions by different techniues As I understood that it is the output of years of ongoing learning and personal experience The writer listed many techniues and supported by examples and uotes from different placed Books TV mediaetc Many of these techniues are being implemented unconsciously by human the writer merely listed and named them accordingly Personally I loved the introduction for the meanings of the terms at the beginning of the book and how they were linked to scientific terms and concepts The illustrations were amazing and confusing in the same time for certain examples I believe they added a value to the book and enriched it with a humorous side I suggest the book to be read for a second time if the reader would like to apply and use these techniues in his reality

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *