درست استدلال کردن

by John Shand, تورج قانونی (Translator)

What are arguments for? How do they work and how do they fail? Arguing Well gives a lucid introduction to the nature of arguments and provides a guide on when to implement reason. It explains the principles of good reasoning, how to apply it and strategies to overcome forces that lead to abandoning it. A simple introduction to symbolic logic gives the reader a useful tool in dealing with arguments. Throughout the book, the long neglected psychological factors that prevent the operating of reasoning are uncovered and a guide is provided on when to implement reason.

Genres: Philosophy, Logic

162 pages, Paperback

First published August 9, 2000

Reviews

[یاسر میردامادی · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very concise and well articulated book in logic and critical thinking.

[William Rigby · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow, my first non-fiction book of the year!

I am the first to admit that I completely messed up my regular reading schedule. I usually go for two fiction books followed by a non-fiction book to ensure I am still actively and passively learning. But wow, I have just realised it has been a while since I last read something that didn't contain dragons or mythical beasts, hahaha.

This was an excellent book and a real find! And for 99p, this was a steal. A hidden gem amongst the other random ass books that charity shops have in stock. While it was only short, it was tightly packed with practical advice on applying logic, valid arguments and sound reasoning while accessible to the armchair rhetorician. I will cover my bases by admitting that I am a complete novice on this subject, and I am far from being knowledgeable on how well this book stands in comparison to others in its field. But for me, this was a great introduction to the subject of sound argumentation and provided insight into some of my fallacies and misconceptions.

I will admit I did not understand nor care for the symbolic logic chapter of this book, and I know its importance and why it is applicable. However, I do not have the faculties for such a mathematical topic, so I skimmed over it. Is this cheating? Maybe. Who will punish me? No one. Who cares? Not I.

Overall, good book! Let's see what I read next.

[Javad Oftadeh]

کاش یکم راحت‌تر ترجمه میکردی مومن
از فارسی سخت هم سختر است!

[Mino · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book explains the anatomy of an argument by going through the components and the possible variations in relationship between the components.

This is my take-away:

Arguments are a set of propositions, of which one is a conclusion and the others are premises.
By way of applying a valid logic form, the conclusion si derived from the premises.

Here is a symbolic example of such a logical form (among many others possible):
p implies q
p
------------
q

where p and q can be substited with any propositions about the world. This would be considered a valid argument as the form used stands to logic. For the conclusion to be true the premises need to be true and the argument valid (the validity consisting the truth table of the logical form).

Arguing is a movement of thought, it gets you from the premises to the conclusion. The conclusion is *deduced* from the premises. Denying the conclusion should result in a contradiction, and this is one way to verify the validity of the argument. Conversely, if the conclusion is false and the argument is valid then it follows necessarily that at least one of the premises is false.

Logic is not concerned with the truthfulness of the propositions but only with the relation between the premises and the proposed conclusion. Conversely, the process of reasoning or arguing in favor of a statement is not in itself concerned to convince someone but primarily meant to be objective and truthful in stating observations about the world, although correct reasoning or arguing would be one of the best tools employed in convincing someone of something. Rhetoric on the other hand is rather meant for convincing people. Rhetoric is much more complex and plays with a number of other psychological aspects alongside other techniques of bringing people to believe or act in certain ways. It's important to distinguish between the two.


The book then goes into the importance of the terms used in the argument, the importance of the consistency of meaning of the same terms used in the premises and the conclusion and how it influences the validity of the argument. The author then goes on to define what constitutes a good definition of a term (capturing the essence of the defined notion by presenting the conditions sufficient and necessary that describe it). Then it goes on into a soft nice introduction to propositional and predicate logical abstraction, operators and truth tables and how to read the symbols. It then concludes with a case for building a habit to reason correctly which I found compelling.


The book is quite short but there still was quite a bit of repetition. The same core ideas were expressed in various ways (perhaps meant as a pedagogical technique in fact). It might take a toll at some point. All in all, this is a good book and I think it lays some good foundation for what it meant to present.

[Tiamat Ankers · Rating 4 out of 5]

A concise but thorough introduction to reasoning, this book goes over how to reason, the principles of deduction and logic, and the reasons why we should reason, as well as why we needn't always. A necessity for any who need to think critically about what they see, which is everyone, and anyone in the fields of maths, science, or any of the humanities, where truth is so important.
A very helpful introduction with easily understood language that doesn't require any understanding of notation or terminology to read, this is a must-read for anyone wishing to better their understanding of the world.