Ali Almossawi

Imagine that Aristotle decided to reissue his great On Sophistical Refutations as a graphic book. Then you would have the lush An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments in which author Ali Almossawi lays out logical fallacies and improves a reader’s capacity for cogent, logical argument. Illustrations of anthropomorphic woodland creatures by Alejandro Giraldo people — if you’ll pardon the pun — the 64-page tome, making even the most obscure explication crystal clear. A priceless guide for show more anyone who’s trying to turn muddled, fuzzy incoherence into flawless, convincing prose. (I’m talking about you, Thomas Friedman and Jonah Goldberg!)

If you write, you need this book as much as you need The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White and either The Transitive Vampire: a Handbook of Grammar for the Innocent, the Eager, and the Doomed or The Deluxe Transitive Vampire: A Handbook of Grammar for the Innocent, the Eager and the Doomed, both by Karen Elizabeth Gordon. show less

This very short volume contains one-page descriptions of various logical fallacies people make in arguments, accompanied by whimsical illustrations in which cute animals play out the fallacies.

I'm afraid I like this idea of this book a lot more than I like the execution. The descriptions of the logical fallacies often aren't as clear as they could be, especially given that they're supposedly aimed at readers for whom this subject is new, and the examples Almossawi uses are sometimes kind of show more odd. And the illustrations are charming, sometimes even delightful, but some of them are a lot more apt than others. show less

I enjoyed this concise collection of the types of logic failures so common in conversation and debate, and I found the explanations excellent (mostly) but I have to admit to finding the illustrations, skilful though they are, a bit obscure. Some worked, but others just failed to clearly illustrate the fallacy they were paired with.

Still, it's a book I'll enjoy referring to now and then, if only to remind myself not to fall down the slippery slope of logical fallacies.

The idea of a simplified book of critical thinking has merit, but the promise of this book was not achieved. A quick read, partially because there is very little substance, marred by the fact that some of the examples he used were weak, and in some cases could arguably said to be inaccurate (particularly the one he used for ad hominem, which bears little resemblance to most of the ad hominem arguments typically being made). I had hoped to use this for my students, but it is not sufficient show more nor accurate enough to include on their list. Avoid this, and read one of the many better books on the topic. show less