How to Win Every Argument: An Introduction to Critical Thinking

This book comes across as a handbook on deception, but it clearly educates you on how to recognize fallacies and erroroneous reasoning by understanding how to create fallacies and invalid reasoning. The tone is serious, but having listened to the tape version and have read the book, the author is clearly demonstrating bad reasoning in order we can recognize and are not deceived by salesmen, supervisors, spouses, or anyone else who self-intrests are counter to our self-interests. It's unique prespective helps you deal with deceptive, manipulative, and exploitative people. Also, recommend Sherlock's Logic, another unique approach to logic that might appeal to people who are more comfortable with the idea of using logic to arrive at the truth in a straightforward way.

The author found that the best way to teach his philosophy students how to spot fallacies was to teach them the tricks of deceptive arguing--and it works. It eschews most of the passive, tedious techniques commonly used, with a lively, amusing tutorial on how never to lose an argument. Not just limited to formal Socratic debate, it discusses how to approach different audiences, considering how to handle adverse facts, and ways to make your argument 'win' even when it is logically weaker.

If more people read and understood this book, 99% of op-ed columnists would be out of a job!

One of the reviewers gave this book only one star because the book showed (the reviewer seems to think the author is actually advocating the use of)methods to deceive others. While accurate to some extent, the motive for such instruction was to highlight ways people may use to deceive the reader. In his Introduction, the author indicated he would teach the reader methods of deception so the reader will recognize and avoid attempts by others to deceive the reader through similar devices. In this, the book is quite successful. With all the propaganda thrown at us by politicians and the so-called "News" media,the teachings in this book are indispensable for anyone hoping to avoid being sucked in. Too basic for the trained logician, but an excellent discussion for the rest of us.

I am a high school debater. This book is absolutely one of the best books written for philosophical debate.

However, I would caution the casual user about buying this book. It will NOT help you win your everday arguments with your boss, collegues, trash disposal, etc...

The ideas are very simple without unnecessary analysis into the depths of logic. Implementing the techniques into debate has been very easy. The book avoids undue jargon and symbols found in other logic books.

The book isin't afraid to expose some technques of deception, which might include unethical abuses of language during a debate. Exposing these helps you tremendously, now one can be able to identify deception as well as use it on an unsuspecting opponent.

I bought this book because I had read several good reviews of it (the book was previously published under the title "The Art of Deception"). I thought that it would be able to help me improve my arguing skills using legitimate methods. However, the book has turned out to be an absolute waste of my time and money. It is hardly an "Introduction to Critical Thinking" as it claims to be. The author advocates using ambiguity, trickery, and insulting your opponent to try to win arguments. For example, he states that you should not use the words "all" or "some" or that you should use vague terms so that later on you can claim any of a number of different meanings. He also states that you must have a deep voice in order to be successful at arguing, so I guess if you are a woman then you will be unsuccessful. He even has some ridiculous suggestions, like if you don't agree with certain ideas, then you should attack all knowledge in general, and claim that there is a conspiracy among those people who support those ideas. In addition, he often suggests that you attack your opponent rather than their argument. This might be a good strategy for elementary school kids, but not for adults! He also states that you should never admit defeat, and you should refuse to be convinced of your opponent's argument. It really sounds like the author has an ego problem. If you are able to communicate your ideas to your opponent and are able to analyze and understand their ideas and you still lose, then so be it. The presentation of your ideas and the analysis of your opponent's ideas are the key aspects of arguments. Unfortunately the book does not understand that.