This is a wonderful, easily understood, readable
discussion of the difference between logic and
pseudo-logical argument tools and tricks to pull the wool over the eyes of the other persons.
This is important reading for young people.
Frequently, arguments which seem valid are false--tricks. This booklett tells how to recognize the phony and use it also.
This is a lot of doubletalk. Whitehead's little booklet
entitled "The Aims of Education" is clear, not of great content, but it makes sense. This "The Concept of Nature" is worse than worthless. It came out in 1919, well over a decade after Eieinstein's Special relativity came out, and three years after Einstein's General Relativity came out, though the experimental verification was not to be for several years after 1919.
This work could have as well have been written in the Middle Ages. If it is intended to have any serious purpose, the purpose is well hidden.
This is quite a fun and actually educational book. The fun and educational qualities are the same, specifically the extremely broad use of logically invalid arguments. The aspect makes it of great use in teaching logic and logical writing. Virtually every device one may imagine are used.
Some arguments are rather odd. The use of Thoman Hunt Morgan, the father of modern genetics, to refute Darwin's Survival of the fittest is surprisint; mutation is used as the refutation. Very strange.
One really fun argument is the
refutation of Survival of fittest, etc by imagining a contest between a mouse and an elephant: In single combat. The mouse standing proudly over the dead elephant is imagined. So Darwin is pronounce absure. Good reading for this purpose. And maybe for historical purposes. There is no science.
m.jones’s book reviews
discussion of the difference between logic and
pseudo-logical argument tools and tricks to pull the wool over the eyes of the other persons.
This is important reading for young people.
Frequently, arguments which seem valid are false--tricks. This booklett tells how to recognize the phony and use it also.
entitled "The Aims of Education" is clear, not of great content, but it makes sense. This "The Concept of Nature" is worse than worthless. It came out in 1919, well over a decade after Eieinstein's Special relativity came out, and three years after Einstein's General Relativity came out, though the experimental verification was not to be for several years after 1919.
This work could have as well have been written in the Middle Ages. If it is intended to have any serious purpose, the purpose is well hidden.
Some arguments are rather odd. The use of Thoman Hunt Morgan, the father of modern genetics, to refute Darwin's Survival of the fittest is surprisint; mutation is used as the refutation. Very strange.
One really fun argument is the
refutation of Survival of fittest, etc by imagining a contest between a mouse and an elephant: In single combat. The mouse standing proudly over the dead elephant is imagined. So Darwin is pronounce absure. Good reading for this purpose. And maybe for historical purposes. There is no science.
Like a preacher, not a scholar of conseequence.