Book Review: A Rulebook for Arguments

A Rulebook for Arguments, fourth edition

by Anthony Weston

The Premise

One would think that arguments are rather unpleasant and undesirable, and that most people would go to great length trying to avoid it. However, if you really want to broaden your horizon, then discussion of clashing ideas with other people is unavoidable. There will be some pain, to be sure, but those are good pain. Those are the growing pains of learning new things. Here, in this book, Anthony Weston has distilled the most common argument techniques, as well as various fallacies that is common in discussing ideas. If arguments are unavoidable, at least by using the techniques described here, it would be a civil one.

The Rules and Generalizations

The basic elements of a properly constructed argument includes a premise and a conclusion. The art of arguments, therefore, is to draw a logical thought that goes from premise to the conclusion. It bothers me to no end that people still engage in random arguments, using nothing but vague terms, when in fact, this book specified that you need to use concrete terms, "(4 Be concrete and concise").

You can use examples as your arguments, of course. That is described on part 2, Generalizations. You do need to use representative examples, rather than outlier, and preferably that you use more than one. Also that you're not supposed to cherry pick your examples, of what I term "Myopic arguments". Part 4 explains that you can use experts' opinions for your arguments, just be sure that they have the right expertise! In my personal experience, sometimes people are hell-bent to win an argument, that they fail to realize that they're arguing with top expert in the field, just because. 

Different Types of Arguments

The book does a great job surveying different types of arguments. In my opinion, the types of arguments presented represents a good balance between usage, utility, and coverage. Does Anthony Weston provides the most comprehensive type of arguments? He does not, and he should not. In fact, Wikipedia has more argument types, yet I do not consult Wikipedia because it's so boring! The selection here is thorough without being boring, a testament to the skill and experience of the author.

Common Fallacies

About the only weakness that I can find is about "straw man" argument. It does refer to Rule 5: Build on substance, not overtone. However, the frequent misuse that I encounter in daily basis merits, in my humble opinion, that he should expand the subject in more comprehensive manner. Since that is a weakness, and not a flaw, I can definitely say that it's a great book, indeed!

Again, the surveyed fallacies does represent most instances where they get misused. Hence, reading and utilizing the techniques described in this book will get you far ahead than most people.

The Conclusion

There are many, many times, that people relentlessly argued back and forth in some on-line community. The result is always the same: Bruised ego, hurt feelings, and no improvement whatsoever. Repeat that often enough, and the community died a lonely death. The best one can hope for is for the community to limp along, propped by a few loyal users. And yet, it is not necessarily be so. Had the people involved actually read this book, and practice the discipline to have a proper, reasoned arguments, the community would have thrive, indeed. So, you own it to yourself to read this book, a slim and easily digested volume, in order to have a good healthy community around you. 

This book may not be the most comprehensive nor authoritative, but it is eminently readable and accessible to the common person, and hence receive my utmost recommendation. It's a must read.