你值得换本别的书来入门逻辑学
2016-09-11
我一开始读此书觉得很受用。
但是,当我读到中部,觉得比较难读下去,放下了。时隔几年,逻辑能力有所提升后,再读此书,发现这书本来不是一本好的逻辑入门书。很多人觉得好,是因为我们多数人的逻辑能力是如此之差,即使是如我一样受过高等教育的所谓知识分子。因为书商的营销努力,我们面前突然冒出一本薄薄的通俗的讲逻辑的书,读起来不难,用起来实用,填补了知识和智力的大空白,由此就相当受用,内心相当好评此书。
但恐怕,我们觉得眼前的馒头好吃,并不是馒头真有多美味,而是我们太饿了。
即使是只教人古典逻辑(形式逻辑)入门,此书也不够合格,引用另一位豆瓣用户“尘”的短评:
-----------------------
读完就一个感觉“被忽悠了!”...这书不但侮辱了哈佛师生的智商,还侮辱了哈佛师生的智商....开始部分极力强调“真相”考察真实性,说眼见为实,那我们还见变魔术呢!.....排中律,同一律和矛盾律,觉得直接按照逻辑学导论上的方式来讲还清楚些,作者为了求“通俗”,反而整复杂了。还冒出了一个“万物存在都有理由”...这样不伦不类的什么定律。将亚里士多德的四因说,解释为原因的四种形式...还有最后一部分的28个非逻辑思考分类严重没有标准,而且相互重合,如:以泪掩过,以笑饰非....以出身论英雄和权威,滥用专家意见...两者简单合并一下就行,读者智商不至于那么低。还有什么质的量化,逻辑学本身命题中就是将价值,情感这样的判断排除除去...简单的对真假命题及其推理过程做讨论。至于情感和价值判断对逻辑推理过程的影响,可以单独的通过心理学中的研究来讲。不过里面也有一些很中肯的建议,观念联系事实,术语要精确,中项不周延问题,前提与论证结构对结论的影响....总之,要么作者可能是一个大忽悠,要么出版社是可能个大忽悠...
------------------------引用结束的分割线
在美国书评网站goodreads上,本书原版得分3.69,成绩还行,然而最受赞同的排名第一的评论给它只打了2星,评语原文如下:
------------------------再次引用的分割线
The author's intent was to write a book that would be to logic what Strunk and White's The Elements of Style is to writing. Unfortunately I don't think McInerny succeeded. The book is organized nicely and is written clearly. That is the best I can say about it.
Being Logical is an introduction to logic. I assumed this meant formal logic, but it actually consisted of a mix between formal and more practical informal logic. This made sense given its introductory level. However, what did not make sense were the author's faults in logic. McInerny places strong emphasis on true premises. At one point, they said,
"If we start with a false premise, a valid (i.e., structurally sound) argument will only allow us to proceed consistently to a false conclusion. The adage 'garbage in, garbage out' applies nicely here."
Anyone with a basic knowledge of logic can tell you a false premise can in fact lead to a correct conclusion. The most common example I heard in class was "Dolphins are fish. Fish live in water. Therefore, dolphins live in water." The logic is still sound, even though the premises is false, and the conclusion is true. It's obviously not a good idea to argue with obviously false facts, but that does not mean the logic is bad.
The strongest, most useful section of the book was the last, fifth, section, where McInerny described common logical fallacies to avoid and watch out for. The rest of the book is mostly common sense or very basic formal logic. I would recommend the book to someone who needs a light refresher, but never to someone new to logic, as the author intended when writing the book. The premise of the book was good, but the execution was mediocre and occasionally the facts are just wrong.
--------------------------
我还要引用我觉得很有帮助的的豆油 Orion Dianae 的评论 https://book.douban.com/review/3322175/
------------------------------
我找到的好的入门书
1 《逻辑学导论》 https://book.douban.com/subject/26267406/ 经典名著,目前有第13版,既有演绎也有归纳,既有古典逻辑也有现代逻辑。
2 在Amazon书评上听人介绍,找到:
Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications 作者 Kenneth H. Rosen https://book.douban.com/subject/3125432/
中文版《离散数学及其应用》https://book.douban.com/subject/6558200/
目前已经有第七版
只读第一章,就是逻辑入门。