How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age

by Theodore Schick Jr., Lewis Vaughn

This concise and engaging text teaches the basic principles of good reasoning through an examination of widely held beliefs about the paranormal, the supernatural, and the mysterious. By explaining what distinguishes knowledge from opinion, science from pseudoscience, and evidence from hearsay, How to Think about Weird Things helps the reader develop the skills needed to tell the true from the false and the reasonable from the unreasonable.

Instructors and students can now access their course content through the Connect digital learning platform by purchasing either standalone Connect access or a bundle of print and Connect access. McGraw-Hill Connect® is a subscription-based learning service accessible online through your personal computer or tablet. Choose this option if your instructor will require Connect to be used in the course. Your subscription to Connect includes the

• SmartBook® - an adaptive digital version of the course textbook that personalizes your reading experience based on how well you are learning the content.
• Access to your instructor’s homework assignments, quizzes, syllabus, notes, reminders, and other important files for the course.
• Progress dashboards that quickly show how you are performing on your assignments and tips for improvement.
• The option to purchase (for a small fee) a print version of the book. This binder-ready, loose-leaf version includes free shipping.

Complete system requirements to use Connect can be found

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Science, Psychology, Skepticism, Logic, Reference

352 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1994

Reviews

[Lena · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've often wondered how my life might have been different if I had been given a good course in critical thinking skills in high school or college. Had I been so fortunate, this book would have been the best text I could imagine for such a course.

A lot of the information covered here was familiar to me from other reading I've done in the last few years, but this book is by far the most comprehensive collection of all of the things one needs to know to effectively evaluate the ideas we are exposed to about the world around us and how it works. It covers everything from the basics of possibility and logic, what makes an argument good or bad, different ways of knowing and perceiving, cognitive biases that can skew our objectivity and the foundations of scientific thought processes. Interspersed within the more technical portions of the text are sidebars applying the principles at hand to various popular extraordinary claims such as instances of apparent ESP and things like the Amityville haunting.

This book is an actual textbook. Though the authors do a fairly good job of making it readable by using these sidebars and other interesting examples for much of what they cover, there are still a few sections that were rather on the dry side. Though this made parts of the book a bit of a slog, what I learned from it was more than valuable enough for me to keep going.

Among the sections that I personally found most useful were the discussions of how quirks in our perceptual systems can cause us to misinterpret what's happening around us, the problems with appealing to mystical experience as a way of knowing, and the discussion of just how damaging it can be to believe things on insufficient evidence. In a chapter called "Case Studies in the Extraordinary," the critical thinking processes outlined earlier are applied to the juicy topics of homeopathy, dowsing, UFO abductions, communicating with the dead, near-death experiences, ghosts and conspiracy theories. The authors are careful to refrain from saying definitively whether these things are or aren't real, but instead show the reader how to evaluate the evidence and come to their own conclusions about which ideas are genuinely worthy of consideration. Highly recommended for anyone who thinks.

[mohamad jelvani · Rating 5 out of 5]

نمی دونم واقعاً از تاثیر این کتاب بود
یا واقعاً دیگه وقتش بود که نوع افکارم تغییر کنه
و با این کتاب این اتفاق افتاد
اما به هر حال
خواندن این کتاب بسیار بر من تاثیر گذاشت
یک جور خودآموز منطق کاربردی برای زندگی روزمره
که می تونه شما را از دام کلیشه های فکری رها کنه
کلیشه هایی که تا به حال با اونها زندگی می کردید
و اونقدر باهاشون اُخت شده بودید
که لزوم تجدید نظر در اونها را احساس نمی کردید
و خارج از چهارچوب اونها هم نمی تونستید بیاندیشید
اما خطا و خطرناک بودن

[Sirwaan Nemati · Rating 4 out of 5]

چگونه درباره ی چیزهای عجیب بیندیشیم: اندیشه ی انتقادی برای دوران جدید
نام اصلی
How to Think about Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age
نویسنده: تئودورشیک، لوئیس وُن (Theodore Schick, Lewis Vaughn)
ترجمه: رامین رامبد
انتشارات: مازیار
موضوع: تفکر انتقادی
چاپ سوم ۱۳۹۳
تعداد صفحه: ۴۰۸
شاید اگر من این کتاب را می‌نوشتم اسم آن را "چگونه در دام خرافات نیفتیم" می‌گذاشتم. من هر چقدر که از سنم می‌گذرد افسوس بیشتری نسبت به آموزش‌هایی که تا به حال دیده‌ام می‌خورم و این که چطور آموزش نادرست انسان‌ها را به بیراهه می‌برد. شاید شما که الآن این متن را می‌خوانید به‌کرات در مقابل انسان‌هایی قرار گرفته باشید که با پافشاری بر تجربیات شخصی یا هر چیز دیگری بدون داشتن هیچ گونه مدرک مستدل و دلیل عقلی به چیزهای عجیب و مسخره و گاها خطرناکی باور دارند. (یا شاید خود شما هم چنین انسانی باشید ولی از آن آگاه نیستید!) تا به حال برایتان پیش آمده که از خواب بلند شویید و در طول روز واقعه‌ای برای شما اتفاقی بیفتد که آن را در خواب قبلاً دیده‌اید؟ به رمالی مراجعه کرده‌اید و پیش بینی‌هایی را در مورد شما می‌کند که درست از آب در می‌آید؟ و هزاران چیز دیگر که به‌ظاهر توضیح منطقی و علمی برای آن ندارید؟ اگر در مورد چنین چیزهای به دنبال جواب می‌گردید این کتاب مطالب زیادی را به شما خواهد آموخت.
این کتاب توسط دو نفر فیلسوف نوشته شده است که کتاب‌های زیادی را در این حیطه نوشتند که خوب هم در سطح دنیا به فروش رفته است. کتاب بعد از مقدمه‌ای وارد روانشناسی شده و علت‌های علمی از دید این علم را برای وجود باورهای خرافی در انسان‌ها مطرح می‌کند که به‌شخصه این قسمت از کتاب را بسیار جذاب یافتم. اینکه باید ذهن خودمان را به‌خوبی بشناسیم و مراقب باشیم که بعضی ویژگی‌های ذهن که در حالت عادی برای یافتن واقعیت کاربرد دارد ممکن است ما را گول بزند! آزمایش‌های زیاد علمی که در این زمینه توسط دانشمندان صورت گرفته شرح داده شده که بسیار جالب و آگاهی بخش است. در ادامه وارد معرفت شناسی ( شناخت شناسی) و وسایل شناخت ما از دنیا و نحوه عملکرد مغزمان در تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات خواهد شد. دنیاهای معروف فلسفی درون (ذهن) و بیرون (دنیا) در کتاب مطرح می‌شود. عرفان، شهود و حس ششم بررسی می‌شود، علم و روش علمی را معرفی و بررسی می‌کند و مباحث مربوط به منطق شامل انواع استدلال و دایره کاربردها و مغلطه‌ها معرفی و بررسی می‌شوند. در آخر هم مطالبی که در کتاب تا به حال مطرح شده است برای بررسی چند ادعای عجیب به کار می‌رود. موارد عجیبی که بررسی شده است بیشتر غربی است مثلاً UFOها حضور پررنگی در کتاب دارند که البته طبیعی است چون کتاب توسط نویسندگان غربی نوشته شده است ولی موارد مشترک زیادی با فرهنگ کشورمان هم در آن بررسی شده است مانند احضار روح و جن زدگی، خواب‌های عجیب، تأثیر ستارگان و سیاره‌ها در زندگی ما و طالع و شانس. با روش‌های آن می‌توان بسیاری از عقاید موجود در جامعه‌مان را محک زد و تصمیم گرفت که آیا باید زندگی‌مان را بر اساس واقعی بودن آن‌ها ادامه دهیم یا غیرواقعی بودن آن‌ها (یا شاید هم کنار گذاشتن آن‌ها تا زمانی که مدارک بیشتر برای تصمیم گیری داشته باشیم)
در کل در کتاب روانشناسی، فلسفه و منطق را برای بررسی ادعاهای عجیب و جدید به ما می‌آموزد. باوجود اینکه این مباحث جدی است و کتاب هم جدی است ولی خواندن آن لذت بخش و آسان است. داشتن اطلاعات قبلی در این حوزه‌ها لذت خواندن کتاب را دو چندان می‌کند ولی چون مطالب آسان و مختصر مطرح شده است خواندن آن برای ذهن‌های ناآشنا به روانشناسی و فلسفه و منطق هم آسان و جذاب خواهد بود. سخن آخر اینکه خواندن این کتاب را شدیداً به همه کتاب خوانان عزیز توصیه می‌کنم.
در مورد ترجمه کتاب توسط رامین رامبد:
این اولین کتابی بود که تا به حال با ترجمه ایشان خوانده بودم. ترجمه را دوست نداشتم. چون کتاب را خیلی ارزشمند می‌دانم ترجیح می‌دادم ترجمه هم به همان میزان بهتر ترجمه می‌شد‌. ترجمه کمی روان نیست ولی هرچه به آخر کتاب نزدیک‌تر بشویید این مسئله کمتر می‌شود.
چند علت به نظرم در این مسئله دخیل بوده‌است:
1- موضوعات تخصصی این کتاب فلسفه، منطق و روانشناسی است. برداشتم این است این حوزه‌ها، حوزه تخصصی مترجم نیست. کلمات انتخابی برای بعضی موضوعات با کلمات استاندارد در متون ترجمه‌ای فارسی خوانایی ندارد.
2- مترجم بسیار فارسی ترجمه کرده است! من از این نوع ترجمه اصلاً خوشم نمی‌آید: سره نویسی. اینکه سعی شود تمامی کلمات حتماً فارسی باشد به ترجمه‌ای ختم می‌شود که خوش‌خوان نیست. کلمات عجیبی در متن است که گاها بیشتر از موضوعات کتاب باید در مورد معنی آن فکر کنید!
3- در ترجمه کتاب عجله شده است. کمی حوصله و سعی در روان کردن متن بسیار به خوش‌خوان کردن بیشتر کتاب کمک می‌کرد
در آخر می‌خواهم که تشکر بکنم از مترجم و ناشر که چنین کتاب زیبا و مناسب حال جامعه‌مان را به جامعه فارسی خوان معرفی کردند.

[Cait · Rating 1 out of 5]

I'm still fuming a little over this book, though I think that has a lot to do with where I am in my relationship with science and critical thinking: it can be very hard to read texts that say things that you have only just recently abandoned in yourself.
That being said, I believe that there are things that are very weird to think about, that can distort our sense of where the boundaries of reality are, things that seem irreconcilable with other things we believe, great internal and external paradoxes. I think that letting yourself embrace a paradox, letting yourself kind of believe two things at once, is a worthwhile experience. This doesn't even necessarily mean that you have to reject reason, or think that magic exists, or anything, but even admitting to yourself that it might, or understanding how a rational vocabulary is not always the best type of vocabulary for every situation... I think these are good endeavors. So if I thought this was actually a guide to cool ways to think about weird things, I'd be excited. But (and I admit I didn't read very much of this book before rejecting it) that's not what it is! It's "How to discredit weird things." Which... whatever, having critical thinking skills is essential, and learning to separate the weird chaff (i.e. most conspiracy theories or fad diets) from the weird grain (i.e. the strange duality of the human mind, the feeling of god) is important. But in their effort to be critical, rational debunking teachers, they took a lot of short cuts that are essentially fallacious, and overlooked a lot of *actually* weird stuff to talk about *not actually* weird stuff, thereby offending my sensibilities BOTH as a rational thinker AND as mystical woo woo thinker. Grrrr.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent! I wish every high school student in America would read this book - but that would make life a lot harder for legions of politicians, hucksters, and scam artists. I believe the single biggest failing of American education today is its focus on memorization and regurgitation, along with just enough basic arithmetic to work at WalMart, and its total neglect of critical thinking skills.
If you have children or grandchildren in their teens or twenties, give them this book! Research has shown that young people embrace this kind of teaching when they are exposed to it in subjects like media literacy, framed in terms of enabling them to be less gullible and easily fooled by people trying to manipulate them.

[Fallon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic book, read this as part of a university paper at the University of Canterbury. The class itself completely changed how I think about all things in life (in fact was the most life changing moment I think in my life so far) and I'm sure this was also due to this book in some ways. A great introduction to critical thinking and would recommend.

[Brendan · Rating 5 out of 5]

How to Think About Weird Things was recommended as a primer on diagnosing Woo by Orac over at Scienceblogs. As someone who finds himself more and more irritated by irrational thinking (despite my own gaping biases that lead to it), I was really interested in reading this book. Thus, I read a text book for fun. Sigh, I think there’s a new level of nerdiness there.

Schick and Vaughn lay out a number of key arguments for how and why one should wield the tools of critical thinking to understand the essence of arguments and ideas being offered in the public sphere. I transcribe the key ideas below. Much of this is verbatim from their book. My commentary is in italics

They discuss how to understand claims being made. Namely, just because a claim: is possible doesn’t mean it’s true; hasn’t been refuted doesn’t mean it’s true; hasn’t been proven doesn’t mean it’s false; can’t be explained doesn’t mean it’s supernatural; is possible doesn’t mean it’s real. In other words, people often argue that things aren’t conclusively proven and are thus open to interpretation. While this is true, the authors lean heavily on the idea that we must consider the best conclusions, not just the possible ones.

Truth in personal experience. Just because something seems (feels, appears) real doesn’t mean it is. But it is reasonable to accept personal experience as reliable evidence only if there’s no reason to doubt its reliability. The authors outline a lot of ways our own perceptions fool us. My favorite part of this is selective attention, which gives us the idea that things like The Lunar Effect are true (it isn’t). We look to confirm ideas we already have.

Relativism, Truth, and Reality. Schick and Vaughn obliterate the idea that reality is relative with incisive logic. Just because you individually or a group of people believe something to be true doesn’t mean that it is. There is an external reality that is independent of our representations of it. They critique cultural relativism by suggesting that one cannot posit the truth of cultural relativism without rising above that very phenomenon.

Knowledge, belief, and evidence. There is a good reason to doubt a proposition if it conflicts with other propositions we have good reason to believe, the more such conflicts, the more reason to doubt. We should proportion our belief to the evidence when there is good reason to doubt. Here’s my favorite: There is good reason to doubt a proposition if it conflicts with expert opinion. There has always been a suspicion of expertise, but my guess is this becomes the hardest pill to swallow in the age of Google University. Experts in one field are not experts in all fields. Creationists, take note: A PhD in Geology or Physics does not a Biologist make.

Evidence and Inference. When evaluating a claim, look for disconfirming as well as confirming evidence. This chapter also spends quite a bit of time on Deduction, Induction, and Abduction. Nothing about Conduction, sorry Ulmer.

Science and its pretenders. If you were to read just one chapter, this is the one to read. The authors dig into the way science works and why pseudo-science doesn’t work and how it adopts the rhetoric of science without the rigor. Schick and Vaughn create a heuristic they call the “Criteria of Adequacy.” In short:

The amount of understanding produced by a theory is determined by how well it meets the criteria of adequacy–testability, fruitfulness, scope, simplicity, conservatism–because these criteria indicate the extent to which a theory systematizes and unifies our knowledge. (172)

Testability means it predicts something other than what it explains; fruitfulness refers to the bonus predictions that come from it — this is a plus but not a necessity; scope refers to the diversity of the phenomena it explains — the more the better; simplicity refers to the assumptions it makes — the fewer new assumptions, the better; conservatism means it conflicts with as little background information as possible.

The Evolution vs. Creation debate illustrates these principles nicely.

* Testability: Evolution can be tested against fossil records, against genetic material, and in labs with small organisms. Creation can be tested in the same ways (and has come up lacking). (E 1, C 1)
* Fruitfulness: evolution predicted a number of novel things, including DNA. Creation has not yielded such predictions. (E 2, C 1)
* Scope: Both theories explain a huge swath of science study. (E 3, C 2)
* Simplicity: Evolution relies solely on natural mechanisms we know exist and can observe. Creationism relies on “Special creation,” an unrecorded and non-repeating act by a supernatural diety. (E 4, C 2)
* Conservatism: Evolution fits with other scientific observations about the world, such as the life-span of the Earth. Creationism overturns many of these as well. (E 5, C 2)

Thus, Evolution fits all the criteria for accepting a scientific theory, while Creationism does not. One of the elements of creationism, testability, actually works against it since people have attempted the tests and failed to find anything useful.

The last couple chapters are devoted to case studies of miracle cures and other ideas generally not accepted by science. It’s a great book for people interested in the gap between science and public understanding.

[Armin · Rating 4 out of 5]

بسیار کتاب خوبی بود، زمینه‌های مختلفی را پوشش داده و کاربردی است. عمدتا زبان ساده‌ای دارد اما گاهی سخت‌خوان هم می‌شود. فصول ۲، ۳، ۴ و ۶ جذاب‌تر و کاربردی‌ترند و علیرغم جذابیت کلی، ممکن است در فصول آخر کمی حوصله‌اتان سر برود. در فصل ۴ که به نسبیت‌باوری اختصاص دارد، نویسندگان به خوبی از پس تشریح و نشان دادن مشکلات آن برآمده‌اند. هم‌چنین در فصل ششم که در آن به برهان‌ها پرداخته شده، توضیحات و مثال‌ها می‌توانند بسیار کاربردی باشند. از آن‌جایی که کتاب به‌گونه‌ای تنظیم شده که بتوان هر فصل را مستقلا مطالعه کرد، فکر می‌کنم حتی اگر قصد مطالعه کتاب را ندارید نگاهی به دو فصل اخیر بیاندازید.

[Kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book literally teaches you how to think about weird things. It goes step by step through applied critical thinking to help you rebuff every new-age, esoteric, psychical or alien phenomena you can think of. Not your idea of fun? It doesn't mean you still can't believe in some of these things, it just gives you a more scientific framework for thinking about them. It explains seemingly mysterious phenomena like spontaneous human combustion, divining, and the Amityville Horror, and tells you why the U.S. Army was actually trying to build an army of "warrior monks" who could use ESP, leave their bodies at will, levitate, and walk through walls. No, I'm not kidding. This is a really fun read, and will make you think twice about all the strange stories you may hear. Granted, no one likes the guy who brings logic to the party, so you might not want to start off every statement with, "well, actually..."

[Robert · Rating 4 out of 5]

I used this as a textbook when I taught critical reasoning. It's about as entertaining a book on the subject as one could find, and includes a lot of epistemology, informal logic, and philosophy of science. And who wouldn't want to be able to give an informed answer when asked why exactly UFO reports are unworthy of credence?

[T · Rating 5 out of 5]

Definitely something I'd recommend for a course on critical thinking using multiple sources, or even a textbook course of study solely by itself. Three thumbs up.

[Erin Ramsay · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very useful book for understanding sound scientific and logical principles for evaluating information. It falters in terms of how to reconcile these approaches with the existence of “unscientific” phenomena which cannot be wholly undone without cruelty, discrimination or violence - culture, gender identity, etc. The authors defend the scientific method as the only way to determine what is true, and thus be in the best possible position to make good decisions - but it doesn’t always follow that knowing what is scientifically true will lead to knowledge of how to construct a fair and equitable society. Scientific knowledge certainly helps us make the best decisions when it comes to, for example, health (sound scientific knowledge helps us understand that, e.g., vaccines are safe) but doesn’t necessarily help us solve questions of, for example, poverty, or how to create a society where members of different cultural groups can live peacefully among one another. I was quite disconcerted by one of the imagined scenarios given as a revision tool which said something to the effect of, if you encountered a village of people who believed in some god, how would you go about convincing them that this god is not real? By applying the scientific method to the question of the existence of gods, it is quite clear that it is very unlikely that gods exist - but to force this conclusion onto entire cultural groups seems a recipe for violence (such a thing has occurred within the past few centuries countless times to indigenous peoples the world over via colonisation). Acknowledgement of cultural contexts should always be a part of knowledge sharing and building. Despite my gripes with this book, it was very well-written, and I especially enjoyed the section on the tachyonic anti-telephone!

[Jonathan Phares · Rating 5 out of 5]

My wife read the previous edition in a philosophy course in college, and drew a lot from it. A couple years later, as I have been looking to develop my ability to influence and convince, and to improve mental acuity, I returned to this book in the new edition.

Where this text shines is in its scope and clarity. It talks the reader through logic, argument, knowledge, truth, and reality. Each section is explained thoroughly to the point of complete understanding.

Where the book fails (if failure is the right word) is how the authors dive deeply into the weeds on specific claims as a means of illustrating the principles discussed throughout the book. Overall not a major issue because I found some of it enlightening. It was just unnecessary.

As I read through the text, I have identified many of the fallacies described in the book in my thought process and the thought process of others. Now the test is for me to correct myself and to act as sound-thinking role model for others.

This is a great book. I'm glad I read it and I encourage you to read it as well.

[Halden · Rating 3 out of 5]

Part of evaluating an unusual claim is to control our tendency to believe or disbelieve without good reason.

How to think about Weird Things by Theodore Schick & Lewis Vaughn

How to think about weird things is a nice little primer into how to apply critical thought to extraordinary claims about the world around us. It was enjoyable and light yet still thought provoking and informative although I did find that it got mired and slowed when debating specific issues. I would have preferred that the book stay on the general topic of critical thought rather than debunking various supernatural and extraordinary claims.

I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in learning or honing their thinking skills. The book is full of tips to keep an open mind yet not opening it so wide that your brains fall out.

[John Orman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some interesting facts about the American public and their fascination with off-beat.
25% of Americans take astrology seriously, more than people living in the Middle Ages.

The goal of the book is that we understand how and when our beliefs are justified.
New to the third edition: communication with the dead, cold reading, updates on creationism/evolution, Intelligent Design.

The book lists 33 principles of knowledge, reasoning, and evidence we can use to sharpen out judgment. It also lists 60 paranormal, supernatural, and mysterious phenomena, such as astrology, ghosts, ESP, UFO abductions, channeling, near-death experiences, and time travel.
48% of us believe in UFOs, and 31% believe that alien craft crashed at Roswell, NM in 1947.

Since I have attended the 50th anniversary celebration at Roswell, guess I am a believer too!

[ron btdtbttsawio · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fun and easy to read book that teaches critical thinking skills while examining controversial topics like crop circles, astrology, ghosts, alien abductions, fire walking, sasquatch, etc. There are separate chapters dedicated to logic and the scientific method which give a good overall introduction. I really enjoyed the chapter on medical miracle cures. It is quite extensive and covers many areas such as: doctor evidence, personal experience, placebo, how to spot quack cures, case studies, animal studies, clinical trials, etc. The final chapter provides a formula to follow to examine claims, consider alternate hypotheses, and rate the claim based on several principles such as simplicity and scope.

[Amy · Rating 2 out of 5]

I flagged this book to read after seeing it mentioned in an article about critical thinking some time ago. I was hoping for a serious look into critical thinking. This was not that book. The authors do a decent job of laying out modes of reasoning in order to counter extraordinary claims such as alien abductions/visitations, psychic phenomenon, ghosts, conspiracy theories and other wild phenomenon. Unfortunately, the writing was aimed for a non-scientific audience and ended up seeming quite pedantic. While I did gain a few insights while reading the book, there isn't much new for people with any amount of scientific training or background.

[Jeffrey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sloppy thinker? Don't know how to think? Think you're smart? Read this and get the truth. Great book on understanding our biases and the brain washing we do to ourselves. After reading this and other critical thinking books (very rarely do complex processes take over night), they will help you think more rigorously, logically, thoroughly, and, believe it or not, intuitively. Great read. Some very interesting case studies to go along with your critical thinking education here. Great stuff.

[Ali Feizi · Rating 4 out of 5]

از پشت جلد کتاب:

این کتاب از چگونگی ارزیابی منطقی سردرگم کننده ترین باورها درباره پدیده های پارانرمال، فراطبیعی و رازآلود سخن می گوید. مفهوم اصلی مطرح شده در این جا عبارت است از اینکه باورهای خوش بینانه از هر قسمی نیازمند دلایل خوب اند. جدا کردن دلایل خوب از بد امکان پذیر است (حتی در قلمرو رازآلدگی)، و سرانجام این نکته که فراگرفتن این مهارت هم سومدمند و هم نیروبخش است.

[Danielle · Rating 4 out of 5]

this is the best book out there i've read (and i've read like a ton) specifically about the paranormal. still too naive realist-ish sometimes but there's no skeptic textbook so far that isn't... easy to understand and interesting.

[Bob Prophet · Rating 4 out of 5]

A worthwhile textbook on critical thinking, written for the modern audience without focusing on pointless abstractions.

[Dæmon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting but certainly not bulletproof; however, most of the analysis is MUCH less biased than the Physics instructors that assigned it as a class text book..

[Ken · Rating 5 out of 5]

Required reading for the young skeptic.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent presentation of how to cut through the crap science and faulty reasoning we are surrounded by every day. Should be required reading before voting.

[Ron · Rating 3 out of 5]

Used as a text in my Critical Thinking & Introductory Logic course for about three years

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first chapter of this book left a poor taste in my mouth. I have trouble explaining why that was exactly, but it was difficult for me to pick the book up again after that first reading. Whatever that unappealing quality was, it dissipated in the following chapters, and I am delighted that I stuck it out and took the time to reflect on the messages of the text. Understanding argumentation is essential in gaining control over your own decision making. That understanding can also help you actively influence the decision making of others, for better or worse. The most obvious application of this understanding comes up in political discussions. How easily people can come to believe something that is not reflective of their own beliefs or personal experience.
Still, argumentation is present in all interactions. It's omnipresence, and our general culture's lack of interest in understanding it sets up an odd problem.
I picked up this book because I wanted to be able to evaluate the weight of someone's argument more objectively. I would say the deliverable that information to me in an approachable and concise way.
The interesting result of this is that if an individual presents a weak argument, I have very little desire to try to counter or reflect on their opinion. This is a good thing in some situations and a bad thing in others. Many people don't put much effort into making a strong argument.
Many chapters follow the format of present a new concept then provide examples of the application of the concept to a weird thing (ESP, Ghost, etc...)
I skipped many of these examples, which made this book a relatively quick read. I found that after reading the context and presentation of the new idea, I could apply it reasonably well to my personal questions and did have the need to understand the example about how this connects to UFO sighting. I was not reading this book to try to debunk arguments about the mystical or unexplained but to better understand how to evaluate arguments about real-world challenges and decisions.

I got a lot out of the concepts in this book. It was mostly a pragmatic read. Not something that excites or motivates but one that informs.
I do think the world would be a lot less gullible place if more people committed more thought to what makes a good argument. From my experience, I expect that this book can help some people get there.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A USEFUL ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS TYPES OF ‘SUPERNATURAL’ PHENOMENA

Authors Theodore Schick and Lewis Vaughn wrote in the Preface to this 1999 (2nd edition) book, “Few claims seem to arouse more interest, evoke more emotion, and create more confusion than those dealing with the paranormal, the supernatural, or the mysterious---what in this book we call weird things… Billions of dollars are spent each year on people and products claiming supernatural powers… How do we decide which claims are credible? What distinguishes rational from irrational claims? This book is designed to help you answer such questions… The central premise of this book is that such an understanding is possible, useful, and empowering… The emphasis, then, is neither on debunking nor advocating specific claims, but on explaining principles of critical thinking that enable you to evaluate any claim for yourself… this book is essentially a work of APPLIED EPISTEMOLOGY.” (Pg. vii-viii)

They state, “If a lack of evidence against a claim actually constituted evidence for it, all sorts of weird claims would be credible, like the claims that mermaids, unicorns, and centaurs---not to mention Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and the abominable snowman—exist. Unfortunately, substantiating a claim is not that easy. The principle here: Just because a claim hasn’t been conclusively refuted doesn’t mean that it’s true.” (Pg. 19)

They observe, “To precognize an event is to know what will happen before it actually does… Such an ability certainly appears … impossible… for it seems to suggest that the future exists now, and that’s a contradiction in terms… The problem with this view is that there are models of physical reality … in which the future does exist now… Einstein showed that … the faster you travel, the slower you age. At the speed of light, you don’t age at all, time stands still, so to speak. If you were to go faster than the speed of light, you would go backward in time… [and] you could get into all sorts of trouble. You could, for example, kill your father before he met your mother… In Einstein’s theory, we don’t have to worry about such things, for nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.” (Pg. 24-25)

They report, “On March 3, 1968, a UFO was sighted by multiple witnesses… six people in Indiana spotted the same UFO… Fortunately, we know exactly what these witnesses … saw… Records from NORAD … show that .. the rocket used to launch the Soviet Zone 4 spacecraft reentered the atmosphere… So where did those interesting details come from---the giant craft, the inverted saucers, the square-shaped windows, and metallic cigar-shape? They were constructed.” (Pg. 42-43)

They state, “Cryptomnesia is a professional problem for artists, it also plays an important role in past-life regression. In the … Bridey Murphy … case… research by reporters… uncovered the surprising source of housewife Virginia Tighe’s past-life memories…As a teenager.. Virginia had lived across the street from an Irish woman… [whose] maiden name was Bridey Murphy, [and] had regaled her with tales about the old country.” (Pg.. 50)

They say of the ‘Hundredth Monkey,' myth, “The story focuses on a troop of macaques living on islands in Japan… [who] suddenly and miraculously learned to wash potatoes… Japanese primatologists … report that the behavior … was observed only among a few individual monkeys and that it had not spread throughout a colony… there is nothing to indicate … some supposed miraculous event.” (Pg. 88)

Of Immanuel Velikovsky, they observe, “Since Velikovsky thought that Venus had been recently expelled from Jupiter, he predicted that it would still be hot… The Pioneer space probe revealed…. that Velikovsky was right: Venus is hot… Velikovsky does not say how Jupiter was able to generate such energy. Nor does he explain how the Earth was able to resume its normal rate of rotation after it slowed down… unless Velikovsky can identify the correct laws and show that they explain astronomical events better than the currently accepted laws do, there is no reason to believe that those currently accepted laws are mistaken.” (Pg. 165)

They report about J.B. Rhine’s ESP cards experiments that psychologists Leonard Zusne and Warren Jones note, “Chance was clearly not producing Rhine’s results… Testing often occurred in a face-to-face situation, with minimal screening between the agent and the percipient… the latter can see the backs of the cards… Changes in facial expression give away clues that are not concealed by small screens. Larger screens still allow the percipient to hear the agent’s voice.. When the distance between the percipient and the cards was increased, scores dropped.” (Pg. 185)

They say of firewalking, “Firewalking is a physical feat, not a mental one. It is possible because charcoal … does not transfer heat rapidly to other objects… You can stick your hand into a very hot oven without burning yourself, but if you touch metal in the oven, you can be badly burned… The firewalkers walk (usually rapidly) on the charcoals---they don’t stand around. If they did so they would be burned… walking on hot coals without sustaining injury is not a miraculous feat." (Pg. 199)

What about homoeopathic medicines? “People taking homeopathic remedies feel better because of the placebo effect… the placebo effect is a very well-documented phenomenon that occurs frequently when people try new treatments. What’s more, the failure of studies to support the homeopathy hypothesis---specifically, research showing that homoeopathy works no better than placebo---lends credence to the notion that homoeopathy ‘cures’ ARE placebos.” (Pg. 242-243)

About hypnosis, they state, “it’s not the revealer of truth that many believe it to be. Research has shown that even deeply hypnotized people can willfully lie and that a person can fake hypnosis and fool even very experienced hypnotists… when hypnotized subjects are asked to recall a past event, they will fantasize freely, creating memories of things that never happened.” (Pg. 251)

They look into Near-Death Experiences (NDE): “The near-death experience as [Raymond] Moody described it is fairly common among those who have survived a close brush with death… your chances of having such an experience are about fifty-fifty…. [But] The fact that one is transformed by an experience doesn’t imply its reality… Moody provides [examples] of knowledge supposedly gained during the near-death experience… But the [experiencer’s] body was there. Is it really inconceivable that [they got] this information from [their] senses?... Moody is right that the most compelling evidence for his theory is the fact that NDEers accurately perceive reality while in the midst of their experience. He is right, too, that this evidence is not acceptable evidence of the existence of the soul… The problem is not that the evidence fails to prove conclusively that the soul leaves the body but that it fails to prove the claim beyond a reasonable doubt… for out-of-body experiences can be induced by other means. Meditation, stress, drugs, and exhaustion … are known to produce out-of-body experiences.” (Pg 270-273)

Although the authors do frequently cross the line into ‘debunking,’ their assembled information will be of great interest to those studying such phenomena.

[Gapag · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not a bad book; I wish I had read it when I was a young man, it could have possibly made me if not smarter more systematic.

Some parts, though, sounded a little rhetorical to me. On pages 205/206 of the edition I am reviewing, as the final paragraph about "intelligent design", the authors comment the words of Kenneth R. Miller about the relationship between believing in God and in evolution theory.

It sounds like the authors agree with Miller in thinking that "there is reason to believe that evolution is the only view that makes a meaningful relationship with God - and thus a meaningful life - possible." and a little later they state that "a life in which all our actions were determined by God would not be a meaningful one [...] So evolution, far from diminishing our relationship with God, actually strengthens it."

This kind of arguments don't really convince me because we cannot agree with what the expressions "god", "relationship with god", "meaningful relationship with god" and "meaningful life" stand for, whereas it is clear what one means by evolution. I found this part a little bit contradictory but maybe I did not really understood the context. Or maybe some beliefs of the authors leaked.

[Gabrel Francesco · Rating 2 out of 5]

absolutely a relic of the ‘90s, published right before post-modernity entered the mass public consciousness, before western civilization entered what we now call the digital age. this is antiquated by its nature, a book that presumes that it’s pure thinking of facts and logic and reason is the supreme way to “humor” matters of superstition and faith, or even other truths. “weird things” isn’t even referring to weird things, for in our current world we have been so inundated in insanity and the spectacular that “weird” is our normal.

at this book’s publishing, the oldest of millennials wouldn’t be even out of middle school yet. now, as they approach middle age, that generation and the next (mine) would grow up with unprecedented access to all sorts of information and even more thoughts and ideas on said information. the Information Age has been our norm, and dumb motherfuckers remain, only now we seem to have lost our imagination.

[Mark Isaak · Rating 4 out of 5]

Since this book's focus is entirely on pseudoscience and the paranormal, it is not ideal for the subject of critical thinking in general. There is nothing in it about questioning motives, and its coverage of normal biases is limited to those that directly apply to the issues it covers. (Nothing, for example, about framing or anchoring effects.) Even with its pseudoscience focus, though, it covers a wide range of subjects, with chapters on epistemological approaches, sound arguments, and on how science operates in practice, plus specific coverage of astrology, UFOs, ESP, health claims, and dozens of other such claims, showing not only relevant facts, but how to approach thinking about the claims. Each chapter has, at its end, study questions and such; they lack recommendations for further reading.