Book Review: Logically...Fallacious: The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies by Bo Bennett

I'm back with another book review, of something significantly more controversial than I Spy.  Please note that I am not advocating any particular political, social, or religious agenda with this blog, unless you count "Treat other people with respect," as a super-controversial agenda, in which case I really don't know what to say.  This book is interesting and informative, but also, well...prone to causing arguments.
Here are the facts:
Title: Logically...Fallacious: The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies by Bo Bennett
Genre: Adult nonfiction, rational thinking, philosophy
Content Rating: 5, for many politically and religiously controversial topics discussed, as well as some references to sexual topics that may be considered tasteless

For an academic book about formal logic, complete with Latin phrases, Logically Fallacious is oddly humorous.  Commonly known fallacies, such as Ad Hominem, the Strawman Fallacy, and Appealing to Emotion are thoroughly defined and discussed, as are other common logical slip-ups that few before Bennett even identified as fallacies.  These include such errors as Appeal to Definition, the God Wildcard Fallacy, and the Just Because Fallacy.  All of the explanations are fairly self-sufficient and entertaining.

Now, to the somewhat controversial bits.

Personally, I appreciated that Bennett avoided the common pitfall of trying to defend social injustice, as many so-called experts in logic and reason do.  He defines things such as Stereotyping and Tokenism as fallacies.  There are some arguments referenced as illogical regarding extreme religious sensitivity (such as defending violent practices) as a form of so-called "political correctness" but Bennett doesn't otherwise label any sort of sensitivity as wholly irrational.  He also mentions that different arguments can be made for sensitivity being rational or irrational.

The only true element of controversy involves religion, generally Christianity.  I am not sure of Bennett's religious affiliation or lack thereof, as he does criticize athiests from time to time.

He doesn't have a problem with pointing fingers and naming names, often citing examples related to
-religion as a whole
-Scientology
-Mormonism
-believing in ghosts
-athiests

The list also includes totally non-religious things, such as:
-wealthy people
-Americans
-anyone against same-gender marriage
-hippies
-racists
-Windows Vista, for some reason

And the list goes on. 
To his credit, Bennett never explicitly says that any of these things are outright bad, he simply points out common irrational arguments used to defend them.  Except maybe Windows Vista, which apparently a lot of people didn't like.

The bottom line here is, if you dislike anything you say possibly being proven illogical, if not outright wrong, don't read this book.  If you want to improve your logical argument skills, I think this is an interesting book.  I don't appreciate some of the more potentially offensive bits, but other than that the reasoning is pretty solid. 
Last notes:  Although the author recommends that the book be read cover to cover, it doesn't have to be.  That's not how I've read it; I have used it as more of an encyclopedia, since that is how it is written.
I will also be referencing this book in later blog posts about logical fallacies, as it's kind of sparked an interest.

Signing off,
SM