May 16, 2011
Bertrand Russell on how smoking saved his life
by Melville House
Free copy of Lars Iyer‘s Spurious to the first person who can tell me what logical fallacy Bertrand Russell is employing in the following video.
Leave a Reply
50 annotated first editions—going to the highest bidder 
Wikipedia: male novelists are “novelists,” female novelists are “women novelists” 
Granta editor: Leeds is “completely out of the literary world” 
Sing-along Moby-Dick 
Most Viewed Stories
- Amazon to monetize fan fiction, he moaned
- Yesterday was a bad, bad day for book editors UPDATE: Today also sucks
- What is going on with Moleskine?
- More turnover at Granta
- Eleven tactics to keep your reading choice a secret
- Amazon temps sue for backpay, German Amazon strike imminent
- Writing a novel? Don’t quit your day job.
- How to redesign a classic, or, The Bell Jar strikes back
- ‘Just a joke’: Amazon gets more money from UK government grants than it pays in tax
- Academic publisher sues librarian blogger for millions
Most Recent Stories
- “Shit storm” at Granta explained, sort of
- What’s the future for the UK’s local libraries?
- Sherman Alexie and Laurie Halse Anderson address censorship
- Chinua Achebe buried in Nigeria
- Following the footsteps of the Romantic poets in Italy
- Penguin settles antitrust suit, will pay nearly $90 million
- Amazon to monetize fan fiction, he moaned
12 Comments
He’s inferring causation from correlation.
He’s inferring causation from correlation.
False Cause!
False Cause!
Sounds good, MPK. Write in to publicity@mhpbooks.com with your address and we’ll send you Spurious.
Sounds good, MPK. Write in to publicity@mhpbooks.com with your address and we’ll send you Spurious.Â
Russell wasn’t making any general claims for smoking. But smoking did, on that occasion, save his life; If he hadn’t been in the smoking section, he wouldn’t have survived. I don’t think he was committing any fallacy.Russell wasn’t making any general claims for smoking. But smoking did, on that occasion, save his life; If he hadn’t been in the smoking section, he wouldn’t have survived. I don’t think he was committing any fallacy.
 Russell wasn’t making any general claims for smoking. But smoking did, on that occasion, save his life; If he hadn’t been in the smoking section, he wouldn’t have survived. I don’t think he was committing any fallacy.Russell wasn’t making any general claims for smoking. But smoking did, on that occasion, save his life; If he hadn’t been in the smoking section, he wouldn’t have survived. I don’t think he was committing any fallacy.
Meant that being a smoker, not smoking, saved Russell’s life on that occasion. Forgive my pasting in my last comment, which somehow led to its being doubled.
Meant that being a smoker, not smoking, saved Russell’s life on that occasion. Forgive my pasting in my last comment, which somehow led to its being doubled.Â
Whoa cool. Done.
 Whoa cool. Done.