I read this article twice yesterday, and plan to read it a few more times.
It's excellent.

http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html

Don't be misled by the "infidels" and "atheism" in the link title. The
article is strictly about logic, reasoning, and avoiding the all too common
logical fallacies used in supporting assertions that we make.

When the original poster suggested that reading the article would "improve
argumenting skill", he was referring to the very useful skill (which the
Buddha used frequently) of establishing truthful and valid conclusions by
correctly making inferences from reasoned, logical premises. That's the
definition of "argumenting" intended. Whether argumenting is used in
frivolous debate or skillfully used in meaningful communication is an
entirely separate issue.

I was just about to say, "by following the guidelines of skillful
argumenting, the quality and quantity of meaningful communication in this
forum would definitely improve", but of course that would be a fallacy of
generalizing and oversimplification. Here's a hypothetical case: an
irrational, illogical, pompous, abusive poster could stimulate very
meaningful and beneficial discussion by dredging up subjects that are
usually hidden under our cloak of polite and respectful sensitivies.

It's very fascinating that the practice of the 8fold noble path leads me to
continually find much more uncertainty in so many things I had previously
viewed as certain truths. This is not to say that I've become an eel
wriggler or hindered by wavering skeptical doubt about everything. On a
conventional level, I still view those truths as truths, but I'm much more
aware of the tenuous and sometimes changing connection between the truthful
conclusion and the truthful premise, and that leads to a much greater
nonclinging to conclusions, views, conventionally held truths.

-fk