78Thinking Model: Logical Thinking A Good Reasoning Learning

As we all know, China is the world-renowned ancient civilization, the four great inventions is to influence the world, China's ancient in technology is also very leading, however, from the mid-17th century, China's science and technology is like a river, fell into a quandary. According to relevant information, from the 6th century to the beginning of the 17th century, China's share of the world's major scientific and technological achievements had been more than 54%, while in the 19th century, it plummeted to 0.4%. Why did China and the West have such a big fall and rise in science and technology, pulling away from such a great distance?

Why did capitalism and modern science originate in Western Europe and not in Chinese civilization? This is the famous Joseph Lee mystery. It was formally raised by the British scholar Joseph Lee in his 15-volume History of Science and Technology in China, and in 1976, the American economist Kenneth Boulding called it the Joseph Lee Puzzle.

The answer Joseph Lee got from the perspective of scientific method is:

First, China does not have a view of nature that is suitable for the growth of science;

Second, the Chinese people are too pragmatic, and many discoveries are stuck in the empirical stage;

Third, China's system of imperial examinations stifles people's interest in exploring the laws of nature, and their minds are bound to ancient books and fame and fortune. The first pursuit of the scholar was to "learn and excel".

Joseph Lee also highlighted the fact that the Chinese did not know how to manage by numbers, and that the Chinese Confucian academic tradition focused only on morality and not on quantitative economic management.

Albert Einstein also argued that "the development of Western science is based on two great achievements: one is the system of formal logic invented by the Greek philosophers; the other is the method of discovering causality through systematic experimentation. The ancient Chinese philosophers did not take these two steps."

Logic has played a huge role in promoting the development of Western science, and the United Nations has listed logic as one of the seven basic disciplines. UNESCO's classification of disciplines, the basic disciplines include mathematics, logic, astronomy and astrophysics, geosciences and space sciences, physics, chemistry, and life sciences.

In our work and life, there are often people who speak, speak half a day to speak not clear, confused thinking, no logic, and many people can not reason. In fact, these are the lack of logical thinking performance. What is logical thinking? How to improve logical thinking? How to clearly argue their own point of view? It is a thinking skill that every modern person must master.

China is in the midst of a great renaissance, and it is entering a modern civilization that requires qualified citizens, and unqualified citizens rely on authority and power to solve problems. Lacking independent thinking, they cannot distinguish between black and white, and are easily incited and misled.

Qualified citizens solve problems based on reason and procedures, and have their own independent thinking and judgment.

Without logical thinking, how can we talk about rationality and independent thinking? At the same time, logical thinking is also a prerequisite for becoming a future citizen. Future citizens need to have five skills: critical thinking, the ability to process information, problem-solving ability, learning ability, and global awareness. All of these skills require logical thinking.

Logical thinking, people in the process of understanding things with the help of concepts, judgments, reasoning and other forms of thinking to reflect the objective reality of the rational cognitive process, also known as abstract thinking. It is the way of thinking that people grasp the essential laws of concrete things and recognize the objective world. It is the advanced stage of human cognition - the stage of rational understanding.

The form of logical thinking is mainly concepts, propositions and judgments, reasoning and argumentation.

1, the concept

is to reflect the essential properties of things or unique properties of the form of thinking. Concept is the cell of knowledge. In the human cognitive thinking system in the most basic construction unit. It is the perceived thing *** with the essential characteristics of the abstract, to generalize.

Human cognition is mainly formed by three parts:

First, the objective existence of things;

Second, the reflection of things in the brain;

Third, the language we created for it, through which we can communicate with others. And concepts are the language created by humans to facilitate communication.

Concepts have two basic characteristics, namely, the connotation and extension of the concept.

Connotation: the unique properties or essential properties of the object reflected in the concept. Answer the question of "what"? What is the nature of the object.

For example, a commodity is a product of labor produced for exchange.

Extension: An object that has the characteristic or essential properties reflected in the concept. Answer: "How many? What objects are included? What is the scope?

For example: goods include clothes, food, furniture, appliances, real estate, etc..

Concepts are expressed as words or phrases.

For example: animals, furniture, real estate, commodities, etc.

Humans have a concept to be able to think, otherwise, if you want to express the concept of "animal", you need to say all the animals to express a clear, time-consuming and laborious, not easy to communicate and think. So clear concept is to clarify the connotation and extension of the concept, is the basis of human thinking and communication.

2, propositions

Propositions are sentences that express judgment.

For example, China is a developing country.

Generally, a statement that judges something is called a proposition. Statements in which the judgment is true are called true propositions, and statements in which the judgment is false are called false propositions. Propositions are expressed as sentences.

For example, "China is an ancient civilization" is a true proposition. "China is not an ancient civilization" is a false proposition.

3, reasoning

Reasoning is the process of introducing a new judgment (conclusion) from one or more known judgments (premises).

For example: all men die - Socrates is a man - so Socrates will die.

Reasoning has a special place and role in all forms of thought.

To generalize new, universal, general knowledge from a multitude of sensible phenomena, it is necessary to rely on reasoning, and such reasoning is called inductive reasoning.

The introduction of new knowledge from existing knowledge also requires reasoning, which is called deductive reasoning.

From the properties of an object to introduce another object may also have this property, also requires reasoning, such reasoning is called analogical reasoning.

For example, artificial intelligence was studied based on neuronal connections in the human brain. Human observation of dragonflies invented helicopters, the study of bats invented radar, etc., are analogical reasoning.

The study of logic centers on reasoning, which is the most important part of logical thinking. All arguments and proofs are based on reasoning, and concepts and propositions depend on reasoning to obtain them. Concepts and propositions are the most basic units of thought, and we can generally use them in a fetishistic way, and the formation of concepts and judgments belongs to the realm of cognition, which is generally affected by religion, culture, and ethics in many ways.

Logic has three basic laws: the law of identity, the law of contradiction, and the law of ranking in the center, and later added a law of sufficient reason. These are the basic laws formed by human beings after more than a billion times of thinking tests, and they are the most basic objective laws. Therefore, anyone who engages in thinking activities must abide by these three major laws. Only by complying with these basic laws of thinking, the concept can be clear, appropriate judgment, reasoning and argumentation is persuasive. Otherwise, the concept of assertion is ambiguous, inconsistent, ambiguous, can not properly think and express their thoughts and views.

1, the same law?

(1) the content of the same law: the concept or judgment used in the same thinking process to maintain their own consistency. That is, an apple is an apple, and an apple cannot be an orange.

(2) the requirements of the same law:

First: in the same thought process, the concept must remain the same, can not change;

Second: judgment must also remain the same, can not be transferred at random.

(3) Logical errors that violate the same law: first, confusing concepts or stealing concepts; second, shifting thesis or stealing thesis.

For example: of all things in the world, man is the first precious. I am man. Therefore, I am the first precious of all things in the world.

Here, the former person, refers to the vast human collective, and the latter person, refers specifically to the individual, which is completely different from the two concepts, its extension and connotation is completely different, if they are equated, it is a violation of the same law of logic, it is a willful theft of concepts.

2, the law of contradiction

(1) the content of the law of contradiction: in the same thought process, two mutually negative thinking can not be the same true, there must be a false;

(2) the requirements of the law of contradiction: contradictory or mutually opposed ideas can not be affirmed at the same time, there must be a false;

(3) violation of the law of contradiction of the logic of error: "


For example, no one has ever gone into this cave, and those who have gone in have never come out. That is to say, it affirms that "no one has ever gone in" and it affirms that "some people have gone in". This is a contradiction.

3, row in the law

For anything under certain conditions of judgment to have a clear "yes" or "no", there is no intermediate state. A thing, it either exists or does not exist, there is no intermediate state. There is a lamp on the table, and the statement is either true or false, there is no other possibility.

(1) the content of the law of exclusion: in the same thought process, contradictory ideas can not be false at the same time, there must be a true;

(2) the requirements of the law of exclusion: contradictory or opposing ideas, can not be denied at the same time, there must be a true;

(3) violation of the law of exclusion of the logic of the error: "ambiguous ".

For example, when discussing whether smoking should be banned, a person says: "I am not in favor of banning smoking; tobacco is an important industry for the country. I am also not in favor of not banning smoking, after all, smoking is dangerous to one's health." Whether you are in favor of banning smoking or not, the idea expressed in this way is ambiguous and commits the error of ambiguity.

The law of identity, the law of contradiction, and the law of neutrality are all laws about the certainty of thought. They ensure certainty of thought in different ways.

Reasoning is a form of thinking that introduces one proposition or some propositions from another. Reasoning consists of three main elements: premises, conclusion, and form of reasoning. According to the characteristics of the thinking process can be divided into deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, analogical reasoning .

1, inductive reasoning

Induction is by N known data or phenomena, deduce a law. Induction is a way of reasoning from the particular to the general, it is our observation of the objective world, looking for the phenomenon behind the **** nature of the scientific method of refining the theory of knowledge.

Experimental science is the inductive method, scientists do experiments, from countless observations to discover the law, most of our current knowledge is obtained by this method.

For example: gold expands in volume when heated; silver expands in volume when heated; copper expands in volume when heated; iron expands in volume when heated;

Because gold, silver, copper, and iron are all metals; therefore, all metals expand in volume when heated.

From Bacon to Russell, and later to logical positivism, empirical thinkers have argued that scientific knowledge is based on induction, that is, scientific induction based on a large number of observations and experiments to arrive at a general understanding. For example, the laws, laws, and formulas of physics, chemistry, and astronomy are derived in this way.

The value of the induction method is to be able to find the **** behind the phenomenon, but due to the limitations of the sample size and observation and experimental conditions, there are also its limitations, such as

First: induction can only draw insufficiently reliable conclusions.

Second: induction may not be able to grasp the essence of things.

Third: induction can only summarize the past of things, not the future.

Russell, the famous British philosopher, had a famous turkey story about a turkey in a turkey farm that found that on the first day at 9 o'clock in the morning the owner fed it. On the second day and many days afterward it was fed at 9 o'clock, and it collected a great number of observations about the empirical fact that it was fed at 9 a.m.; and it made these observations under a variety of circumstances: rainy and sunny days, hot and cold days, Wednesdays and Thursdays ...... Every day it added a new statement of observation to its own record sheet . Finally it reasoned inductively and came to the following conclusion, "My master always feeds me at 9:00 a.m." However, things were not as simple and optimistic as it thought. On Christmas Eve, instead of feeding it at 9 o'clock, the owner slaughtered it and made it into a delicious roast chicken.

So induction has its advantages and its limitations, and the conclusions of induction are generally influenced by three factors.

1, the representativeness of the observation: whether the observation of an event can represent the whole of this category.

2, the amount of observation: whether the amount of observation is large enough.

3, the validity of the evidence: whether the source of evidence is reliable, etc..

Logic divides induction into complete and incomplete induction (simple enumeration induction and scientific induction)

(1) Complete inductive reasoning?

The premise of complete inductive reasoning is to examine all the objects of a class of things without omission, and to conclude that each object in the class has (or does not have) a certain property, and the conclusion concludes that the whole class of things has (or does not have) the property. Thus, the connection between the premises and the conclusion is one of necessity; if the premises are true and the evidence and form are valid, the conclusion is necessarily true.

For example: 1) The Pacific Ocean has been polluted; the Atlantic Ocean has been polluted; the Indian Ocean has been polluted; the Arctic Ocean has been polluted; (the Pacific Ocean, the Atlantic Ocean, the Indian Ocean, and the Arctic Ocean are all the oceans of the earth) therefore, all the oceans of the earth have been polluted.

The requirements of complete inductive reasoning are three

One is that the assertion made by the premise must exhaust all the objects of a class of things;

the second is that all the judgments in the premise are true;

and the third is that there must be a caste relation between the principal term of each judgment in the premise and the principal term of the conclusion.

Complete inductive reasoning, although it leads to correct conclusions, requires complete exhaustion of the quantities under study, so some reasoning is difficult to do. For example: you can't find all the swans in the universe to see what color they are.

(2) Simple enumerative inductive reasoning?

Simple enumerative inductive reasoning is the reasoning that enumerates a part of the objects in a certain class of things, and makes a general conclusion about this class of things based on the absence of contradictions.

For example, e.g., swans fly, sparrows fly, crows fly, so it is concluded that all birds fly.

Although it does not observe enough, it is not necessarily wrong, as long as we find the birds that do not fly, the conclusion is wrong, and can provide new knowledge. If we can increase the number and range of observations, we can improve the reliability of the conclusion. Simple enumeration inductive reasoning has a very important role in people's daily life and scientific research because it is easy to understand and easy to use. For example, a lot of proverbs (snow is a sign of a good year) are obtained by simple enumeration reasoning.

The use of simple enumeration inductive reasoning should pay attention to overcome the "generalization" or "rash generalization" logical error.

(3) scientific inductive reasoning?

Scientific inductive reasoning is based on scientific analysis as the main basis for a class of some of the objects and their attributes of the causal link between the introduction of the class of all objects have some kind of attribute of inductive reasoning.

For example, there is a limestone cave near Naples, Italy, where cats, dogs, and other small animals fall to the ground and die when they enter the cave. After observation, people found that the cave floor deposited a large amount of carbon dioxide, the lack of oxygen near the ground, so cats, dogs and other small animals near the ground head into the cave will fall dead. Accordingly, it was concluded that all small animals with their heads close to the ground will fall down and die when they enter the cave.

Scientific inductive reasoning focuses on finding causal links between objects and attributes, and is based on simple enumerative inductive reasoning, and then analyzes the causal links between objects and attributes to introduce conclusions. The typicality of the sample, the number and validity of the evidence are very high requirements, so scientific inductive reasoning, although it is also incomplete induction, but the reliability of its conclusions will be higher.

2, deductive reasoning

Deductive reasoning is from general to specific reasoning. The connection between the premise and the conclusion of the inference is inevitable, is a kind of indeed reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the process of proving axioms that are already relatively correct by someone else and then deducing the conclusion that follows. The beauty of it is that if your premise is correct, the result that follows it must be correct.

Deductive reasoning has two very important tools, first principles and trivium. First principles are self-evident axioms, and trinomialism is using first principles as a major premise to derive new conclusions.

According to Einstein, the work of theorists is divided into two steps, the first step is to discover the axioms, and the second is to introduce conclusions from the axioms. Discovering axioms is the process of finding first principles. Launching the conclusion is the process of obtaining new knowledge, with new knowledge and then go to explain more phenomena, to promote the progress of human knowledge again.

Deductive reasoning has the form of straight trinitarianism, false trinitarianism, and selective trinitarianism.

(1) Straightforward Trinitarianism

Trinitarianism is the general pattern of deductive reasoning, which contains three parts: major premise - the known general principles, minor premise - the particular situation under study, and conclusion -a judgment about the particular case based on the general principle.

For example:

All men die

Socrates is a man,

so Socrates dies.

The major premise is that all men die, the minor premise is that Socrates is a man, and the conclusion is that Socrates will die. An argument that is valid is only a reliable argument as long as the premise is true. But there's a problem, how do you make sure that this major premise is true? The fact that all people will die also comes from inductive reasoning, where the major premise is an accepted common sense or self-evident axiom. That all people die is a common sense that has been verified over millions of years.

In scientific argumentation, the major premise is generally axiomatic, and the so-called axioms are self-evident truths. For example, Euclid organized the axiomatic method of geometry in Geometry Originally, with 5 axioms, 5 postulates, 119 definitions, and 465 propositions, which led to the first system of mathematical axioms in history, and the establishment of the foundation of the entire geometry.

(2) Hypothetical Trinitarianism

It is reasoning that presupposes a hypothetical judgment. Also called a conditional argument, it is an argument that contains an "if ...... then ......" structure. In this argument, the brain sets a certain condition first, and if that condition is met, a definite conclusion emerges.

For example, if you work hard, then you will eventually achieve your goal.

If I'm going to be rich, I'll take you on vacation. I'm rich now, I'll take you on vacation.

If the stock market goes down, someone will jump. The stock market is down, so there will be people jumping off buildings.

The point of the hypothetical syllogism is that if the big premise A (whatever it is) holds, then B must also hold.

(3) Elective Trinitarianism

is reasoning that presupposes an elective judgment.

For example, in response to a vote on a tobacco control ordinance, you either voted for or against it. You're voting against it now, so you're going to support tobacco control and not smoke.

Airplanes are either in the air or on the ground. Right now airplanes are not in the air, so they are on the ground.

Inductive and deductive reasoning go hand in hand; inductive reasoning introduces a conclusion. Deductive reasoning introduces a new conclusion based on that conclusion.

3, analogical reasoning

Analogical reasoning is based on two or two types of objects have some of the same attributes, so that their other attributes are the same reasoning.

For example:

A has properties R, S, T, U, V, W, X, and Y.

B has properties R, S, T, U, V, W, X, and Y.

A has property Z.

So B also has property Z.

This conclusion is not inevitable, but it's very likely. Based on the fact that two things have a lot of the same properties, when one of them has one of the other properties, it's likely that the other also has it.

Many important theories in science have been developed through analogical reasoning. The modern scientific and technical methods of modeling and simulation are based on analogical reasoning.

For example: analogies from experimental models to developed prototypes - model experiments in modern engineering

Analogies from natural prototypes to technical models - modern bionics

Kant said. "Whenever reason lacks ideas for reliable arguments, the method of analogy often guides us forward"

Analogical reasoning is the method of scientific discovery, one of the hallmarks of creative thinking.

For example, Ruben saw sawtooth grass and invented the handsaw. Scientists study the properties of fish, invented the submarine. All are analogical reasoning, analogical reasoning is to touch the class, to learn by example, cross-disciplinary, fringe disciplines are produced by analogy.

The disadvantage of analogical reasoning is that it is easy to commit "representational bias" of the impact. It is easy to make the wrong decision based on superficial similarities.

For example: Zhang and I are the same, are from a place, graduated from a school, recently Zhang opened a restaurant, making a lot of money, so I believe that I go to open a restaurant will be able to make money.

In fact, can you make money, depending on the degree of similarity between you and Xiao Zhang, after all, to make money is the time, place and people, the market is ever-changing, and so you open up the hotel, you may find that it has been unable to make money.

1 , what is the argument?

Argumentation is a proposition or some known to be true to determine the truth or falsity of another proposition thinking process.

The main components of argumentation include thesis, argument, argument, argumentation, and so on.

2, the structure of the argument

Thesis: the arguer asserts and to prove the point of view in the process of argumentation, in the general sense of "therefore", "accordingly", "explain", "think", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain", "explain".

The argument is the point of view that the arguer asserts and has to prove in the process of argumentation. In a general sense, "therefore", "accordingly", "explain", "think", "presume", "suggest" and other prompts after the statement is usually the argument.

An argument is a clear judgment, a complete statement of the author's point of view, a judgmental sentence that indicates affirmation or negation, a clear epigrammatic sentence. It is a person's subjective judgment. And the thesis is the topic of discussion, the argument is formed on the basis of the thesis.

For example: "On reading" is a thesis. The thesis is that "reading makes you better".

Argument: is the reason used by the arguer to support or refute an argument, it is to answer the question of "what to prove the argument". The general sense of "because", "due to", "if", "the reason is" and other words are usually followed by arguments In survey research, the word "survey" is usually followed by an argument. In research, "survey", "statistics", "experiments", "research" and other prompts are often followed by The main reason for this is that it is not a good idea to use it as an argument.

There are two types of arguments commonly used, factual and theoretical.

Factual arguments are representative examples, facts and statistics.

Theoretical arguments refer to the correct theories that have been tested by people's practice and recognized by the society, including social science theories, such as philosophical theories, as well as principles, laws, formulas, and widely circulated proverbs, famous quotes, and aphorisms in the natural sciences.

More reasons to support the argument is good. Reasons should have "four": dissimilarity (arguments and arguments are different), the consistency of the argument (the argument does not contradict the argument), the consistency of the argument (the agreement between the argument) and relevance (the argument is related to the argument).

Argumentation style: the way in which arguments and arguments are linked, which answers the question "how to use arguments to argue an argument".

The mode of argumentation is a supportive relationship between reasons and arguments, which is reflected in some form of reasoning. Thus, modes of argumentation are essentially reasoning relationships. Since the argument is more than one reason, and each reason may have a different support relationship to the argument, so there are a variety of argumentation in an argument, such as inductive argumentation, deductive argumentation, analogical argumentation, and so on.

For example, the Pyramid Principle is a rigorous argument structure.

3, the five rules of argumentation

(1) thesis

Rule 1: the thesis should be clear and precise

The formulation of the thesis should not be ambiguous; if necessary, the key words need to be defined. Before the argument is fully developed, it is necessary to review or clarify the true meaning of the thesis.

Violation of this rule is the fallacy of "unclear thesis"

Rule 2: The thesis should be the same

An argument is defined by a thesis. A thesis corresponds to an argument. There can be only one thesis in the same argumentation process, and, the thesis cannot be changed until this argumentation process is over.

Violating this rule is the fallacy of "shifting thesis".

Therefore, it is necessary to stop and review the argument from time to time during the course of the argument to ensure that the thesis remains the same.

(2) Arguments

Rule 3: Arguments should be true propositions

As a matter of common sense, whether an assertion is true or false, it can only be based on true propositions. Sometimes, the argument can also be a proposition that is more likely to be true, i.e., with a higher probability.

Violating this rule commits the fallacy of false justification

Rule 4: An argument should be more plausible than the thesis

The proposition used as justification must be more plausible than the thesis.

There are three kinds of propositions that cannot be used as arguments: propositions that are not probabilistic (whose truth is not certain), propositions that are less plausible than the thesis, and propositions that are equivalent to the thesis.

(3) Argumentation

Rule 5: It should be possible to derive the thesis from the argument

It is possible to show the acceptability of the thesis on the basis of the truth of the argument, as well as the logical relationship between the argument and the thesis. This depends largely on the strength of the logical connection between the argument and the thesis, the form of reasoning used in the argument is valid or reliable.

Errors that violate this rule: the inference does not include "irrelevance", "insufficient argument", "generalization", "appeal to ignorance", "appeal to ignorance", "appeal to the public", "appeal to the public", "appeal to the public", "appeal to the public", "appeal to the public", "appeal to the public", "appeal to the public". "appeal to ignorance", "appeal to false authority", "appeal to the crowd", and so on.

Summary:

The McKinsey Method book mentioned the principle of problem solving as, based on facts, assumptions, strict structuring, the use of the pyramid principle to analyze and think about the problem, in fact, is logical thinking. Logical thinking is a basic way of thinking that must be mastered by modern people, and it is also the necessary ability of a manager. In Stephen? Robbins, Mary? Coulter co-authored the book "management" that the conceptual ability is the most important ability of top management ability, more than interpersonal skills and technical skills. This conceptual ability is the ability to think abstractly, is the ability to think logically.

Logical thinking is a person's knowledge of the objective world, understanding of natural phenomena and social phenomena of the basic tools, is an important thinking tool for the expression of thinking and communication, can help us better solve problems, but also to develop critical thinking and innovative thinking, logical thinking provides a series of theories, tools and methods to enhance our cognitive ability and thinking ability at the same time, but also in the improvement of our knowledge architecture, enhance our philosophical and practical ability. Our knowledge structure, enhance our philosophical literacy and cultural literacy, laying a solid foundation for us to become qualified social citizens in the future.

References:

Simple Logic

McClenny, USA

Renmin University of China Publishing House

Logic

Editor-in-Chief: Song Wenjian Associate Editor: Guo Shiming

People's Publishing House

Cognitive Psychology

Goldstein, USA? Translated by Zhang Ming and others

China Light Industry Press

Thinking

Gary R. Cappy, Jeffrey R. Goodpaster

People's University of China Press