After reading simple logic

After carefully reading a famous book, I believe everyone’s horizons must have broadened a lot. At this time, how can the most important feeling after reading be left behind! Many people must be worried about how to write a good review. Below is a simple review of logic that I have collected. Welcome to read. I hope you will like it. Simple Logic Reading Review Chapter 1

Recently I saw a small book on the Internet, written by an American. It was less than 150 pages, but it felt thicker and thicker as I read it. I have to admire the foreign author's writing. It’s so charming that even the editor of this book lamented: The more extraordinary it is, the more ordinary it is! This book lives up to its name, "Being Logical".

This book divides logic into five chapters. The first chapter is preparation, the necessary ideological framework to be established in order to become a logical thinker. Chapters 2 and 3 are the core of logic, how to establish correct logical thinking. The second chapter explains the basic facts that guide logical thinking, and the third chapter focuses on the external manifestations of "argument-logical thinking". Chapter 4 explores the attitudes and thinking patterns that lead to illogical thinking. Chapter 5 revolves around the details of “fallacies – illogical thinking”.

Logic, as a whole, is a broad, profound, and exciting field. This book is neither a rigid theoretical discussion nor a formal textbook. It is a practical application guide for those who are new to logic. People who are exposed to logic introduce the basic principles of logic. It looks to create practitioners, not theorists.

After reading the whole book, I am more interested in the "law of sufficient reason" (or the principle of cause and effect), one of the four major principles of logic, that is, everything has a reason for its existence. "Existence is reasonable." It tells me that the existence of things is not accidental, they all have their own roots. Of course, "problems", such as quality issues, complaints, charging issues, etc., are a special form of existence of things. In theory, the root causes of them exist, and they are worthy of everyone's pursuit and exploration. The so-called cause must be able to lead to the results we observe and leave a specific imprint on the results; each result, to a certain extent, will reflect the characteristics of its source.

First of all, in the process of specifically exploring the root cause of the problem, we generally start from the results. There must be inevitable similarities between every problem and its result, which is the principle we must follow. Under normal circumstances, when we explore a certain cause, we cannot know what the result of a certain cause is, but we can obtain indirect knowledge about it through the previous results. Through statistics and evaluation of the intensity, distribution, and nature of the results, we can infer some of the characteristics of the cause. This knowledge will guide us in the direction of continued exploration. Here the author gives a story about someone who spilled the milk in the kitchen. From the strange noises, to the half-boiled cow falling to the ground, to seeing ants, to the canary coming out of the cage, to the neighbor's cat outside the window, the author explored and eliminated step by step, and finally identified the cat that was chewing in the bushes. Key suspects.

Secondly, don’t give up halfway in exploring the reasons. Facts often tell us that there is a series of reasons. For example, A is the cause of B, and the occurrence of B leads to C, and C then brings D... As shown in the picture: A→B→C→D... Assume that D in the picture is an urgent problem to be solved , we found that D was caused by C. Following the principle that the correct way to solve things is to find his cause, we decided to focus on C. It's commendable that the logic has gotten this far, but as you know, it doesn't go far enough. C is indeed the direct cause of D, but it is not the fundamental cause. The source of the causal chain is A, A leads to B, and B leads to C. Both B and C are the result of a process. The problem about B must be traced back to A. Unless the root cause A is sufficiently intervened, the problem of D will be difficult to be completely solved. The story of "the lights went out" that Dean Chen often mentioned is a typical example, as well as what we know as the "butterfly effect" and "domino effect".

The author also pointed out that sometimes, we cannot find the root of the problem simply because we are lazy and do not study it fully; sometimes we are not patient enough. When it comes to things we need to do, we always think of the fastest, once-and-for-all solution, but little do we know that the root of the problem is still laughing at us!

Finally, we should reasonably distinguish the reasons.

Earlier we mainly discussed "efficient cause", that is, its activity can determine whether something exists or not or change its state of existence. In fact, in addition to "dynamic cause", there are other "causes". Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC), the master of ancient Greek natural philosophy, once proposed the famous "Four Causes Theory". He believed that things are composed of "formal cause", "material cause", "dynamic cause" and "final cause", among which the final cause is the ultimate and the most important.

For an action, the final cause is the purpose or goal of the action; for objective things, it is its function; the material cause is the specific material that makes up the thing; the formal cause is what determines what a thing is. It’s not that special property. The author uses the birdcage as an example to analyze. Its agent is Fred, who made it; its materials are pine, nails, screws, and paint; its formal agent is the specific shape of a birdcage that distinguishes something like a filing cabinet or a window lattice; The purpose is to provide a place for birds to live. Simple Logic Reading Review Part 2

Sometimes I feel less and less able to speak. When I say this, some people may think that I can’t even speak. Not being able to speak is actually a sign of chaotic logic. If your thinking is chaotic and the language you organize is certainly unclear, then it would be normal to not be able to speak. What's the logic? In the past, whenever I mentioned this word, it was more difficult than asking me to climb a mountain, because I felt that the logic was too big and too deep for me and other mortals to study and understand casually.

During the summer vacation, I read the book "Simple Logic". When I first read the title, I asked myself, is there a difference between simple and non-simple logic? Although I thought so, I asked Du Niang first. Du Niang’s evaluation was quite high and she said this book was a “must-have book for stepping into the door of logic.” Well, I’ll give it a try.

Before reading, let’s talk about the author first. The author is American D.Q. McClenny, a famous American logician and professor of philosophy. He has been teaching for many years and has taught at the University of Notre Dame and the University of Kentucky. Shortly after the publication of "Simple Logic", it was regarded as one of the 40 English classics by the Chinese University of Hong Kong and regarded as a crown book by the Harvard University bookstore.

In the introduction of the book, the author makes a very accurate positioning of the book - introducing readers to the basic principles and techniques of logic. My understanding is to introduce the most basic things in logic, which is most suitable for "logic illiterate" people like me to read.

To be honest, when I started reading, I was still a little bit scared. I was afraid that as soon as I got to the topic, I would be shocked by the zombie-like professional terms and frequent symbolic symbols. But the fact is that after I read through the first chapter to prepare for learning logical thinking, I didn’t feel as scary as I imagined. Instead, I felt very relaxed, because the explanations of each entry in the text are combined with life, and the commonly used words in our daily life are combined. , conceptualizing things that are often encountered, which is refreshing when reading. And there are many things that we are in contact with every day. When we cleverly integrate these things around us, we will suddenly discover that this is logic, and we are dealing with logic every day.

For example, "confirm the facts." The book says that the most direct and effective way to confirm whether facts exist is to conduct on-site inspections. For example, the White House, whether it really exists can be known by going to Washington. In real life, we often ignore the aspect of on-site inspection, so we will get red-faced over some trivial matters, and in the end we still have no conclusion. Just like yesterday at noon, I wanted to invite a few colleagues to have snacks together, but just to confirm the exact address of this snack bar, A and B argued. Colleague A said it was on Beijing Road, and colleague B said it was on Changchun Road. Finally, No one convinced the other, but instead made everyone feel very bad.

Why fight over where the snack bar is? You will know it by taking a look at it. This is simple logic in action.

Another example is “effective communication”. The book says that the higher the match between language and concepts, the clearer and more effective the communication will be. When communicating, don’t assume that your audience will understand what you didn’t express directly. This is very suitable when applied to work. When arranging work, you must communicate effectively with your subordinates and delegate clearly. Don't think that your subordinates will understand what you mean. Because the environment you are in and the height you stand on are different, your understanding is also different.

In Chapter 2, we talked about the four basic principles of logic, namely: the law of identity. A thing can only be what it is.

The Law of the Excluded Middle: The judgment of anything under certain conditions must have a clear "yes" or "no", and there is no intermediate state. Principle of Sufficient Reason: Everything has a sufficient reason for its existence. The law of contradiction: At the same moment, something cannot be both this and not this in the same aspect.

After studying, you will find that the four basic principles of logic do not explain anything shocking, because the basic principles are based on the self-evident basic facts of human reason and have been practiced repeatedly by humans for a long time. Test, basic proposition that does not require additional proof.

The third chapter is relatively difficult for me to understand, so it is extremely difficult to read. However, after reading the third chapter and then reading the last two chapters, you will find that it seems to be a reflection of the previous chapters. The preparations made are a summary of the basic principles mentioned.

In short, I gained a lot from reading the book "Simple Logic". At least it broke my previous fear of logic and allowed me to read it with a normal mentality and understand it. it. Although the whole book only has more than 150 pages and more than 80,000 words, it is thin but the content is very thick, making it suitable for beginners to read.

So what is the logic? Simply put, logic is a tool designed to reveal the truth. Because all logical reasoning and all arguments have only one purpose: to find out the truth about something, because the truth is the meaning of all our efforts.

After reading this book, you will find that as an introductory book on logic, it does not contain much professional knowledge, and the examples cited in the book are all from life. Let us, when reading, There is an immersive feeling. But no matter how practical the book is, as the author said, the most important thing is to practice and discover after learning, rather than learning purely for the sake of learning. If practice stays in books, the meaning of learning will be lost.

Logic, I believe that "Simple Logic" is just the beginning, not the end. Simple Logic Review Chapter 3

"Simple Logic" is a famous logic work written by the American writer McClenny. Although it is a thin book, it is full of rich contents. content. In short, I have benefited a lot from reading "Simple Logic". It has broadened my horizons and exercised my thinking ability; it has improved my cognitive ability, and my judgment of problems does not stop at perceptual understanding but focuses on it. Rational thinking. The themes of simple logic are clear thinking and accurate judgment. Simple logic is both a science and an art of speaking. The book "Simple Logic" does a good job of integrating theory with practice, and has a very important guiding role in improving a person's logical level of speaking.

After reading the whole book, what I like the most is the third point of the basic principles of logic in Chapter 2: Everything has its origin. The principle of sufficient reason tells us that the existence of things is not accidental, they all have their own origins. We don’t know exactly why everything exists, but we know that they all exist for a reason. As rational animals, when we want to know why things are the way they are, we spend a considerable amount of our energy exploring these reasons. From a theoretical point of view, knowledge about origins is very exciting, because knowing why can lead to a deeper understanding of them. But knowledge about the origin can also be widely used in practical fields, because finding the root of things can control the development of things and the impact of things. For example, we can determine that a certain bacteria is the cause of a certain disease, and then we can eliminate the disease by destroying the bacteria. After we know the origin of all things, we understand the causal connections between things, so that we can discover problems and solve them.

In the process of exploring the roots of things, we generally start with their consequences. We are faced with this or that phenomenon and need to explain it. That is to say, we face these objective things; to explore how these things are formed. Our search must be guided by the principle that there must be a fundamental similarity between every cause and its effect. That is to say, the so-called cause must be able to cause the effect we observe and will leave its specific imprint on the effect: every effect will, to a certain extent, reflect the characteristics of its source. What important practical significance does this kind of logical thinking have? When we are searching for a certain cause, we cannot directly know what is the cause of a certain result, but we can get indirect knowledge about it through the results in front of us.

By assessing the nature of the result, I can infer part of the nature of the cause, and this knowledge will guide our search. In this chapter, the author gives a story about someone who spilled the milk in the kitchen. From the strange noises, to the half-boiled cow falling to the ground, to seeing ants, to the canary coming out of the cage, to the neighbor's cat outside the window, the author explored and eliminated step by step, and finally identified the cat that was chewing in the bushes. Key suspects.

In our daily work and life, there are situations where we need to use logical thinking. If we have good logical thinking, it will help things get done smoothly; on the contrary, if we lack logical thinking skills, we may mess things up. In life, logic is everywhere. Whether we do it intentionally or not, logic serves our lives all the time.

Reading "Simple Logic" made me realize the one-sidedness of my previous thinking. Reading this book has greatly helped my thinking, and I have learned preliminary knowledge and basic skills of logic. Through the study of logic, I believe that I will be able to think more comprehensively in the future, and my verbal expression will be clearer and more logical. Simple Logic Reading Review Chapter 4

I have read philosophy and logic before. According to the formal written language: Logic and philosophy are both a discipline and an art. If applied to real life , you can also define them as a skill. Through comparison, I personally think that logic theory is easier to understand than philosophy, and it is more practical and has a wider scope. Philosophy is a subject that teaches you how to understand the world and how to think. Logic, on the other hand, is more like a spiral process of understanding. This book roughly describes the meaning, manifestations, and purposes of logic as well as the meaning, reasons, and manifestations of non-logic. Through this book, my definition of logic is logic, which can also be called reasoning, with the purpose of finding the truth.

However, compared to philosophy, logic not only teaches you how to think, but also allows you to understand how to communicate effectively with others. This is also the section that I remember the most about this book and gained the most. I have always believed that we live in human society and are in contact with the people and things around us every day. The most important thing is to connect with people, so before you can communicate effectively, you need to think to achieve this goal. This book is like an introductory textbook for novices. Driven by the thinking of this book, you will find that every word we say is closely related to logic. Effective communication means thinking about what you mean and giving corresponding feedback. This process is like you are a deducer, you contact society (assuming arguments) - collect materials (arguments and reasoning) - draw conclusions and react (arguments established). This also shows that logic is also a step-by-step process; take the examples mentioned in the book, such as the common law of cause and effect, and avoid the law of synonyms (which refers to using the most precise words in a sentence and avoiding ambiguity). ), avoid too many negatives, because in Spanish, double negatives still mean negation, which slightly strengthens the tone and emphasis. In English, double negative means affirmative.

So these are practical communication principles when you communicate with others. If you don't understand clearly, then the other party still needs to guess your inner feelings, which is an inefficient and time-consuming communication. What's more worth emphasizing: not everyone is willing to spend time on you. In fact, when you understand it deeply, you will really find that logic is everywhere, affecting us all the time, and having more or less effects on us, but we just didn't notice it or pay special attention to it. , to talk about the most concrete and obvious examples of logical ability in daily life, I can immediately think of: police, teachers, debaters, lawyers, etc. Because these examples basically rely on the process of contacting people, discovering and understanding problems, and finding the truth.

In summary, sometimes seemingly incomprehensible knowledge can be slowly absorbed. If we cannot understand it, it means that our cognitive scope is limited, then we should collect more information and expose it. the truth. The last sentence is my current attitude towards reading: you don’t need to master every knowledge, but at least you will learn another new way of thinking. Simple Logic Reading Review Chapter 5

When I randomly clicked on the folders on my hard drive that were full of files that needed me to calm down and sort them out carefully, I clicked on two G’s trip to Qingdao, and His thoughts also drifted away.

To be more conceited, I have always prided myself on my ability to think divergently. The problem is that my mind often wanders too much, and the things I have considered may still bother me later. One of the functions of Boker is shown in this: I have to force myself to sort out the random and erratic thoughts logically and enter them word by word, which is time-consuming and labor-intensive. Now let me summarize the random thoughts that came to me after reading the "trip to Qingdao" folder and elaborate on them at will.

Places I’ve been to:

1. When I see the smiling faces in the photos, and compare my mood at that time in my memory, I feel that the joy in the photos is always so unreal. This is probably why I like to look through photos from time to time.

2. The folder contained at most 3 days of my experiences and memories, but now it seems to me that it is so long and long. It was unimaginable that so much could happen in a short period of time. thing. Comparing the one-year study abroad for a master's degree, I felt that it was a pity that so much time of hard work only resulted in such a short time for further study. If you think about it, I have grown a lot in 2008, including a lot of chaotic time. What if I was thrown into a fiercely competitive environment? Maybe it's just a rebirth. Teacher Li said it best: People always habitually exaggerate their achievements in ten years, but underestimate what they can achieve in one year.

3. The folder to be sorted has been lying on the hard drive for a long time. I always pick it up inadvertently but it has never been sorted out. There are always too many things to be busy with, which can also be called permanent inertia.

4. I still remember that when I saw the photos of the "Win in Nannong" event, I was surprised by the huge gap between people's conditions at that time and now. I still feel this way now. However, since they are all related to Liu, they seem to have a different taste. Meiling once said in a text message that she was grateful to me for watching the growth of these little girls, but she laughed at me at the time - How could I have ever been so great? Now it is gradually gaining some flavor. I am very fortunate to be able to witness the growth and death of some friends around me from time to time, and be surprised and sad, but especially when I participate in it, I still feel a sense of pride rising from the bottom of my heart, for me, and even more for them! Perhaps only I, who is sometimes too calm, can sometimes think about this and taste a different kind of joy from it: my dreams are still on the road at best, but it is really a kind of enjoyment to watch others realize them! Speaking of Qiuping, who I haven’t seen yet tonight, there is always kindness and admiration rising in my heart. I hope I can be lucky enough to witness a period of growth and a legend again.

These are some in-depth divergences that I selected after re-thinking. Today I finally finished reading "Simple Logic". I was impressed by it, but it was too difficult to write. It will feel much better after reading it once. However, after reading the book and reading an article in a magazine the day before yesterday, I still have thoughts that are straightforward and easy to express. The author emphasizes the application of logic. However, in my opinion, as a layman, the system structure of the book does show its logic. But what I preach is still too rational in my opinion and seems to be a rigid thinking. To sum up, for a proposition, thing or event, it should be the most optimal solution to let my thoughts wander first and then think about it logically.

On reflection, I still lack the ability to grasp the logic of overall macro events. It would be better to practice more.