- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Textbooks and any other literature on logic and rhetoric.
Now on a trip, I won't look at my shelf, but I can offhand recommend two books from the recently published ones.
1) Nikita Nepryakhin ” Argue for it!”
2) Stella Cottrell “The Art of thinking and success in school, career, and life: 500 exercises for brain development”
Oh, well, Schopenhauer (don't be afraid of a terribly classical-sounding surname, he writes something interesting!) – “Eristika”.
Robert Dilts “Language Tricks” is also a classic, it is here about techniques for persuasion, but it helps to understand the logic of thinking your own and someone else's well. In fact, this is why logic and rhetoric go hand in hand in response to your request.
You can't just read books here. Math or related sciences such as physics, computer science, etc. can best help you develop logical thinking. Choose what you like best and start exploring.
Logical thinking is the ability to think and reason consistently. To think logically means to be able to correctly build a causal relationship and not lose important conditions “on the way”.�
This is easy to test on logical tasks. Here is an example of such problems with a solution.
Over time, a person will definitely visit Mars. Sasha Ivanov is a human being. Consequently, Sasha Ivanov will eventually visit Mars. Is this reasoning correct? If not, what error was made in it?
Answer: This reasoning is incorrect. It is absolutely not necessary that Sasha Ivanov will eventually visit Mars. The external correctness of this argument is created by using a single word (person) in two different senses: in a broad (abstract representative of humanity) and in a narrow (concrete, this particular person).
You don't have to have eyes to see. Without the right eye, we can see. Without the left one, we can also see it. And since we have no eyes other than the left and right eyes, it turns out that no eye is necessary for vision. Is this statement true? If not, what error was made in it?
Answer: The reasoning is, of course, incorrect. Its external correctness is based on the almost imperceptible exclusion of another option, which in this argument also needed to be considered. This is an option when neither eye can see. This is exactly what was missed: “Without the right eye, we can see, and without the left eye, too, so the eyes are not necessary for vision.” The correct statement should be: “Without the right eye we see, without the left eye we also see, but without the two together we do not see, so we see either with one eye, or with the other, or with two together, but we cannot see without the eyes, which are thus necessary for vision.”
If solving such problems is not easy for you or you do not understand how to build reasoning, then you need to train this skill. To develop this ability, it is useful to solve problems – both logical and mathematical. And this requires an understanding of logical laws and knowledge of mathematical rules. Start with simple tasks and gradually move on to more complex ones, so that the brain trains, learns to find several solutions. Regularity is very important in this process, as with any skill – if you don't train it, it gets lost, and after a long break, it will be difficult to cope with even simple tasks again.
Logical thinking is a type of thinking as a mental function of the brain. The inability to think logically can be associated with a weakening of the main function – thinking itself.�
There are various tests to test this feature.
The online service Wikium offers a comprehensive verification test for three cognitive functions of the brain at once-thinking, attention and memory. When registering on the site, you will be offered to pass game simulators that determine the level of your abilities. Further, depending on the result, an individual training program will be compiled that develops weaker functions. All Wikium simulators are based on scientific methods of studying brain functions, they are aimed at improving brain performance.
Sudoku, Japanese crosswords, puzzles, logic problems. And the difficulty is higher.
Once you start snapping them like seeds, start learning critical thinking.
Few people know, but logic is a humanitarian discipline. For some reason, experts in exact sciences consider logic to be their hobby. In fact, this is a specialized subject in legal education. Lawyers study logic much more deeply than any techies. In addition, its creator (Aristotle) he was a philosopher.
Accordingly, the best way to learn to think logically is to get a good liberal arts education. There is an easier way. You need to study philosophy. When you follow the train of thought of a philosopher, the ability to reason inevitably develops. And in the future, this will allow you to correctly reason independently on any other topics.
The Oxford course “Critical Reasoning for Beginners”is very good. You can download it for free. The teacher dwells in great detail on the issues of argumentation of his opinion, what is the difference between fact, opinion and argument, how to distinguish a strong argument from a weak one, etc. I highly recommend it, especially if you often need to prove something.
If the goal is analytical thinking, or more precisely, the development of analytical abilities, then approx. Studying “logic” (and usually “logic” is understood as a school course in formal propositional logic) for this purpose is about the same as studying in depth the rules of grammar of a language in order to become a writer.
TheQuestion: we will find those who will answer your questions.
This is also the basis of the courses of programs developed by higher educational institutions in the discipline “Logic”. The required minimum of only one mandatory literature of the above-mentioned discipline comes from dozens of books, and this is — in addition to the seminar work and lectures on mastering the discipline.
The least painless way to start is to study the list of references in the course of the discipline, since auto — teachers successfully master even more complex sciences.
Lists of such literature are searched in course programs —the search template using search engines is as follows: “logic discipline program & recommended literature”.
And yes — the course programs are particularly peculiar due to the fact that there is no single standard for the Logic course program.
Here are the exercises that really helped me:
1) Get a flamingo and water it once a week until it becomes ambidextrous;
B) Collect bread crumbs of different varieties, manufacturers and levels of radioactivity;
9) Пересмотр Review all parts of Bond in order of age�the lead actor, starting with the lisping one.
Guys, books are great, but logic is primarily self-reflection and independent conclusions. In a sense, logical thinking denies all previous experience, all previous knowledge. It is synonymous with critical thinking. Logical construction does not necessarily reflect any truth, although it helps you get closer to this truth. Logic indicates the ability to build long, consistent (in themselves, and not always and in everything), causal chains. First of all, it is a method.
I can give you the following advice : in order to develop logical thinking, you need to think a lot about a variety of things (global and not so much), trying to abstract from your emotions, lingering for a long time on conclusions (even those that seem 100% correct to you). In other words, even when reading a book about logic, do not skip places where everything seems obvious to you. Don't memorize them as a formula. Try to test everything with your mind.
I recommend reading Diana Halpern's book “The Psychology of Critical Thinking”.
It not only reveals how to teach logical thinking, but also describes the very process of thinking in the human brain.
Beautifully designed and very easy to read.
I started with the book “Logic and Life” by M. Litvak, N. Epifantsev, T. Shafranov, textbook. It is written in a simple, lively language and is suitable for the initial level of learning logic. The book explains the main logical categories-concept, judgment, inference, and gives practical examples “from life”. The authors highly recommend Chelpanov's textbook on logic, and his book will be my next textbook.