Thinking logically definition: What Is Logical Thinking in the Workplace?

2

Abstract-logical thinking

Abstract-logical thinking is the completion of the thought process with the help of categories that do not exist in nature (abstractions). Abstract thinking helps a person to model relationships not only between real objects, but also between abstract and figurative representations that thinking itself has created. Abstract-logical thinking has several forms: concept, judgment and conclusion, which you can learn more about in the lessons of our training.

3

Verbal-logical thinking

Verbal-logical thinking ( verbal-logical thinking ) is one of the types of logical thinking, characterized by the use of language tools and speech constructions. This type of thinking involves not only the skillful use of thought processes, but also the competent use of one’s speech. We need verbal-logical thinking for public speaking, writing texts, arguing, and in other situations where we have to express our thoughts using language.

At this point, we suggest to practice a little:

Now let’s continue.

Application of logic

Thinking using the tools of logic is necessary in almost any field of human activity, including the exact sciences and the humanities, economics and business, rhetoric and public speaking, the creative process and invention. In some cases, strict and formalized logic is used, for example, in mathematics, philosophy, and technology. In other cases, logic only provides a person with useful techniques for obtaining a reasonable conclusion, for example, in economics, history, or simply in ordinary “life” situations.

As already mentioned, we often try to think logically on an intuitive level. Some do it well, some worse. But when connecting the logical apparatus, it is still better to know what kind of mental techniques we use, since in this case we can:

Components of logical thinking

Often the use of logical thinking is associated with the rapid solution of logic tasks and passing tests to determine the level of intellectual development (IQ). But this direction is connected to a greater extent with bringing mental operations to automatism, which is a very small part of how logic can be useful to a person.

The ability to think logically combines many skills in the use of various mental actions and includes:

1. Knowledge of the theoretical foundations of logic.
2. The ability to correctly perform such mental operations as: classification, concretization, generalization, comparison, analogy, and others.
3. Confident use of key forms of thinking: concept, judgment, conclusion.
4. The ability to argue one’s thoughts in accordance with the laws of logic.
5. The ability to quickly and effectively solve complex logical problems (both educational and applied).

Of course, such operations of thinking using logic as definition, classification and categorization, proof, refutation, inference, conclusion and many others are used by every person in his mental activity. But we use them unconsciously and often with errors without a clear idea of ​​the depth and complexity of those mental actions that make up even the most elementary act of thinking. And if you want your logical thinking to be really correct and strict, this needs to be specially and purposefully studied.

How to learn it?

Logical thinking is not given to us from birth, it can only be learned. There are two main aspects of teaching logic: theoretical and practical.

Theoretical logic , which is taught at universities, introduces students to the main categories, laws and rules of logic.

Practical training is aimed at applying the acquired knowledge in life. However, in reality, modern training in practical logic is usually associated with passing various tests and solving problems to check the level of development of intelligence (IQ) and for some reason does not affect the application of logic in real life situations.

To actually master logic, one must combine theoretical and applied aspects. Lessons and exercises should be aimed at the formation of an intuitive logical toolkit brought to automatism and consolidation of the acquired knowledge in order to apply them in real situations.

This is the principle behind the online training that you are reading now. The purpose of this course is to teach you how to think logically and apply the methods of logical thinking. Classes are aimed at familiarizing with the basics of logical thinking (thesaurus, theories, methods, models), mental operations and forms of thinking, rules of argumentation and laws of logic. In addition, each lesson contains tasks and exercises for practicing the use of acquired knowledge in practice.

Logic lessons

Having collected a wide range of theoretical materials, as well as having studied and adapted the experience of teaching applied forms of logical thinking, we have prepared a number of lessons for the full mastery of this skill.

Lesson 1. Logical analysis of language

We will devote the first lesson of our course to a complex but very important topic – the logical analysis of language. It is worth mentioning right away that this topic may seem to many to be abstract, loaded with terminology, inapplicable in practice. Don’t be scared! The logical analysis of language is the basis of any logical system and correct reasoning. Those terms that we learn here will become our logical alphabet, without knowing which it is simply impossible to go further, but gradually we will learn to use it with ease.

Lesson 2. Concept in logic

A logical concept is a form of thinking that reflects objects and phenomena in their essential features. Concepts are of different types: concrete and abstract, single and general, collective and non-collective, irrelative and correlative, positive and negative, and others. Within the framework of logical thinking, it is important to be able to distinguish these types of concepts, as well as produce new concepts and definitions, find relationships between concepts and perform special actions on them: generalization, limitation and division. You will learn all this in this lesson.

Lesson 3. Definition in Logic

In the first two lessons, we talked about how the task of logic is to help us move from an intuitive use of language, accompanied by errors and disagreements, to a more orderly use of it, devoid of ambiguity. The ability to handle concepts correctly is one of the necessary skills for this. Another equally important skill is the ability to give definitions correctly. In this tutorial, we’ll show you how to learn it and how to avoid the most common mistakes.

Lesson 4. Logical judgment

Logical judgment is a form of thinking that affirms or denies something about the surrounding world, objects, phenomena, as well as relationships and connections between them. Propositions in logic consist of a subject (what the judgment is about), a predicate (what is said about the subject), a connective (what connects the subject and the predicate), and a quantifier (the scope of the subject). Judgments can be of various types: simple and complex, categorical, general, particular, singular. The forms of connections between the subject and the predicate also differ: equivalence, intersection, subordination and compatibility. In addition, within the framework of compound (complex) judgments, there may be their own links that define six more types of complex judgments. The ability to think logically implies the ability to correctly build various types of judgments, understand their structural elements, signs, relationships between judgments, and also check whether the judgment is true or false.

Lesson 5. Laws of logic

Before proceeding to the last third form of thinking (inference), it is important to understand what logical laws exist, or, in other words, objectively existing rules for constructing logical thinking. Their purpose, on the one hand, is to help build conclusions and argumentation, and on the other hand, to prevent errors and violations of logic associated with reasoning. In this lesson, the following laws of formal logic will be considered: the law of identity, the law of the excluded middle, the law of contradiction, the law of sufficient reason, as well as de Morgan’s laws, the laws of deductive reasoning, Clavius’s law and the laws of division. By studying the examples and doing special exercises, you will learn how to purposefully use each of these laws.

Lesson 6. Inference

Inference is the third form of thinking in which one, two or more judgments, called premises, follow a new judgment, called conclusion or conclusion. Inferences are divided into three types: deductive, inductive and inferences by analogy. In deductive reasoning (deduction), a conclusion is drawn from a general rule for a particular case. Induction is an inference in which a general rule is deduced from several special cases. In inference by analogy, on the basis of the similarity of objects in some features, a conclusion is made about their similarity in other features. In this lesson, you will get acquainted with all types and subtypes of inferences, learn how to build a variety of cause-and-effect relationships.

Lesson 7. Syllogisms

This lesson will be devoted to multi-premise inferences. Just as in the case of one-parcel inferences, all the necessary information in a hidden form will already be present in the premises. However, since there will now be a lot of parcels, the methods for extracting them become more complex, and therefore the information obtained in the conclusion will not seem trivial. In addition, it should be noted that there are many different kinds of multi-premise inferences. We will focus only on syllogisms. They differ in that both in the premises and in the conclusion they have categorical attributive statements and, based on the presence or absence of some properties of objects, allow us to conclude that they have or do not have other properties.

Lesson 8. Types of reasoning

In the previous lessons we talked about different logical operations that are an important part of any reasoning. Among them were operations on concepts, definitions, judgments and inferences. So, at the moment it should be clear what components the reasoning consists of. However, nowhere have we touched on the questions of how reasoning can be organized in general and what types of reasoning are in principle. This will be the topic of the last lesson. To begin with, reasoning is divided into deductive and plausible. All types of inferences discussed in previous lessons: inferences on a logical square, inversions, syllogisms, enthymemes, sorites, are precisely deductive reasoning. Their distinguishing feature is that the premises and conclusions in them are connected by a relation of strict logical consequence, while in the case of plausible reasoning there is no such connection. First, let’s talk more about deductive reasoning.

How to take classes?

The lessons themselves with all the exercises can be completed in 1-3 weeks, having mastered the theoretical material and a little practice. But for the development of logical thinking, it is important to study systematically, read a lot and constantly train.

For maximum effect, we recommend that you first simply read the entire material, spending 1-2 evenings on it. Then go through 1 lesson daily, doing the necessary exercises and following the suggested recommendations. After you have mastered all the lessons, engage in effective repetition using this technique in order to remember the material for a long time. Further, try to apply the methods of logical thinking more often in life, when writing articles, letters, when communicating, in disputes, in business, and even at your leisure. Reinforce your knowledge by reading books and textbooks, as well as with the help of additional material, which will be discussed below.

Additional materials

In addition to the lessons in this section, we tried to pick up a lot of useful material on the topic under consideration:

• Logical problems;
• Tests for logical thinking;
• Logic games;
• The smartest people in Russia and the world;
• Video tutorials and master classes.

As well as books and textbooks, articles, quotes, auxiliary trainings.

On this page we have selected useful books and textbooks that will help you deepen your knowledge in logic and logical thinking:

• Applied Logic. Nikolai Nikolaevich Nepeyvoda;
• “Textbook of logic”. Georgy Ivanovich Chelpanov;
• “Logic: lecture notes”. Dmitry Shadrin;
• Logic. Training course “(educational and methodological complex). Dmitry Alekseevich Gusev;
• “Logic for lawyers” (collection of problems). A.D. Getmanova;
• Logic. Textbook for law schools. V.I. Kirillov, A.A. Starchenko
• Logic. Textbook for secondary school. Vinogradov S.N., Kuzmin A.F.
• Logic. Textbook for humanitarian faculties. A.A.Ivin
• Logic. Ivanov E.A.
• And others.

Articles about logical thinking

Also pay attention to the “Logic and Intelligence” section of our blog, where we collect interesting materials on this topic, including:

• 4 laws of logic
• Heuristic
• Schrödinger’s cat – the essence in simple words
• What you need to know about IQ tests
• Paphos, logos, ethos
• And other articles by our authors

Trainings

Training and development of logical thinking can be supplemented by the following trainings, which you can take for free on our website:

logical operations are performed.

2. Creative thinking, together with logic, will give you the opportunity not only to draw the right conclusions, but to look for non-standard solutions where logic has reached a dead end.

3. Oratory and writing skills form verbal and logical thinking, and also allow you to put into practice the acquired knowledge in this course.

4. Mental counting and speed reading are suitable for the development and training of intellectual abilities.

5. Human psychology is useful in understanding logical thinking, because it is psychology as a science that studies the mental operations, motives, and incentives of a person.

Quotes from famous people about logic

Many great people spoke about logical thinking, and here are some quotes that we considered relevant in this training:

I think, therefore I am (either in Latin Cogito, ergo sum, or in the original French Je pense, donc je suis).

Rene Descartes

Only a few people think logically. Most of us are biased, prejudiced, infected with preconceptions, jealousy, suspicion, fear, pride, and envy.

Dale Carnegie

Logic, which alone can give certainty, is an instrument of proof.

Henri Poincare

Logic is the anatomy of thinking.

John Locke

Logic is not identical to knowledge, although its area coincides with the area of ​​knowledge. Logic is the common connoisseur and judge of all private investigations.

John Stuart Mill

Wisdom is the most exact of sciences. You can make mistakes in various ways, you can only act right in one way, therefore the first is easy, and the second is difficult; easy to miss, hard to hit.

Aristotle

Now let’s get started.

We wish you success in mastering the skill of logical thinking!

Ksenia GalaninaEvgeny Buyanov

1 Logical analysis →

Logical thinking – Human psychology

What is logic, if not the art of proving?

Jean Piaget

A seemingly simple thing – logic, which we all, even without knowing about its laws, intuitively use in our reasoning and reflections. We connect certain facts known to us with others and get a certain picture of events that helps us understand what happened, what is happening or what can happen. However, if you look at the decisions of many people, you can often see that their decisions are illogical. Well, or at least their logic is imperfect. It seems that, if you think about it, all the calculations say that a person should have acted this way, but for some reason he acted differently. And the point is not only that people often make decisions based on emotions, which, so to speak, have their own logic, somewhat strange, but also that the logic of people is not always the same, since it depends on what they they know and what they do not know, and consequently, logical thinking, even when very well developed, does not allow us to always make accurate calculations. We may overlook something and therefore make a mistake. I’ll tell you how it goes. I will also briefly tell you what logical thinking is and how to develop it correctly in order to make mistakes less often.

I must say right away that I am not going to retell the well-known logical laws and rules, you can study them without me. Logically, there is more than enough material on the net. I will tell you about my understanding and perception of logical thinking and the methods I use to develop it. Let us first give a brief definition of logic.

What is logic

Logic is the science of conventionally correct thinking. Why is it conditionally correct? Because guided in their reasoning by the known rules of logic, it is not always possible to get the right answers to the questions posed. Logic rests on facts known to a person, and if he does not know something, then his calculation will turn out to be incorrect, no matter how ideally he argues. Yes, and these laws themselves may not be entirely true. We just haven’t opened the others yet.

And what is logical thinking, exactly as a process? What exactly does this mean? Logical thinking, it is also conditionally correct thinking, is the ability of a person to make connections between various facts known to him, using the known laws of logic for this, in order to form a coherent picture of something, some kind of reality, some kind of event. Here, let’s say, something happened, some event, how can it be explained with the help of logical thinking? It is necessary to determine all the possible reasons that will indicate the pattern of what happened and choose among them the one that has the most evidence in its favor. Then we will understand why this event happened by identifying the main reasons and a number of secondary reasons. But how to understand what this event means? It is necessary, using the example of other similar or at least similar events that have already occurred, to suggest what consequences this event may have. And again, the more evidence there is in favor of one of the versions, the more reason to believe that it is true and that such consequences should be expected.

This is how logic helps us, one might say, to put together a movie of life, well, or a separate episode of it, thanks to gluing together different frames, that is, facts. And the glue is evidence in favor of a certain connection between facts and the laws of logic that these connections prove or disprove. To think logically, you need to start asking questions about the causes of something and the consequences that some actions, some events can lead to. Why does something happen the way it does? Why is something arranged this way and not otherwise? What are the consequences of making one decision or another? What will this or that trend lead to? There is nothing complicated here. But the answers to these questions need to be able to substantiate. You can’t just say that I think so. And you can’t even refer to your past experience of explaining and predicting something. Each experience is limited by the conditions in which it became possible, while other people’s experience may be different. More different evidence is needed, confirming or refuting various connections between facts, so that the reasoning, reflections of a person look logical.

Logic helps us to think holistically, coherently, broadly. Logical thinking, together with systemic thinking, allows you to collect the whole picture of an event, and not be content with pieces and not have fragments of information about it, according to which it is not clear where one came from, what the other will lead to. Thus, for a well logically thinking person, there are no inexplicable, irregular phenomena, and such a person can make a more or less accurate forecast for the future, evaluating what is happening in the present with the help of his logical thinking. It is only necessary to ask the question of what facts the facts that are currently available can be connected with and what this connection looks like. If everything goes the way it is now, what will it lead to? And what led to what we have now?

Cause-and-effect relationships

We usually talk about the ability to draw cause-and-effect relationships, talking about the ability to think logically. Because in logic we connect with each other mainly such facts that are scattered over time. For example, some fact preceded the emergence of another fact or leads to new facts that we assume. Moreover, the cause is not just a fact, it is a whole combination of circumstances, these are special conditions in which the occurrence of some phenomenon is possible, which we then call the effect. In other words, several facts, including the main fact, precede the emergence of a new main fact and several accompanying facts.

A fact is an event, a phenomenon that actually happened. But this event, the phenomenon took place under certain conditions, which must also be taken into account when speaking of causal relationships. It cannot be said, for example, that a seed thrown into the ground caused the appearance of a sprout, because it is not only a matter of a seed, although one can call it throwing into the ground the main fact that preceded the emergence of a new fact – a sprout. Because the point is in many other factors that influenced the fact that the seed germinated. This is moisture, and climate, and the peculiarity of the soil, and much more, less significant, but necessary for seed germination. Therefore, for each effect, as a fact, there are causes in the form of other facts, in which there is a main fact and a number of secondary ones. This is what we can call the conditions due to which some kind of phenomenon, event becomes possible. Having a good understanding of the conditions under which this or that phenomenon becomes possible, we can perfectly explain what happened and make calculations for the future, building a chain of thoughts called cause-and-effect relationships. If such and such conditions develop, if such and such a combination of circumstances arises, then this will lead to such and such consequences. And for a person in life there will no longer be so many surprises that happen in the life of people who think poorly logically.

We explain what happened or is happening at the moment by studying the factors that preceded these events in the form of a set of facts, which we call conditions. Something always follows from something and everything leads to something. But it is curious that the logic may not always be coherent enough, precisely because each effect may have several causes that are not so easy to take into account. For example, if you throw a match on flammable things, then with a high degree of probability a fire will occur. Is it logical? Logically. But does it follow from this that every fire can be explained by a thrown lighted match, even in cases where this actually happened? Obviously not.

It is not always just a thrown lit match that leads to a fire. Even if it was abandoned and because of it something ignited, in the future the fire could develop due to a completely different set of circumstances. For example, due to which a short circuit or due to a gas explosion. Yes, anything could be the cause, even taking into account the cause known to us in the form of an abandoned lit list. This means that if we see a fire, then without knowing additional information about it, we will not be able to explain its cause only with the facts known to us. Our logic will fail until we find all the evidence we need to factor into our calculations. Moreover, the known evidence may also not be enough to find out the cause of the fire, because they can be thrown to us in order, for example, to hide the fact of deliberate arson, which was committed to cover up another crime, for example, theft. Therefore, in order to reason logically when looking for the causes of something, in particular a fire, you need to know about all its possible causes and then look for evidence that will either confirm or refute this or that version. Otherwise, the logic will be too narrow and therefore inefficient.

Connection between facts

In order to think logically, it is necessary to make connections between various facts, which, of course, must first be known. The more facts you know, the more connections you can make to draw the right picture of events. But how to make this connection? How to understand that one fact is related to another? And here, if we think systematically, then we can assume that in this world everything is connected with everything in some way. Therefore, the connection depends on how often and close some facts are located to each other. The density of the connection is determined by the frequent and closeness of the facts that arise with each other. Studying situations that are similar to each other and conducting experiments helps us find the right connection between facts. For example, if some words and some human behavior are often found in conflict situations, it means that there is a connection between such words and actions, and the conflict situation, even if they cannot be directly connected with each other. It seems that the person didn’t offend anyone, didn’t insult, didn’t humiliate, didn’t seem to do anything so bad to other people by doing something, but the conflict still arose. This means that there is an indirect connection and one must look at how the other side perceives such words and such behavior, which does not seem to be in conflict, but subsequently leads to conflict. Logic is not always coherent and obvious, but it is always there. Here’s what’s important to remember. Logic is always there and in everything. The only question is how to connect one facts with others. That’s what examples and experiments are for.

And knowledge, without them, nowhere, without them, logic is impossible. You can’t make a connection between something you just don’t know about. It can be said that there is no smoke without fire, therefore, if you see smoke, then somewhere there is a fire that creates it. But in order to reason like this, a person must know that smoke accompanies fire, and if you have never seen this and do not know, you will not connect one with the other. The more important facts you know, the more logically you will be able to reason, relating these facts to each other in the context of time. Conversely, not knowing important facts will make your logic clumsy and primitive or completely absurd. For example, what follows from what – does the wind blow because the trees sway or vice versa? Well, can you think logically at this moment without having certain knowledge in the field of physics?

Logic is the thread that links the different parts of the whole together to allow the big picture to be put together. Well, in order to have something to connect with, a person needs facts.

Wrong logic

We are so accustomed to some things as supposedly logical that we see logic where there is none. Here I will give you an example that I once studied quite deeply. This is an example of a person confessing his guilt. Imagine that a crime has been committed, let it be theft, and not something more terrible. Law enforcement agencies arrest a recidivist thief who lives near the place where the crime was committed. And this man is confessing. Would it be logical to consider him guilty of the theft and punish him? No no and one more time no! Absolutely not! In no case should we accept his confession, unless, of course, we want justice to be done, as at least some evidence of a person’s guilt. Because it is illogical behavior for a person to confess to a crime, knowing that you will be punished for it. People don’t do that.

A person can admit his guilt in three cases: if he is somehow bribed, if he is intimidated or beaten out of a confession, or if he has some unhealthy beliefs in his head or in general problems with it. In all three cases, the person’s behavior will be unnatural and unhealthy. And how can something unnatural and unhealthy be accepted as evidence? Well, why on earth would a normal person admit to something? And if he was influenced, then what kind of justice can we talk about? Or, if he is unwell, if he has some problems with his head, that’s why he confessed in order to be punished, then he should be treated, not judged. Sick people are the easiest to blame.

Therefore, an admission of guilt is not the queen of evidence. This is unnatural behavior. Whatever prompts a person to confess his deed, this cannot be taken as evidence of his guilt, otherwise justice will not be done. In judicial practice, any admission of guilt in general should be considered as a reason to conduct an additional check and see how the investigation was carried out in general, if in the end the person admitted his guilt. For it is possible that a person was either tortured, or deceived, well, or blackmailed with something in order to get a confession from him. Therefore, as long as an admission of guilt is proof of this very guilt, people will be terrorized by the law enforcement system, which is much easier to get a confession from a person than to find other evidence of his guilt. If we want to live in a civilized society, and not in a cannibalistic one, people’s confessions to crimes cannot be considered as evidence of their guilt! Directly such things as confession and guilt are not connected, it is illogical. They are connected only through the additional conditions that made recognition possible.

Why is it illogical to admit to something for which you can be punished? Because every healthy person must protect himself from any danger, including from any punishment. Whether you committed a crime or not is irrelevant. If you’re not crazy, you won’t admit your guilt, that’s just stupid. To deny your guilt in every possible way, even when all the evidence is against you, this is logical behavior. And the confession of the deed is illogical. A person has the right to defend himself. And if he confesses to something, he can be punished, then such evidence must be rejected. Otherwise, people will be forced to confess to many crimes despite the fact that they did not commit them. I hope that in the future the justice system will completely refuse to accept people’s admission of their guilt as at least some kind of evidence. And those societies in which such practices continue will be considered backward and inhuman. Because they will definitely practice knocking out confessions from the accused. And you must understand, if you are beaten properly, then you will confess to anything. So, you see, knowing the laws of human behavior, we can draw the correct conclusion about what we see and hear, using our logical thinking.

But for the time being, you see, society, being guided by its primitive perception of such facts, and therefore reasoning illogically. A lot of people believe in the logicality of the fact that if a person confessed to something, then he really did it. Therefore, recognition is accepted as evidence of someone’s guilt.

What else is unnatural, and therefore illogical in people’s behavior, in which we are used to seeing logic? Well, for example, to speak publicly the truth, for which they can be punished. People will not speak openly in their own name about things that may cause them problems, fear will not allow it. Some, of course, speak, but in general it is unnatural for a person. Therefore, many prefer to lie, just not to bring trouble on themselves. But anonymity can make people more sincere. And, in fact, it does. It is thanks to anonymity that people are able to tell the truth, because in this case they feel safe. As Oscar Wilde said: “A man is very embarrassed when he speaks for himself. Give him a mask and he will tell you the whole truth.“ Therefore, when they say that in order for people to be responsible for their words, it is necessary to deprive them of their anonymity – this is not true. People will be afraid of punishment, and will not be responsible. That is why, when people vote in elections, they do it anonymously, so that they do not have to report to anyone for their decision and not be afraid that they will have some claims from those who are dissatisfied with their choice. Why, then, in this case, on the same Internet, anonymity should be removed? So that people would begin to lie and be hypocritical more, so that the quality of information on the network would decrease? Think logically to understand where this will lead.

How to develop logical thinking

Well, now let’s think about how to develop logical thinking, preferably on the example of everyday activities, so as not to do it on purpose, which takes time. And when a person develops thinking, doing everyday things, he combines the necessary with the useful and desirable. It’s like always and everywhere to learn, in any situation.

Intuitively, we all use logic. But as the above examples show, by linking various facts together just because we are used to doing so, considering such a connection to be true, we can think wrongly, but at the same time think that our logic is flawless. Like twice two. Therefore, the first thing to start developing logical thinking is the rejection of thought patterns. All old connections that we considered logical, but did not compare them with others, need to be re-checked. You need to prove your logic, and not accept it as a common truth. And first of all, you need to prove it to yourself. Here, let’s say, you personally somehow checked the question with smoke without fire – is this possible or not? You can literally consider this example, you can figuratively. The main thing is to find out whether you checked some logical connection known to you or not. If not, why do you think this logical construction is logical, what evidence convinces you of its correctness? I often come across such logic when developing thinking with people. They say that this is logical, that is logical, but why this or that is logical, they do not explain. Because they themselves did not check this logic. It’s just easier to adopt such an attitude, where B follows from A, especially if you were taught this somewhere somewhere. Other options are not considered. Just do not forget that official science is also often wrong in its conclusions. Therefore, one must always have good reasons to consider some connection between facts as logical, constantly proving to oneself its logicality. Otherwise, you will not have logical thinking, but dogmatic.

Breadth of knowledge is another important condition for the development of logic. It is not necessary and impossible to know everything. But he must study some specific, important question for a person from all possible sides, he must consider all the points of view available on him in order to be able to draw many connections between different facts and understand which of them is the most logical. Some of these connections will be the strongest, and therefore the most logical. This is the meaning of logic – to be convinced of the correctness and strength of a certain connection between facts. It’s like choosing a product in a store, best of all on the Internet, since there is more choice. The ratio of important characteristics for a person and the price of a product can be different. You look at one offer, another, a third, to find the best one. In some cases, it may seem that you have found the best option when you stumble upon something that is pretty on a number of indicators. But if you do not rush and continue to choose, then you can find even more suitable options, even more attractive. And here is the best option of all studied – this is the most logically sound option. But in order to stumble upon it, you need to go through a lot of different options. So it is with information, in order to find the strongest connection between facts, which will be the most logical, you need to study a lot of different facts and the connections between them. Because many things can be connected with many things, everything can be logical, the same sophistry shows this. But if we need the right connection, when one really follows from the other, it’s not worth connecting anything and everything with anything.

And now the most important thing is the questions. Having abandoned all logical patterns, well, or at least those of them that are most closely related to your life, in order not to close this topic, considering it studied and learning as much as possible about something, you should start asking questions about the reasons why something works the way it does. We need to ask ourselves the right questions aimed at explaining the observed patterns in order to find the right connections and get used to doing it on an ongoing basis. There is a question, so there is an idea. Because the question forces you to look for an answer, and therefore to think. But at the same time, we need a justified, proven answer, and not anyhow. Observing various phenomena, one should think about the reasons for their origin. Why something is exactly the way it is, why exactly these things happen, and not some others. Why, for example, do some people, if you do them a good deed, in return do you evil? We need to explain this logic, we need to understand why this happens. Various events should not be perceived by a person as a set of individual episodes, pieces of life. They need to be tied into a whole film, or rather, into a script. And if with systemic thinking we connect everything with everything, then with logical thinking, we are looking for connections in some specific event, in some specific course of things. Why does B follow from A? Why not in some other way? Or maybe there are other connections, maybe D follows from A? How to find out, how to check it?

Another category of questions is directed to the future, when a person thinks about what will happen if something goes the way it is now, if he does something in a certain way. That is, you need to calculate events in advance, asking questions about the probable future and assuming what it might be in a certain direction. What will happen if you do and say what you are doing and saying now? Can you guess? Do it. And then justify, prove your assumptions. What will happen if the existing trend continues in a certain area and why do you think so? Let’s make a prediction about something and prove it correct. Say, “I believe that with the current state of affairs we will come to such and such,” and explain why you think so. Or, explain to yourself why you do what you do or why other people do what they do. Questions aimed at guessing what the future will be like and finding answers to them. This is how you can train your logical thinking.

But, at this point, some people object, saying that how can you know what the future will be like if it hasn’t happened yet. It is impossible to know what is not yet there. Well, maybe we can assume that tomorrow the sun will rise again, as it has been for many thousands of years, but in other matters not everything is so obvious to be sure of your forecast. So, to know the future, you need to know the past better. There is nothing new under the sun. Although, of course, this is too loud a statement, but still a well-studied past opens our eyes to a probable future. We cannot know it for sure, but logic can help us to guess with a high degree of probability what it might turn out to be in a certain scenario. If you see a child playing with matches, don’t you, knowing what happens in such situations, make the assumption that a fire might happen? That’s the way it is and that’s a lot of other cases. So, the more you know about what and how happens in life, under certain circumstances, the easier it will be to answer the question of what will happen if you do this or that, or if the current state of affairs continues.