4 ms·

Hmm, I want to be a clearer thinker if that makes sense. I have trouble articulating a lot of my thoughts, I don't write very much and so I have a lot of troubl

Hmm, I want to be a clearer thinker if that makes sense. I have trouble articulating a lot of my thoughts, I don't write very much and so I have a lot of trouble putting my thoughts into words. I'm not very good at arguing (I argue more emotionally than rationally). I would like to be able to think more logically, take a hypothesis and see it to it's logical conclusion.

Jtsummers 8y ago
Study logic and mathematics, additionally philosophy. You may not get fast at debate/argumentation (I'm not). But the quality of your arguments will improve. You'll be able to examine the nature of the discussion better and identify the key elements and how they're connected to each other. Learn to identify the assumptions of a position. I have a colleague who is a diehard Young Earth Creationist. He pointed me to some videos by Ken Ham (I believe). I watched them, because I wanted to understand the position. It's been a few years so I can't recall the precise flaws in the arguments, but here was the structural problem: Everything he said, ignoring how he opened an argument, was entirely logical given the initial assumptions. The entire problem was the initial assumptions (a flawed understanding of genetics, physics, and chemistry). If you took his assumptions as givens, then everything he said was quite persuasive. If you, however, actually have studied those fields or have the ability to study them, you can quickly identify why his conclusions are false. Nearly every debate you have with someone, you will find that the disagreements start with the premises and you have to identify these. From there it's an application of logic to see how they get to their actual stated views. With this understanding, you can determine whether you can even change their view. Their assumptions may be so ingrained they cannot change (like my colleague), or you might find your own conclusions changed (develop a better understanding of the history of some country and why that places them in some position today, for instance). But you'll achieve change via logic and not emotion. Sometimes, though, it does come down to emotion. I had some moderate success in getting a colleague to care about prison conditions by appealing to his religious views and pointing out the conflicts between claiming Christianity and also thinking it's ok for men to get raped by other men in prison ("ok", he felt no sympathy for them and thought they were getting what they deserved). I still used logic in that discussion, but one of the premises was his faith and the value he placed in it.
- HiroshiSan 8y ago
  That's my current plan! The math is taking a lot longer than expected.
  - Jtsummers 8y ago
    Within math: geometry, discrete math, and set theory are very proof heavy and pair well with trying to understand logical reasoning. Other math (algebra, calculus, stats) can be proof heavy, but may require a higher level of math/logic sophistication to get into (you'd be looking at textbooks targeting university juniors and seniors, maybe even grad students). Whereas introductory geometry often includes proofs immediately, as do set theory and discrete math. Good luck in your efforts.
    - HiroshiSan 8y ago
      I’m currently working through problem solving books for elementary/juniour high school. I’m trying to mainly learn to love math and problem solving as it causes me a lot of anxiety and frustration but every now and then I solve a problem and get a little bit of a rush.

Jtsummers 8y ago

Study logic and mathematics, additionally philosophy. You may not get fast at debate/argumentation (I'm not). But the quality of your arguments will improve. You'll be able to examine the nature of the discussion better and identify the key elements and how they're connected to each other. Learn to identify the assumptions of a position. I have a colleague who is a diehard Young Earth Creationist. He pointed me to some videos by Ken Ham (I believe). I watched them, because I wanted to understand the position. It's been a few years so I can't recall the precise flaws in the arguments, but here was the structural problem: Everything he said, ignoring how he opened an argument, was entirely logical given the initial assumptions. The entire problem was the initial assumptions (a flawed understanding of genetics, physics, and chemistry). If you took his assumptions as givens, then everything he said was quite persuasive. If you, however, actually have studied those fields or have the ability to study them, you can quickly identify why his conclusions are false. Nearly every debate you have with someone, you will find that the disagreements start with the premises and you have to identify these. From there it's an application of logic to see how they get to their actual stated views. With this understanding, you can determine whether you can even change their view. Their assumptions may be so ingrained they cannot change (like my colleague), or you might find your own conclusions changed (develop a better understanding of the history of some country and why that places them in some position today, for instance). But you'll achieve change via logic and not emotion. Sometimes, though, it does come down to emotion. I had some moderate success in getting a colleague to care about prison conditions by appealing to his religious views and pointing out the conflicts between claiming Christianity and also thinking it's ok for men to get raped by other men in prison ("ok", he felt no sympathy for them and thought they were getting what they deserved). I still used logic in that discussion, but one of the premises was his faith and the value he placed in it.

HiroshiSan 8y ago
That's my current plan! The math is taking a lot longer than expected.
- Jtsummers 8y ago
  Within math: geometry, discrete math, and set theory are very proof heavy and pair well with trying to understand logical reasoning. Other math (algebra, calculus, stats) can be proof heavy, but may require a higher level of math/logic sophistication to get into (you'd be looking at textbooks targeting university juniors and seniors, maybe even grad students). Whereas introductory geometry often includes proofs immediately, as do set theory and discrete math. Good luck in your efforts.
  - HiroshiSan 8y ago
    I’m currently working through problem solving books for elementary/juniour high school. I’m trying to mainly learn to love math and problem solving as it causes me a lot of anxiety and frustration but every now and then I solve a problem and get a little bit of a rush.