一本小小的蓝色逻辑书

by 布兰登·罗伊尔

大约两千五百年前，苏格拉底创建了一套方法，通过一系列探问，也就是后世所说的“苏格拉底方法”，来获取问题的答案，并对这些答案进行推断。通过这种方式，他就可以找出各种复杂现象背后的关键问题，揭开很多貌似有理实则荒谬的说法背后的真相。这套方法就是后来我们所说的“逻辑推理”

本质上来说，逻辑推理是一个“收集信息、评估信息的过程”。要想做出正确的决定，我们首先要占有充分的信息，而要想占有充分的信息，首先需要提出正确的问题。所以那些擅长逻辑推理的人，往往也比较善于提问，搜集相关信息，并用“正确的”方式 对这些信息进行评估。最重要的是，他们可以在不受他人干扰的情况下独立完成这一过程。

本书的目的，就是为读者提炼出一套最有用、最完整的逻辑推理概念，帮助读者在学习和现实生活中更好地理清思路，解决问题。

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Logic, Self Help, Psychology, Reference, Domestic

244 pages, Paperback

First published March 15, 2010

Reviews

[☘Misericordia☘ ⚡ϟ⚡⛈⚡☁ ❇️❤❣ · Rating 5 out of 5]

While there's a lot of self-explanatory stuff in here (as expected), some tidbits were really nice:

- Convergent vs Divergent thinking (cheers to the Divergent)
- Utility analysis
- Decision-event trees

A lot of basic logic-based tips explained easy and nice for people far from Formal Logic as a discipline:
- High correlation (but not causation)
- Q: “Evidence omitted” may hold the key to determining an argument’s validity. (c)
- Q: Does your favorite commercial fiction author sell a lot of books because he or she is famous, or is he or she famous as a result of selling lots of books? Reverse causation is tricky. (c)
- Q: Theory may be divorced from practice. Plans may not equal completed action. Do not assume that plans will be implemented without a hitch. (c)
- Q: Always look for potentially vague terms in an argument and ask for or seek clarification. (c)
- Q: One way to uncover implementation assumptions is to anticipate bottlenecks. (c)
- Q: An argument may depend on the assumption that a person or organization is aware of a pre-existing fact, situation, or condition. (c)
- Q: Searching for something does not guarantee that we’ll recognize it once we’ve found it. The ability to accurately identity that which we are seeking to find may be a key assumption. (c)
- Q: Necessary conditions are not the same as sufficient conditions. (c)
- Q: Sunk costs are irrelevant to future decision making. (c)
- Q: Test the opposite scenario—if you hear that a full moon causes the crime rate to rise, always ask what the crime rate is like when the moon is not full. (c)

Q:
The Four Classic Mindsets
Each of us learns early that different people see the world
differently. Our experience, background, and predispositions
play a unique role in shaping our outlook. Ponder this simple
but revealing question:
Which of the following five sports is least like the other four?
A) Baseball
B) Cricket
C) Soccer (Football)
D) Golf
E) Ice Hockey
This is indeed an interesting question highlighting the possibility
of multiple solutions and subjective interpretations. Not only
would such a question never be chosen for an IQ test, but it also
hints at ambiguity so often present whenever individuals make
choices....
Case in point: People who are analytically minded tend to focus on the
instruments used to play the sport. People who are holistically
minded tend to see the sport in terms of when and where (i.e.,
geography) it is played. People who are results-oriented are more
likely to see the end result, contrasting the desirable low scores
in golf with the desirable high scores in the other four sports.
Process-oriented individuals will likely see contrasts in the
number of players who play each sport, their physical size, and
their athletic movements. (c)

[Katy · Rating 1 out of 5]

this book maight help some people ( some how) for me it's basics, like really basics stuff, it's only about how to decorticate ideas and arguments, nothing really practical, so do yourself a favor, go experiment by yourself, u 'll learn better while practicing
:)

[Galib]

Pretty basic. Not worth reading .
It describes about the manipulation of scenario using different words .

[Rob Dhillon]

Any book that starts with a fictional character like Henry Humidor, Socrates, and a good chuckle in the Intro. is okay with me!The Little Blue Reasoning Book: 50 Powerful Principles for Clear and Effective Thinking

[Ahmed Sanny · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good easy going book for those are interested to improve their basic understanding of reasoning, but not for experts. And, it is not really leading to the implementations.

[Betool Qanber · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked it, pretty basic, but useful for a beginner

[Ali Hassan · Rating 3 out of 5]

A wonderful book.

[Petar Šego · Rating 2 out of 5]

"The little shallow reasoning book" would be a better book title. It lacks original thinking and is not much more but a collection of beginner material on the subject.

[Sean McGowan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good.

[Ferhat Elmas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Most of the logical fallacies with a lot of examples/questions, would be very useful for high school students.

[Julie Dawson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Note: I was given a complimentary copy of this book for review, however the version I was given is an older version under the title The Little Blue Thinking Book. The only differences between my version and the newer version appears to be the addition of some graphic elements.

We have all at some point stood in dumbfounded awe of the illogical or irrational behavior of others. Each of us has at times found ourselves in disagreement with a person who was so obviously wrong that we thought the person was being willfully ignorant.
And yet, was it really the other person who refused to see reason? Or was it the other way around?

You may change your answer after reading The Little Blue Thinking Book.

Author Brandon Royal’s book is what you might call an introductory self-study guide for those interested in sharpening their critical thinking skills. Royal covers everything from selective perception to lateral thinking to probability trees and more in this compact work.

Though technically divided into chapters, the reality is that the book is really two halves. The first half is comprised of the five chapters that detail the actual lessons. The second half consisted of a bunch of appendixes that for the most part simply restate or reinforce information from the first half. While there are a few interesting thought exercises, much of what is in the appendixes felt redundant.

Individuals with some background in logic or critical thinking may find the book at best self-explanatory and at worst overly simplified. However, as a primer for those interesting in building a foundation on which to develop their critical thinking skills, The Little Blue Thinking Book is a solid start.

Addendum: My star rating is based on using this book as a primer. Experienced students will not benefit as much from this book as those just starting out.

[Brent Newhall]

This book takes the reader on a brisk walk through a lot of basic reasoning techniques. From principles found in basic economic theory to classics like the Prisoner's Dilemma, The Little Blue Thinking Book gives the reader just enough information to grasp the concept but rarely digs into the details of exactly how to implement such thinking in the reader's own mind. The book does end by going through a number of arguments and analyzing what statements are true and false about them, which are helpful for sharpening one's analytical skills. If you're familiar with logic or have taken part in debate, this book won't be of much use to you, but for those without that training it definitely has potential merit.

[Rene Stein · Rating 2 out of 5]

Mizerný překlad, kdy překladatel asi nechápe, co je popírání antecedentu. Ale asi i v originále je kapitola o logice tristní. Implikace (formální implikace) je sice neintuitivni, ale to asi není dobrý důvod, proč s implikací celou kapitolu o logice začít a také u ní zůstat a nic dalšího nevysvětlovat. Předchozí kapitoly jsou trochu lepší, ale stejně autor popisuje jen banální příklady (ne) kritického myšlení. I tak by se nám ale ve světě fake news a užitečných idiotů na sociálních sítích, kteří za potvrzení svého před-sudku rozdávají lajky, žilo lépe, kdyby většina recipientů vyhodnotila správně alespoň ty banální a flagrantní příklady nekritického a manipulativniho myšlení.

[C · Rating 4 out of 5]

หนังสือการใช้เหตุผล ที่อ่านง่ายที่สุดตั้งแต่เคยอ่านมา

[Jackie]

Page 120: "We should not ignore or slant evidence if what we seek is the truth.

[Ignacio Ahumada · Rating 1 out of 5]

is very basic, is like googling some concepts, techniques and frameworks and pasting very superficial definitions in a not so helpful book.

[Trevor · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't really learn much from this book.