Framework for Analyzing Problems#
date: April 1, 2023
slug: 20
status: Published
tags: The Wheel of Thinking
type: Post
I. Identifying the Type of Information#
Information can be classified into facts, perspectives, beliefs, and opinions.
Facts are objective existences that are independent of personal judgments. They are real situations and events that can be proven or observed.
Opinions are views formed by individuals based on facts and carry subjective meanings.
Perspectives are opinions influenced by positions and interests. Often, multiple perspectives can be derived from a social event based on different interests.
Beliefs are internally consistent logical systems.
One important point that is often overlooked is that facts do not necessarily equate to the truth. "Truth" is an interesting concept that is frequently (or always) abused. If a person/organization constantly claims to possess the "truth," they likely have ulterior motives and ill intentions.
Common scenarios include:
- Not using comprehensive facts, intentionally or unintentionally ignoring facts, disregarding facts, selectively accepting preferred facts.
- Deliberately misleading others by providing only partial facts.
- Believing something is true when it is actually false.
- Assuming something is certain when it is actually uncertain.
Therefore, when receiving new information, it is essential to first determine the type of information, assess the credibility of the source, verify its cross-validation, evaluate the logical coherence of the information, and check for any contradictions with existing knowledge...
II. Principles of Understanding#
No one is always right. As long as rational logical deductions are made based on factual evidence, we should show respect. If there are opposing opinions, as long as the author has explained the reasoning process in detail, it is acceptable to point out logical errors based on the specific matter. This is a process of mutual learning and improvement. The correctness of individual initial conclusions is not important; what matters is that the argumentation must follow rigorous logic. However, if there is no logical deduction and direct conclusions are made, it is merely empty slogans and a waste of everyone's time. If someone is too lazy to even state their conclusions and resorts to personal attacks, such individuals can be ignored as their remarks are garbage.
If one disagrees with a certain conclusion, they need to provide complete and rigorous facts and logical reasoning. Using emotional language to confuse rational thinking and prevent readers from thinking critically and directly accepting others' conclusions is usually a trick used by fraudsters.