Framework for Analyzing Problems#
date: April 1, 2023
slug: 20
status: Published
tags: Wheel of Thinking
type: Post
I. Determining the Type of Information#
Information can be classified into facts, perspectives, beliefs, and opinions.
Facts are independent of personal judgment and refer to the objective existence of true situations and events that can be proven or observed.
Perspectives are individuals' views on facts and carry subjective meanings.
Beliefs are internally consistent logical systems.
An 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.
- Intentionally misleading others by providing only partial facts.
- Believing something is true when it is actually false.
- Believing something is certain when it is actually uncertain.
Therefore, when receiving new information, it is crucial to first determine the type of information, assess the credibility of the source, verify if it can be cross-validated, evaluate the logical coherence of the information, and check if it contradicts existing knowledge.
II. Principles of Understanding#
No one is always right. As long as rational logical deductions are made based on factual evidence, respect should be given. 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 issue. This is a process of mutual learning. The correctness of initial personal 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 even the conclusion is too lazy to be stated and personal attacks are made instead, such individuals can be ignored as their statements 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 rationality and prevent readers from thinking and directly accepting others' conclusions is usually a trick used by fraudsters.