Insight into the leopard in the care, the non-formal logic that can be seen.
What is Insight?The explanation of the Insight Encyclopedia is to see through and observe thoroughly;Discover the inner content or meaning. Logically insightful. The role of insight is to detect illogical problems and take remedial action to achieve the results of the normative behavior. Insight can be from the present tense, from the future, and even more from the present tense to the past tense. In terms of time, insight into what has already happened needs to be judged according to formal logic, while what has not happened needs to be judged by non-formal logic.
However, what is meaningful and valuable to us about insight is the logical reasoning of the future based on the judgment of the past. What is valuable to people's lives is formal logic. However, judgments based on linear formal logic in life are often defeated by non-linear non-formal logic, and the degree of this defeat is not only to make people doubt reality, but also to lose faith. I've also been struggling, what kind of insight can I use to distinguish which upside-down black and white ** in life comes from?It will bring people to ** again. Until I thought about the logic of non-formal logic, maybe from this point of view, I can see a large part of the answer.
Looking at the insight to narrow the atmosphere and find the root cause is also to give examples, so as to see the leopard in the tube, which can be seen. No matter in **, including the Rakshasa Kingdom and the Tianzhu Kingdom, you are in a lawsuit. When you calmly defeat anger, reason defeats sensibility, and reason returns, and all kinds of correct logic are sorted out with formal logic, and there is also a complete chain of lines of evidence to take the road of rights protection. Rogue referees will also ignore your complete chain of evidence due to insufficient evidence, and will ignore your correct logicThen they force you to transfer the subject of the problem according to their logic, let you appeal or petition on the grounds of process, and then let you fall into an endless loop. They have a complete non-formal logic, which blocks the rationality of formal logic from all angles, such as form, content, process, procedure, subjectivity, subjectivity, and subjectivity. And if you tell the referee why they judge like this, they will say, the fact is that they have no way or ability to satisfy everybody. It seems to have said everything, but it really didn't say anything. To reason about the formation of this phenomenon, it is necessary to consider the difference between formal and non-formal logic from the perspective of insight
The first is that the definitions are different. The encyclopedia of formal logic is a theory that studies the laws of thinking in the intellectual stage of human cognition. It emphasizes the scientificity and rationality of the laws of thinking, and is expressed as deductive logic and deduction of logic, which can also be said to be inductive logic and inductive logic. It is a way to use it for disciplinary research and science-engineering analysis. Rather than formal logic, it emphasizes the use of perception to analyze, evaluate, and improve the judgment used to analyze the existence of things. Logical theories of non-formal reasoning and argumentation that are commonly used in interpersonal communication, political debates, court debates, and **communication**.
Moreover, the history of development is different. Formal logic is the traditional logic that has always existed in reality since the beginning of human existence. It also includes modern formal logic, also known as mathematical logic or symbolic logic, which was developed after the middle of the 19th century. In the 70s of the 20th century, the term "non-formal logic" was mainly applied to the study and judgment of legal principles, including the application of artistic depiction.
The most important thing is that the results of the studies are different. In terms of research methods, formal logic is based on the thinking consciousness based on the existence of facts, and its thinking is based on the thinking and knowledge of the result, essence and content. In other words, it is a complete and complete logic and an ideology that does not take into account human emotions and likes and dislikes, or even only about the ontology of things, and has nothing to do with where the value lies.
Thinking reasoning that is not formal logic is the logic that refutes the inadequacies of formal logic. It is based on the fact that "Theory A is wrong because it does not meet the requirements of formal logic". It's just that this kind of rhetoric is essentially "wrong because it's wrong", or "it's wrong because it doesn't fit me".
In fact, the logic of committing to all-encompassing, at least in the face of life events, is dismal and useless. Therefore, non-formal logic presumes that formal logic without emotion, without position, and without values, cannot fully reflect the logic of human thinking. Non-formal logic is a kind of logical reasoning that is more based on the deference of values related to human nature and emotions, and based on one's own point of view.
As a kind of social rule of formal logic, the express provisions of the law require that the proposition put forward be persuasive, and that it can provide supporting reasons for the proposition, and the supporting reasons can be used as a conclusion to correspond to the proposition. However, it is worth noting that in legal practice, there is often an emphasis on "value-based", and even more non-formal logical thinking such as stance and class.
How to understand it?Look at the explanation of the logical defense of legal rationality by Professor Xiong Minghui of Zhejiang University: Legal rationality is divided into two levels, namely formal rationality and substantive rationality, the former is the object of concern of legal logic, while the latter is the content investigated by jurists. As further commented, formal rationality is not always consistent with substantive rationality. In other words, according to the conventional view, sometimes what is logically rational may be irrational in substance;Sometimes it is rational in substance, while it can be irrational logically. Moreover, the former only studies the form of reasoning, while the latter requires the introduction of value judgments and the specific content of reasoning. This view has almost become the consensus of today's jurisprudence and legal logic.
Look at the experts' defense explanations for logical reasoning or look at insights, find the truth, and look at the essential causes. It seems to be able to find out the confusion in our lawsuit. That is to say, the form is the carrier of the content, the expression of the content, the content is the subject, and the subject is the determining factor.
Going around in a big circle, the time to talk about the conclusion depends on the topic, which is also in line with the correspondence of formal logic. "A leopard in the tube, you can see it", a Chinese idiom, can be used as both a derogatory and a positive word. When used as a derogatory term, it means to look at the leopard from the small hole in the bamboo pipe, and only see a markings on the leopard's body. The metaphor of seeing only a part of a thing means that what is seen is incomplete or that there is a slight gain. It is described as looking at the problem one-sidedly and looking at the problem in an incomplete way. When doing compliments, it is also written as "peep a glimpse and know the whole leopard" and "peep the leopard in the tube, see it from time to time". It means that if you look at the leopard from the small hole of the bamboo tube, you can see a markings on the leopard's body. The metaphor looks at only one part of things and speculates on the whole picture. The important thing is to say three times and summarize it: the logic of thinking that refutes the shortcomings of formal logic instead of formal logic. It is based on the phrase "because a
As an ordinary person who has one thing to say, the demands and propositions of formal rationality encountered in formal logic are often frustrated under the substantive ideal, and the focus of the problem lies in substantive rationality, which is often swayed by emotions, positions and axiology based on non-formal logic. How to understand it, rationality includes rationality based on things, and it also includes emotional rationality. Both are based on rational formal logic, except that one is the formal logic of things and the other is the formal logic of emotions. Logical reasoning looks at insight, ordinary people see the results, excellent people see the causes, and top excellent people see the system. However, there is an interesting scientific study that shows that people who think in formal logic tend to produce scientists and philosophers. People who are not in formal logic tend to produce jurists, politicians, and actors.
A sentence is a mood, a leaf knows the autumn, and the subtlety is known. If you find a little omen, you will know the future development trend of things. Insight is the insight of the mind, which is a kind of seeing through and seeing through, discovering the inner true content and finding the true meaning. The essence of this meaning is to re-insight into the formal logic of things, and non-formal logic is also indispensable, but if you take the non-formal logic based on your own emotions, values, and even your own position and preferences to judge formal logic, that is "a peep in the tube, which can be seen". If you look for non-formal logic based on your own emotions, values, and even your own positions and preferences, or even formulate and implement your own so-called formal logic, then you can see it from the "leopard in the tube". From insight to seeing, and then observing thoroughly;Discover the inner content or meaning of things, whether you are in tune with the ups and downs of my heart. At this time, I still hope that you will think that I am based on formal logic of content expression, not based on empathy, empathy based on position and preference and the same frequency as me.