To become a successful thinker, you must be proficient in the "deductive thinking" method.

Source: Hiphop Village

It is reasonable to assume that the deductive method is one of the most well-established methods used in the construction of science.

It largely eliminates errors and ambiguities without falling into infinity.

Tarski

01. What is deductive thinking?

Deductive thinking is a method of logical reasoning that starts from general premises and derives specific statements or individual conclusions through deduction.

This way of thinking is usually based on known information or rules, and deduces new conclusions or results.

In deductive thinking, one first identifies one or more premises, which are usually known, generally accepted facts or rules.

People then use logical reasoning to derive concrete conclusions from these premises.

This derivation process is rigorous, and each step must have a clear logical basis.

For example: glass is fragile, while stone is unbreakable.

Based on this, we can make deductive reasoning to arrive at other non-fragile things, such as sticks that can break glass, and stones that can break other fragile things, like ice cubes.

Deductive thinking is widely used in natural sciences such as mathematics, physics, and chemistry, as well as in social sciences such as law and philosophy.

For example, in mathematics, we can derive new mathematical conclusions from known mathematical theorems or formulas;

In law, lawyers and judges decide cases through deductive thinking based on the letter of the law and relevant cases.

If you want to be a successful thinker, you must be proficient in deductive thinking.

02. The 4 steps of deductive thinking

Step 1: Ask questions

Asking a few more whys can go a long way in discovering the nature of the problem. In addition, it is helpful to use what and how to express it.

Step 2: Analyze the problem

Look for as many clues as possible, don't be tempted by the first discovery of the solution and the answer, and force yourself to look for all possible information related to the relationship, and then start to think and analyze it deeply.

Step 3: Determine the method

In addition to the solutions that seem plausible at a glance, explore other approaches, especially when adopting ready-made solutions.

If someone else has discussed the same problem and the solution sounds appropriate for your situation, it is important to carefully judge what the situation has in common with yours, but it is best not to use solutions that have not been tested in your case.

Step 4: Verify the certificate

Once solutions have been found, we need to test and prove them to see if they are effective and whether they solve the problems raised.

Many people stop when they get to the previous step, which is actually incomplete and an application of unscientific thinking.

03. Case experience

Let's take a look at the power of deductive reasoning, don't read it in one sitting, it's best to practice it while watching it in conjunction with the thinking program above. Hopefully, your conclusions are just as correct.

In a vast forest, a raging fire raged wildly.

When a valiant ranger heard the news, he quickly assembled an emergency rescue team of 30 volunteer firefighters.

The rangers effectively divided the volunteers into teams and directed them to put their all-out foot into the fight to extinguish the fires.

To ensure smooth communication between the groups, he equipped each group with walkie-talkies.

Before they set off, the rangers solemnly told them that a helicopter would be cruising over the area. In case of emergency, the helicopter pilot must be contacted immediately by intercom so that he can be rescued in time.

The rangers then explained to each group in detail how to use the walkie-talkie and emphasized its importance.

After five or six hours of fierce fighting, the fire was finally successfully extinguished.

Unfortunately, however, three firefighters from one team mysteriously disappeared. After a period of searching, the team found their charred remains in a remote valley.

With legal liability, insurance indemnity, and lessons learned from future fire and disaster relief, it is imperative to find out the truth about how they were not rescued.

Think about what you would do if you were the head of the temporary fire brigade? Using deductive thinking, follow these steps:

Step 1: Ask some specific questions, and the person in charge should ask at least four questions to understand the situation.

1. Who, when, where, last saw these three people.
2. Did the pilot of the plane receive a distress signal from the three men?
3. Was this incident just a rescue plan, or was there some minor negligence due to other reasons?

Step 2: Analyze the situation (problem)

1. Are these people so panicked that they forget how to use the walkie-talkie?
2. Did the fire burn out the walkie-talkie?
3. Did the pilot not receive the signal?

Before the person in charge can learn how to prevent similar accidents in the future, he must first find out the cause of the accident.

After many inspections, the responsible persons learned the following:

• The pilot of the plane said he did not receive a distress signal from the three men.
• They were last seen trekking over a hill towards the valley where their bodies were later found.
• The remains of walkie-talkies were found next to the bodies of these people. Another group of firefighters, who were also trapped on a small mound by the surrounding fire, used their walkie-talkie to call for help to the pilot of the plane, and they were successfully saved.
• Other than that, no firefighters called for ambulance.
• In a fire not so long ago, a team of firefighters was burned to death. The helicopter pilot reported not receiving their distress signal. Their bodies were found in a creek of a wadi river between two hills.

Step 3: Find out what you can do.

1. After the analysis, the person in charge summed up 5 possibilities for these people not to be saved:
2. These people forgot how to use the walkie-talkie correctly.
3. The pilot of the plane did receive a distress signal from the three men, but he said no because he wanted to shirk responsibility for the failure of the rescue work.
4. The intercom's signal was cut off by the valley, so the pilot of the aircraft could not receive the captivity signal.
5. This walkie-talkie affected the performance due to the temperature of the fire.
6. These people were too panicked at the time and did not use the walkie-talkie to call for help in time.

The fourth step is to inspect the certificate

The person in charge needs to think about which of these possible causes is most likely to be true.

He cross-checked each answer with the information found in the second step, analyzed the case, and came up with a way to verify what he thought was the correct answer in the shortest possible way, and to determine whether it was correct.

The person in charge found that the fourth reason was the most likely, that is, the intercom signal was valleyd, so the pilot of the aircraft could not receive the distress signal.

This answer matches all the information, and no distress signal was received.

The walkie-talkie was found next to the bodies of the men, and in another previous accident, the victims were in a similar area.

04. Deductive reasoning must make assumptions in the same context

Now let's look at a strange set of fallacies, which are three sentences said by the same person on different occasions:

The universe is so vast, and I am so small,

In the splendid and boundless universe, my existence is so insignificant, I am simply nothing;

I am a human being, and human beings are naturally superior to other creatures, because only human beings have advanced intelligence.

This flower is so beautiful, and what could be more beautiful in the world than this flower? It is simply the most perfect creation in the world.

These three sentences are fine, but when combined, we come to a very strange conclusion:

Flowers are the most perfect, I am higher than flowers, but I am nothing.

In fact, in the subconscious of most people, there is almost a strange fallacy like this.

So:

Deductive reasoning must satisfy the premise that assumptions are made in the same context.

Different premises cannot be put together.

Therefore, deductive reasoning must be clear about the premise, otherwise it will be difficult to reason to the correct conclusion, and even make jokes.

05. Summary

Deductive thinking is a method of logical reasoning from the general to the specific, which can help us deduce new conclusions or results from the information we already know.

In our daily lives, we can apply deductive thinking in the following ways:

Decision Making:

Deductive thinking can be used when you are faced with multiple choices or need to solve a problem. First, be clear about your goals and constraints, and then come up with possible solutions.

Next, through logical reasoning and predicting the possible outcomes of each scenario, choose the one that is most likely to reach the goal.

Schedule:

Deductive thinking is also very useful when making daily plans or long-term plans.

Based on known information and conditions, you can predict the possible outcomes of different courses of action and choose the optimal course of action.

For example, when planning activities for the day, you can optimize your schedule through deductive reasoning, taking into account factors such as traffic conditions, weather, personal energy levels, and more.

Learn something new:

As you learn new concepts, theories, or skills, you can use deductive thinking to deepen your understanding.

Derive new conclusions or applications from known principles or rules.

This will help you better grasp new knowledge and apply it in real-world situations.

Communication:

When communicating with others, deductive thinking can help you express your point of view more clearly and in an organized manner.

You can back up your arguments with logical reasoning to make your point more convincing.

At the same time, it can also help you understand and analyze the perspectives of others and promote effective communication.

Work something out:

When you have a problem, you can use deductive thinking to find a solution.

First, analyze the nature and causes of the problem, and then propose possible solutions.

Through logical reasoning and experimental verification, the best solution is selected and put into practice.

By constantly practicing and cultivating deductive thinking skills, you can deal with various problems more rationally and methodically, and improve your decision-making efficiency and problem-solving skills.