"Is Your Communication Really Logical?"

This article is Lu Canwei's 101st original piece.

Click the blue 【Lu Canwei】 above to follow; remember to add a ⭐️ star mark~

I have always believed that I am a person with clear logic, but after taking the MBTI test, I found that I do indeed experience logical confusion and lack of clarity at many times, and I sometimes struggle to communicate in a way that makes sense to others.

I don't know if it's because a certain big shot with the surname Zhang recently complained, but a new wave of internet jargon has once again been exposed. One term that has been frequently used lately is "closed loop" and "linkage," which is why a friend recently told me that public accounts should hide these terms and use simpler words instead.

So, can we really say something clearly?

Is there anyone who can clearly understand the relationship between facts, concepts, logic, and language? It seems everyone knows, but explaining it can be quite difficult; those who understand do understand. It's a bit like this: those who get it automatically understand, while those who don't won't understand even if you explain it.

Until I came across a book titled "Simple Logic," which helped me understand that so-called facts have an objective existence. The objective existence of facts comes in two forms: things and events.

Things can refer to all existing entities, such as cats, dogs, vegetables, and banknotes; even an airport can be seen as a representative of things. Events are composed of things or the manifestations of things. For example, if you are going to take a flight to a certain place, that is an event, but if the airport does not exist as a thing, then that event ceases to exist.

So how do we determine the existence of things? We can only investigate in person. For instance, if we are holding a phone, we can confirm the existence of that phone as a thing. Of course, we can also confirm the existence of a new phone through the launch events of certain phone brands. However, events cannot be confirmed in the same way; we can only verify the existence of historical events through literature, photographs, memoirs, and so on.

Facts can be considered objective or subjective. Both things and events are objective; after all, the phone in front of me exists in the public domain, and others can see it too. However, if I say I feel unwell, that is a subjective fact because others cannot perceive it directly; they can only indirectly hear that I am unwell to form a concept of my discomfort. Therefore, subjective facts rely on my reliability; many people who are late like to say they felt unwell before leaving...

Now, let's talk about what a concept is. The source of a concept that can be perceived is the objective things in our brain's consciousness. This part is not very clear; for example, if we have the concept of "cat," and we have seen a "cat" as a thing, then we can know that "cat" exists and is an objective fact. But if someone says "ghost" at this moment, since this thing does not correspond to any existing reality, it can only be a subjective fact because it exists only in our minds.

Our cognition mainly consists of three parts.

Because we have the concept of "cat," we have the word "cat." Everything originates from the objective existence of "cat"; without this objective existence, there would be no concept or language for cats.

Concepts can be divided into simple concepts and complex concepts. Simple concepts are clear and specific, like the cat we mentioned earlier. Complex concepts, on the other hand, do not correspond one-to-one with objective things; for example, the commonly discussed "three views" (worldview, values, and outlook on life) have rich sources: characters, events, family, consumption, morality, etc. The emergence of erroneous concepts completely detaches from their origins; for instance, if we refer to a tiger as a cat, it cannot provide the true situation of the objective thing but can reflect the mental state of the person who has formed the erroneous concept.

Language must faithfully express the true nature of objective things, thereby providing a solid factual basis for our communication. Confusion in thinking will not lead to effective communication; after all, if one cannot even think clearly, how can they talk about effective communication? Or perhaps I know what I want to say, but when I speak, I become unclear.

Therefore, we should speak complete sentences in communication and not summarize with single words. For example, say "The recent stock market decline has made Lao Wang feel very depressed," rather than "Lao Wang got cut."

Do not treat subjective opinions as objective facts. This is also a common mistake I make; what I consider common sense may not be a concept in the eyes of others. This is the so-called common knowledge based on my subjective opinion.

Avoid using double negatives. For example, some people (yes, it's me again) like to say, "It's not that it can't be done," when they should just say, "It can be done."

Use appropriate language based on the audience. This brings us back to the beginning: try to use less industry jargon. Don't start with terms like ecological chain, closed loop, or key nodes. The key to communication is understanding. If the other party is a novice in this area, then you should adjust your expression and language according to their situation.

Recommendations:

My MBTI test results

Time and energy management

How to communicate rationally?

Reviewing through the PDCA model

Discuss what I gained from "Making Money with Skills"

Low points are better

Scan the code to follow 【Lu Canwei】, and send "Self-Media Materials" in the background to receive two benefits for free.

1. A self-media tool kit (worth 1999 yuan)

2. An electronic version of the "2020 Wealth Calendar," containing 365 money-making tips;

👇👇👇 Welcome to click and follow~

"Looking" is the strongest support ↘