General Thinking Tools

In this world where people are bound to make mistakes no matter how careful they are, a little bit of a relaxed attitude seems to be more beneficial to our health than extreme neuroticism.

-- William James, "The Will to Believe"


Recently, I haven't had time to update the WeChat Official Account. On one hand, I've started working hands-on with Web3 products and found that doing actual business consumes a lot of mental energy; on the other hand, I've been studying zero-knowledge proofs, which is a bit difficult for someone like me who has poor math and programming foundations. So recently, I've been focusing on these two tough areas. I'll output something after I've digested them a bit more.

Today, I'll first organize the general thinking tools section from Daniel Dennett's "Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking" that I've read recently:

  • Making mistakes

    • It's valuable to make "good" mistakes

    • The key to making mistakes is not to hide them, especially not to deceive oneself. The natural human reaction to errors is embarrassment and anger, and we are always angriest with ourselves. Therefore, we must learn to overcome these emotional reactions.


  • Reductio ad absurdum

    • A clever way to find erroneous propositions

    • Take some propositions or assumptions from an inference and see if there are any contradictions or hidden absurdities. If so, you must discard the problematic proposition or re-infer.


  • Rapoport's Rule

    • The right way to criticize others

    • Step one: You should clearly, vividly, and impartially restate your opponent's thoughts so that your opponent says, "Thank you, I wish I had expressed it as well as you just did." Step two: List the parts of your opponent's view that you agree with, especially those that are not widely accepted by the public. Step three: Mention what you have learned from your opponent. Step four: Say a word of rebuttal or criticism.


  • Sturgeon's Law

    • Don't waste time on meaningless things

    • There is a great deal of foolish, mediocre, and utterly terrible stuff in every field. Then, to avoid wasting your time and everyone else's patience, make sure you focus on the best things you can find in that field, such as award-winning works, outstanding achievements, and universally praised masterpieces, rather than the dregs.


  • Occam's Razor

    • Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily

    • If you can find a simpler theory with fewer factors and fewer entities that explains phenomena just as well, then don't construct an overly complex theory.


  • Occam's Broom

    • Deliberately concealing evidence unfavorable to oneself

    • Refers to the defenders of certain theories sweeping facts unfavorable to themselves under the carpet with the utmost intellectual dishonesty.


  • Amateurs matchmaking

    • Neither "explaining too little" nor "irritating experts"

    • Let experts express their views to a group of curious amateur listeners, while letting other experts listen in.


  • Jump out of the system

    • A good method to break habitual thinking

    • If a long-standing debate seems unable to make progress, with both sides stubbornly insisting on their correctness, it is often because something they both agree on is actually wrong. Many great moments of jumping out of the system are related to abandoning something highly regarded, which we later discover doesn't actually exist.


  • Gould's Three Thinking Tools

    • "Rather say"

      • "The situation is less about A (the mainstream view you believe); rather, it's about B (a view completely different from the former)."

      • But sometimes, views A and B can coexist, yet the speaker intentionally misleads the listener.

    • "Intentional accumulation"

      • "View A + View B + View C, is obviously wrong" (not knowing which view(s) the speaker intends to indicate as wrong)

      • Putting multiple propositions together and creating ambiguity when negating the overall proposition, leaving others unclear about exactly which proposition is being negated.

    • "Gould's Two Steps"

      • Step one: Create a target and then refute it. Step two: Shift attention to the evidence used in the first refutation.

      • Instead of discussing the actual viewpoint, deliberately confuse the viewpoint and then argue against the confused version.


  • Be cautious of the word "of course"

    • A trick that makes you agree without thinking

    • Marks something that the author truly believes and expects the reader to also believe. However, the "of course" relationship isn't necessarily valid.


  • Rhetorical question

    • Makes you feel awkward saying "no"

    • Be vigilant about rhetorical questions that appear in arguments or debates. Develop a good habit: whenever you see a rhetorical question, try quietly finding a less obvious answer yourself, and if you can find one, speak it out.


  • Deepity

    • Looks profound but actually says nothing

    • A proposition that appears important, correct, and profound due to its ambiguity.


These simple, multi-purpose thinking tools, akin to methodologies of thought, can help us improve our thinking efficiency, more easily identify errors in other expressions, and enhance the quality of our thinking.