Civil servant exam line test logic judgment test center
First, contradiction method to solve the problem of true and false words
Introduction of questions: When the stem gives several straightforward propositions through dialogue or other forms, and points out the number of true and false propositions, and there are obvious contradictions among them, the contradiction method can be used to solve the problem at this time.
Contradictory method refers to the method of solving problems according to the relationship between contradictory propositions. Two contradictory propositions can't be true * * * without a false * * * and can't be false * * * without a true * * *. It can be inferred from a proposition that its contradictory proposition is true, or from a proposition that it is false that its contradictory proposition is true.
After a tax inspection, four business managers came to the following conclusions:
A: Self-employed individuals have never paid taxes.
B: Boss Chen, a self-employed clothing business, didn't pay taxes.
C: Not all self-employed people have never paid taxes.
D: Some self-employed people don't pay taxes.
If only one of the four people decides that it is true, which of the following is true?
Answer: Ding's conclusion is true, but Boss Chen failed to accept B. Ding's conclusion is true, but Boss Chen paid the tax.
C.C. is true, boss Chen pays taxes, and D.A. is true, but boss Chen doesn't pay taxes.
In this question, A and C are contradictory propositions, one is true and the other is false. According to the stem, only one of the four sentences is correct. So, both B and D are lies, and B is a lie. The truth is that boss Chen has paid his taxes, and Ding is cheating. The truth is that all self-employed people have paid taxes. Therefore, of A and B, A is true and B is false. So the answer is C.
When you see the problem of true and false words, you should first observe whether there are contradictions in the sentences. There are three steps to solve problems by using contradictions: finding out contradictions; Combine the stem information, set aside contradictions and determine the authenticity of other propositions; Reasoning according to the known deterministic information and two contradictory propositions to determine the answer.
Second, the breakthrough method to solve naive logic
Topic introduction: Usually, when there are some * * * * special conditions or some * * * * * conditions in the stem of the question are repeatedly mentioned, these * * * * * conditions are often the breakthrough to solve the problem. The so-called breakthrough method is a way to quickly find the breakthrough point in solving problems.
Several students guessed the place in the physics competition. Jason Chung said: "Xiaohua is the third and Xiaoren is the fifth." Xiaohua said, "Xiao Min is fifth and Xiaomeng is fourth." Xiao Ren said: "Jason Chung is the first, and Xiao Min is the fourth." Xiao Min said: "Xiaoren is the first, Xiaohua is the second." Komiya said, "Jason Chung is third, and Xiao Min is fourth." It is understood that there is no tied ranking in this competition, and everyone guessed right.
Then, the specific ranking should be:
A, Xiaohua is the first, Jason Chung is the second, Xiaoren is the third, Xiao Min is the fourth and Xiaomeng is the fifth.
B, Xiao Min first, Xiaoren second, Xiaohua third, Miyako fourth and Jason Chung fifth.
C, Xiaoren first, Xiaohua second, Jason Chung third, Komiya fourth and Xiao Min fifth.
D, Xiaoren first, Xiao Min second, Jason Chung third, Omiya fourth, Xiaohua fifth.
The answer to this question is C. The stem of the question implies that "every ranking is right", so the ranking that is guessed right only once must be right. The second place has only been guessed once, so the guess about the second place must be correct, that is, Xiaohua second. As a breakthrough to solve the problem, only C is correct.
Most of the topics that can find a breakthrough method are "dialogue guessing", that is, several elements are given in the topic, and many people guess these elements, and then judge according to these dialogues and other known conditions. Such a topic is similar to the question of true and false words, but there is no obvious contradiction in the stem. Generally speaking, there will be some abnormal statements, either judging an element many times or judging an element only once. In short, it is completely different from other elements and stands out from the crowd. Such elements can be assumed as a breakthrough, and then the answer can be obtained. So the key to doing this kind of problem is to find a unique one in the element or order.
Thirdly, presupposed possibility reasoning.
Introduction to the question type: This kind of question type is one of the possible inferences. There is an obvious jump between arguments and arguments in the stem, and nothing in the stem can clearly explain the relationship between arguments and arguments. The topic requires the choice of a hypothesis or premise, and the stem argument must be based on this.
The characteristics of synthetic amino acids are different from those of 20 standard amino acids. Integrating these synthetic amino acids into protein can systematically change the structure and biological characteristics of protein. However, so far, researchers can only integrate one synthetic amino acid into one protein at a time, so only one characteristic of protein can be changed at a time.
Which of the following is a prerequisite for the above discussion?
A, changing the structure of protein can change the biological characteristics of protein.
Researchers can only change the structure of one protein at a time.
Synthetic amino acids can only change one structure of protein.
D, synthetic amino acids can only change one characteristic of protein.
The answer to this question is D. The main argument is that "only one synthetic amino acid can be integrated into one protein at a time" and "only one characteristic of protein can be changed at a time", which links the types of synthetic amino acids with the characteristic types of protein. This reasoning process lacks bridges. Item D points out that "a synthetic amino acid can only change one characteristic of protein", and the connection between them needs to be made up.
When a topic requires finding the premise and hypothesis of its argument, and there is no obvious bridge between argument and argument in the process of argument, we can locate the options by analyzing the key words of argument and argument. The correct choice generally needs to contain both the key words of the argument and the argument, and establish an inevitable connection between them.
Common logical mistakes in civil servants' examination reasoning.
First of all, irrelevant arguments
In the process of argumentation, if the argument options used for reasoning have nothing to do with argumentation, or are related to argumentation, but they are not helpful to argumentation, it is "irrelevant argumentation".
This kind of mistakes usually appear in strengthening, weakening and conclusive problems, and new concepts that have not appeared in the original argument often appear, which are easier to eliminate.
example
According to statistics, people who insist on hitting Tai Ji Chuan all the year round have the same life span as those who never hit Tai Ji Chuan. Thus, beating Tai Ji Chuan can't keep fit and prolong life.
If the following statement is correct, which one can weaken the above argument most effectively?
A. Some athletes are physically strong, but their life expectancy is lower than that of ordinary people.
B, Taijiquan is gentle and soothing, and it can promote blood circulation and remove blood stasis, benefit qi and soothe the nerves.
C. There are many weak people who insist on playing Tai Ji Chuan all the year round.
D, Tai Ji Chuan is easy to carry out, and there is no requirement for the physical quality of the venue and athletes.
Analysis of Selected Graduates Examination Network
People who hit Tai Ji Chuan have the same life expectancy as those who don't hit Tai Ji Chuan. It is concluded that beating Tai Ji Chuan can't keep fit and prolong life. A and d are irrelevant arguments; Item B points out the benefits of Tai Ji Chuan, but it can't guarantee physical fitness and prolong life, and the degree of weakening is small; Option C shows that beating Tai Ji Chuan can make many sickly people live the same life as those who don't beat Tai Ji Chuan. It can be inferred that beating Tai Ji Chuan can strengthen their health and prolong their life, which weakens the argument in the middle of the question. So the answer is c,
Second, generalize from one part to the whole.
It is a logical mistake to infer conclusions beyond limited conditions with arguments with limited conditions, or to draw comprehensive conclusions with one-sided arguments, which is "generalizing the whole with one side". This kind of logical error is easy to be confused, so candidates should pay attention to it.
example
People used to think that knowledge is power, and most teachers taught specific knowledge. Teachers teach, students listen, and students passively accept knowledge. The new educational concept holds that students must master the method of independent exploration, acquire the ability of continuous learning, have the quality of cooperation with groups, have the social ability to solve problems in cooperation with others, and have the ability to express their thoughts freely. This means * * * *.
A, the old traditional education concept does not teach learning methods.
B, knowledge itself does not have much power.
C, mastering methods is more important than mastering knowledge.
D, the old and new educational concepts are contradictory and incompatible.
Analysis of Selected Graduates Examination Network
Option a does not mean that the old traditional educational concept does not teach learning methods; There is no implicit evaluation of knowledge in option B. Option d does not express the contradiction between the old and new educational concepts. Options a, b, and d all mean to solve the problem of deviation and curvature; C option, the title points out that the old concept pays attention to mastering knowledge and the new concept pays attention to mastering methods. The reason why new concepts replace old ones is that mastering methods is more important than mastering knowledge. So, the answer to this question is C.
Third, the argument is not sufficient
In the process of argumentation, if the truth is judged not by facts or proven scientific principles, but by the facts, morality, status and speech of the relevant people, such argumentation is not sufficient and cannot be used as evidence.
example
Force is the reason why objects move, because Aristotle thinks so.
analyse
In this example, it is unconvincing to take Aristotle's position as an argument only, which makes the mistake of insufficient arguments.
Expansion package
There is also an argument that is not enough to judge a topic as true, and only regards the topic as an argument that has not been proved to be false; Or judge a topic as false simply because it has not been proved as an argument.
example
God does not exist, because no one can prove it exists.
analyse
In this case, it is not enough to rely on no one to prove the existence of God.