Methods of thinking. The key to the subconscious. Three magic words

Many of us are accustomed to thinking in only one way, and this leaves its mark on a person’s entire life: work, study, success, career, financial condition, satisfaction, romantic relationships, family, communication with others. And if the result is in some way unsatisfactory, the thinking model can and even needs to be changed. All that is required for this is to master at least a few thinking techniques that differ from the ordinary one. In this collection, we will introduce you to different thinking techniques, help you learn to think differently, and therefore act more effectively.

What is thinking

Thinking
as the process of modeling reality with the help of axiomatic provisions, which underlies human cognitive activity. Thinking is a generalized and indirect way of reflecting reality.

Many scientists and philosophers of different eras have emphasized that thought processes are a distinctive feature of human consciousness and are the very essence of man. “I think, therefore I exist,” said Descartes. Pascal said that man is a “thinking reed.”

The result of thinking is thought - concept, idea, meaning. Thought processes are contrasted with the lower forms of knowledge of reality, which are also characteristic of animals - sensation and perception.

The fact that thinking is the content and essence of human activity can be understood by the fact that it surrounds us literally everywhere. Thinking underlies all human science, art, politics, and religion. Thus, many human buildings have not only a utilitarian purpose, but also a symbolic one: the architecture of the building, its location, the nature of the lighting, even the materials from which it was built have a certain significance.

Thinking has one distinctive feature compared to other forms of cognition. With its help, you can obtain information about an object that cannot be perceived directly. This is achieved through thought processes such as deduction and analogy.

Edward de Bono's Six Thinking Hats Method

Among other theories of creativity, the method of lateral thinking specialist Edward de Bono is distinguished by its youth. The Six Thinking Hats was first published in 1985, introducing the public to a technique for organizing thinking and a way to solve creative problems and disputes. Today, this technique has become popular enough to gain both its fans and opponents. Perhaps philosophers would consider it necessary in this situation to joke about the hermeneutic circle, saying that the methodology that defends different views on things is itself evaluated differently. But without irony, we will try to understand the essence of the 6 hats technique, its pros and cons, as well as its application possibilities. Read more…

Types of thinking in psychology

There are several types of thinking in psychology.

All of them represent, as it were, different levels of representation of reality, different levels of abstraction

Visual-effective thinking
. This is the primary level of understanding reality. In this case, thought processes are not yet separated from actions. It’s as if a person “thinks with his hands.” This type of thinking is predominant in children under three years of age. Thus, the child compares objects by placing them next to each other; synthesizes and analyzes, building a “house” from cubes and breaking toys; generalizes and classifies, arranging cubes by color, shape and size. In adults, such thinking does not disappear, but only fades into the background; it is used in cases where it is not possible to accurately predict events: when mastering unfamiliar equipment, rearranging furniture, etc.
Visual-figurative thinking
. This is a higher level of understanding of reality. Here, thought processes are ahead of actions, and not vice versa, as was the case in the previous case. To imagine an object and characterize its properties, a person no longer needs to touch it with his hands. This kind of thinking prevails in a child between four and seven years old. In adults, it manifests itself when, for example, they are planning an apartment renovation: a person can already imagine in advance what the room will look like, what color the wallpaper and ceiling will be, etc.
Verbal and logical thinking
. These are completely abstract thought processes that operate with concepts and logical constructs; such constructions sometimes may not have a visual image at all - such are, say, concepts like “honesty”, “cost”, etc. With the help of such thinking, a person determines the general patterns of various natural phenomena and generalizes visual material. It is clear that such thinking cannot be accessible to a small child, since at an early age a person has not yet accumulated a sufficient amount of figurative material.

Functions and processes of thinking

Any type of thinking implements a certain set of processes that provide knowledge of the world around us.

Comparison – comparison of objects and phenomena, highlighting their similarities and differences;
Analysis – dividing an object or phenomenon into components;
Synthesis is the opposite process to analysis, in which a whole is reconstructed from individual elements by establishing connections and relationships;
Abstraction – highlighting one distinctive property of an object while ignoring all other, less significant ones;
Generalization – discarding individual features to preserve and comprehend common ones, establishing significant connections.

At the same time, a small child needs to carry out these actions literally: disassemble, put objects, arrange them according to certain characteristics. It is enough for an adult to mentally imagine all these actions.

According to their functions, types of thinking in psychology are divided into reproductive, productive and creative. The first type is repetition of learned rules according to a given algorithm; This is how, for example, typical problems in textbooks are solved. Here, thought processes are aimed not at obtaining new knowledge, but at consolidating existing material. The second type is productive thinking, in which a person goes beyond existing knowledge and receives some new information; Moreover, they are new only for a given individual, but not for humanity. If the information obtained in this way is new for humanity, then the third type is involved here - creative thinking. In this case, thought processes acquire special complexity and structure.

Visual-figurative thinking is subject to a single algorithm. First, a person gives one judgment, then adds another to it, and on their basis makes a third judgment - a conclusion. It is the goal of thought processes.

More details about the concepts

It is impossible to understand this issue in detail without finding out the definitions of all terms. Thinking is the process of processing information data and bringing it to a specific conclusion. This ability gave rise to the emergence of speech, which we use to communicate with each other. People come to reflection in order to resolve all troubles and problems, explore the world around them, find out relationships and patterns. By thinking, a person creates innovations, makes scientific discoveries and finds himself in art. Without a mental component, we would be similar to ordinary animals that act within the framework of their instincts.

Forms of thinking are the result of thought and mental processes that manifest themselves in a specific situation, which allows one to understand the essence of phenomena and objects, determine the relationships of objects and notice general signs. There are only three varieties, which I will discuss in detail below.

Types of thinking

Psychologists also distinguish different types of thinking. Usually each type divides people into two categories

Logical - ethical
. Representatives of the first type reason in terms of patterns, rules, and logical connections. People from the second type think based on feelings, experiences, and mood. For the former, communication is an exchange of information, and for the latter, it is an exchange of energy and emotions.
Sensory – intuitive
. The first type involves concrete and practical thinking, its representatives are good at noticing details; they reason from the point of view of current events, understand the current situation. The second type is global, philosophical thinking, while it is theoretical and divorced from the current situation.
Decisive - judicious
. People of the first type make decisions quickly and can act in a tense environment; They often make mistakes, but quickly correct the situation and learn from their mistakes. People of the second type take a long time to make decisions, they are used to acting in a calm and comfortable environment, and avoid unnecessary actions.
Schizothymic - cyclothymic
. Schizothymic people are characterized by subtlety of feelings, selfishness, power, and the desire to be better than others. In ordinary life they show some signs of schizophrenia. Cyclothymics are prone to manic-depressive syndrome; they are irresponsible, carefree, cheerful and sociable.
"Changer" - "runner"
. People of the first type are oriented towards various actions, each time they do something new. But “runners” prefer to do one thing until they complete the task; they are conservative in everyday life, carefully choosing friends, communication, hobbies, and purchases. Such people do not adapt well to sudden changes.
Introverts - extroverts
. This division is well known: the thoughts of the former are directed primarily at their inner world, and the thoughts of the latter are directed primarily at the external world. The former are sensitive, reserved and reasonable, while the latter are active, sociable and open.
Internals - externals
. People of the first type believe that everything that happens to them depends only on their personal qualities. They blame only themselves for all adversity, and rejoice in success as their achievements. People of the second type are sure that everything around them happens due to external circumstances: the actions of other people, chance, “fate,” etc.
Positivism - negativism
. People of the first type see in a situation primarily the qualities that it contains. They reason in affirmative constructions: “What is the weather now? “It’s good, it’s warm outside.” Negativists first notice in the same situations qualities that are absent in them, and reason with negative constructions: “What is the weather now? “Not bad, it’s not cold outside.”

In each of these types, mental activity has its own specifics. In particular, the ability to make true and false conclusions depends on this. However, overly pronounced representatives of either side tend to constantly make logical errors. These are, say, externals and internals. They often cannot objectively assess the situation and are guided by the simplest initial attitudes: “This happened because of me” or “This happened because of others,” when in fact the situation occurred due to a confluence of many circumstances. And it contains both part of the fault of the person himself and part of the fault of the environment.

Since we are talking about logical errors, it is worth considering a type of thinking that is initially erroneous. This is the so-called predicative thinking, which psychologists contrast with logical thinking. A predicate, or predicate, is what is said about an object, its quality or action that is relevant at the time of utterance. “Predicativism” is a type of reason when a person identifies dissimilar objects due to the same predicate.

Example: “Muslims do not eat pork. Vasya doesn't eat pork. Therefore, Vasya is a Muslim.” The error in reasoning is obvious. The correct reasoning in this case would be: “Muslims do not eat pork. Ahmet is a Muslim. Therefore, Akhmet does not eat pork.” The predicate is not an essential feature of the subject; it is relevant only at the time of utterance; therefore, the same predicative can be applied to many unrelated objects. Not only Muslims do not eat pork, but also vegetarians (they generally refuse meat), the poor (they simply do not have money for pork), glass bottles (these are inanimate objects, they cannot eat), etc.

Despite its initial fallibility, predicative thinking is common to many people. This is precisely the irrational type of reason on which political ideology and propaganda, religion, advertising and marketing are based. Examples of “predicativism” can easily be found in advertising slogans: “All successful people use this brand of shampoo!” — the consumer’s reaction is expected: “I use this brand of shampoo, therefore, I am a successful person.” Such a consumer will continue to use shampoo of this brand in order to maintain the status of a “successful person.” “Predictive people” are thus very easy to control, they are suggestible, and they can be easily deceived.

It was precisely this predicative type of reason that became the cause of the medieval “witch hunt,” when sorcerers and witches were found by external signs: red hair color, special clothing, voice, etc. (all these are signs that are insignificant for an object with the status of “witch.” "). It also gave rise to nationalist, racist theories, religious intolerance, and clashes between different youth subcultures. Nowadays, the predicative mind rules the so-called consumer society. Everyone wants to be like successful people, “cool”, rich and famous, while being similar purely in appearance. The “typical consumer” does not understand that Pavel Durov is successful not because he has a lot of money, but because he is a talented programmer, the developer of several large projects (and only because of this he has a lot of money). Predicative reason gives rise to such a phenomenon as envy, while the person himself does not understand what exactly he is envious of.

In its activities, the School of Cultural Policy relies on the conceptual developments of the Moscow Methodological Circle and the basic categorical concepts of the systems-thought-activity approach. I would like to devote my report to a brief overview of the basic concepts and ideas that, from my point of view, allow us to build local ideological spaces and implement programs of local sociocultural and economic development.

First of all, I would like to remind you of the principle according to which new types of mental activity, various sociocultural movements that relate themselves to the field of thought, and sociocultural institutions (acting as a way of realizing intelligence in social systems) arise and become within the framework of translation processes [1].

This means that each new organization or type of mental activity arises and takes shape in the processes of reproduction and translation, is aimed at removing those discrepancies and contradictions that have accumulated in the processes of reproduction and takes on the functional load regarding the processes of translation. These types of mental activity and sociocultural institutions take on the mission of ensuring reproduction, and sometimes creating a new contour of mental activity [2].

The systems-thought-activity approach and system-thought-activity methodology also arise in the situation of translation as a response to those gaps, discrepancies and contradictions that have accumulated (and are partially reflected) within the framework of other institutions and types of thought activity (philosophy, science, engineering) in the second half of the 19th - first half of the 20th century , as well as in the field of education, economic activity and politics.

One of the cardinal issues that gave rise to the systems-thought-activity approach is the progressive specialization and fragmentation of knowledge (caused, among other things, by the process of differentiation of sciences) and the corresponding programs - integration (complexing) of sciences and the development of technologies for the synthesis of multidisciplinary knowledge.

For a deeper discussion of this range of problems, it is necessary to build a meaningful portrait of reproduction processes, deepen the understanding of the differences in transmission channels, specifically analyze the connections between the processes of translation and the implementation of objective and normative structures in sociocultural situations, and consider the relationship between objective and situational forms of organization of activity. It is necessary to answer the question, to what extent do the processes of translation depend on the mass implementation of certain types of cultural norms? To what extent does the mass of implementation influence the translation process and can itself be considered as a translation mechanism?

It is also necessary to move from consideration of formal mechanisms of reproduction to a meaningful analysis of those normative and substantive organizations that make up the “body” of certain regions of reproduction.

At each stage of the development of human practice, its own type of mental activity and sphere performs the function of reflexive closure of other types of mental activity and assimilation of their content. For some time, metaphorically speaking, this sphere comes to the forefront in the development of thinking, collects and accumulates the main tensions of the socio-cultural situation and ensures the implementation of the processes of reproduction of the co-integrity of human thinking and activity.

In the mid-twentieth century, this role for a number of reproduction regions was assumed by systems-thought-activity methodology [3].

It is quite obvious, from my point of view, that purely theoretical forms of thought cannot provide a solution to the problems of reproduction of mental activity and translation. The systems-thought-activity approach, just like other spheres (types) of mental activity that claim to perform the function of reproduction, is forced to constantly set itself a number of practical tasks; make an effort to form new situations of mental activity.

Speaking about reproduction processes, one cannot interpret these processes as purely natural and consider the formation of situations as an automatic result of the implementation of one or another normative design; the formation of situations of mental activity requires special effort and special energy, one of the sources of which is the mechanism for expanding the framework of understanding and action. The involvement of certain normative ideas requires the restoration of the meaning and framework of action, and therefore the meaningfulness of the further formation of one or another contour of mental activity.

This actually means that that sphere of thought or that type of mental activity that involves restoring the integrity of the processes of reproduction and maintaining its position must necessarily set itself a wide range of practical tasks, make thinking practical and activity-oriented, and therefore replace object theorizing with organizational -active.

The coming to the fore in the second half of the twentieth century of methodological thinking and various methodologically organized types of mental activity, from my point of view, was caused, first of all, by the crisis of philosophy. It seems to me that the philosophical way of thinking is dead. He died as a special type of mental activity and a special sphere in which the claim to a holistic worldview was realized. We can say that it could not withstand competition with scientific and engineering thinking, but not because these types of thinking took on the function of a holistic analysis of ongoing processes, but because more “subtle” techniques of constructive mental work and idealization were developed within them, and philosophy remained in the positions of purely conceptual analysis.

Even in its highest manifestations, the philosophy of the twentieth century (Heidegger, Foucault, Gadamer, Habermas, Derrida) was unable to assimilate the experience of world wars and revolutions and intellectually provide the processes of self-determination of the individual and small groups as historical subjects. The processes of individualization and collectivization, subjectification and objectification, massification and exemplification occur outside of philosophy and in addition to it.

Today, in my opinion, philosophical work is being replaced by a fairly broad ideological movement, which can be interpreted as a metaphysical counter-revolution. Having abandoned the construction of techniques and technologies of thinking, understanding, reflection, communication - intellectual technologies in the broad sense of the word - philosophy tries to speak the language of certain objects, brings the problem of the object to the fore, tries to set a frame and limitation on thinking and activity, and in fact “drives” living thinking into the framework of one or another ultimate ontology [4].

I want to emphasize that with this approach, the distinctions between the working, comprehensive and ultimate ontological pictures, which are so significant for methodological work, are erased. In this case, outlining the contours of the ultimate ontology turns out to be the other side of dogmatism and closes the possibilities for the development of mental activity.

Modern philosophical culture is at best indifferent, and at worst it is an opponent of the ideology and practice of development.

At the same time, we can conclude that methodological thinking is primarily self-determined within the framework of development. The positioning of the idea of development as a value (framework) and the use of certain development schemes as organizational and activity sets the requirements for the complex (package) of ontological pictures used in the systems-thought-activity methodology and for the set of practices carried out in the systems-thought-activity approach. The idea of development sets the starting point for analysis and understanding of what constitutes systems-thought-activity methodology and methodological work [5].

Here one could argue that positing the idea of development as ultimate from the very beginning makes the methodology only a regionally oriented philosophy working with objects that have a developmental structure or (as German philosophers in the 19th century would say) with organic objects. This objection ignores the fact that development practices are open. The developing mental activity in its “volume” corresponds to the sphere of the world mind (world Spirit). This means that any types of mental activity that are not involved today in development practices will, at some point in time, be involved in these practices and in the polyprocess of development of mental activity. At the same time, this means that those regional boundaries that philosophy is trying to establish will be violated, making thinking and activity dependent on objects (types of objects) and worlds opposing us [6].

Within the framework of development, there is no difference between actual and possible worlds: what is possible (and therefore, first of all, conceivable) is real in at least one of the worlds.

If we add to this that within the framework of development, what does not yet exist, but what should (may) be, is more real than what is, then we can argue that the opposition of the regional and the total in the systems-thought-activity approach is removed due to the difference and connections between thinking and activity within the framework of development. Thinking remains total in its claims, but is realized (realized) through activity always regionally.

The systems-thought-activity approach, self-determining itself in the context of development and considering all other organizations of mental activity (including epistemological ones) within this framework, postulates the artificial-technical nature of thinking itself, and, due to its involvement in thinking, all other intellectual functions.

From this, in particular, it follows that the systems-thought-activity approach and the methodological thinking that implements this approach are faced with the task of positive assimilation of all currently available methods, techniques and technologies of mental work.

To put it very roughly, we can assume that the systems-thought-activity methodology arises from the task of synthesizing various approaches - philosophical, scientific, engineering (on the one hand) and activity-based, cultural-historical, epistemological (on the other hand). What in the tradition of the Moscow Methodological Circle is called content-genetic logic (epistemology) and programming can be considered as local (historically transitory) programs for the synthesis of intellectual technologies or as sections (options) of organizing methodological work as a synthesis of this kind.

Self-determination in the context of the processes of reproduction and translation forces the subject of methodological thinking (work) to focus on the normative and instrumental aspects of any situation and practice of living thinking. Means are considered as the main organization of translation and a form of reflexive closure, grasping and retaining the experience of thinking and mental activity.

Solving the problem of synthesizing various approaches and techniques of thinking, asserting the artificial and technical nature of mental work in general requires the introduction and use of ontological pictures (representations) of a certain type - in particular, ontologies that would make correlation, synthesis, configuration, reflexive inversion possible and meaningful organizations that are different in their structure, origin and method of functioning as elements of some homogeneous (homogeneous) field (homogeneous in the operational sense, i.e. allowing the above-mentioned operations and procedures to be carried out). It is this function that the ontology of activity carried, and is now performed by the ontology of mental activity.

It should be emphasized that the place of such an ontological picture can, in principle, be taken by any other ontology that meets the above requirements or is functionally commensurate with the mission of methodological work.

The transition from the ontology of activity to ideas about mental activity, from my point of view, was caused not by the fact that thinking and activity were disidentified as different intellectual functions (this was done long before the appearance of the mental activity scheme), but by the fact that it was possible to find (construct) several channels co-organization and linking of thinking and activity. Channels more refined than the principle of reproduction, which forms the basis of the ontological picture of activity.

In particular, these principles of communication (transition) are enshrined in the so-called programming technology. To put it more strictly, this (the possibility of communication-transition and synthesis of thinking and activity) is the essence of programming [7].

The formulation of ontological hypotheses and assumptions, in the limit - ontological work - within the framework of methodological work is expressed in the principle of orthogonal organization of the space of mental activity, combining organizational-activity and object-ontological spaces, and also indicating four possible ways of using representations (schemes) - use in functions principle (disidentification scheme), image of an object (ontological scheme), means of organization (organizational activity diagram) and “key” (zoom lens scheme). Within the framework of methodological work, the main mode is the inversion of the object-ontological space through the organizational-activity space, which is symbolically and operationally enshrined in the idea of the “workbench” (the workbench organization of the space of methodological work) [8].

Thus, at least two different types of workbenches emerge within the framework of methodological work. The first type (workbenches) arises as a result of turning the goals of mental activity through a problem situation, and the second type (workbenches of means and normalization) - as a result of the mental organization of reflection on the completed steps of work in an orientation towards the reproduction of mental activity.

Content-genetic epistemology can be considered as an element and function-oriented technology in the context of programming.

In this case, it is necessary to distinguish quite strictly between working, encompassing and ultimate ontological pictures, formal and material ontologies, as well as frame and picture elements in ontological work [9]. When carrying out ontological work, it is advisable to separate direct and reflexive intentionality, which allows for a double position - the construction of the object under consideration, on the one hand, and the space of existence of a given type of object, on the other hand.

Ontological work is carried out in the context of problematization (this is the essence of work on the first workbench), where the idea of reality can play the role of the primary problematizing structure before any and all assumptions. The problem of truth, characteristic of a number of naturalistically or axiologically oriented philosophical trends, is removed due to the instrumental closure of the entire contour of methodological work (second workbench).

It can be argued that a number of philosophical hypotheses - in particular, the Hegelian hypothesis about the identity of Being and Thinking - arise as a result of the non-reflective use of the principle of orthogonal organization of the space of mental activity (the differences and possible types of connection between object-ontological and organizational-activity “boards”).

Continuing this last remark, one could say that many problems of philosophy and social sciences are caused by a non-reflexive (uncontrolled) transition (transfer of contents) from the organizational and activity “board” to the object one (naturalization, direct objectification, etc.) and back.

As stated above, the idea of activity and the ontology of activity should interest us, first of all, from the point of view of their function in methodological work. I also formulated in the most general form these functional requirements for the type of ontological pictures involved (constructed).

The activity ontology is correlated with programming technology; within its framework, a complex of second-order objects (quasi-objects) is introduced, which allows for zoning and tracing of fields of activity. This ontology makes it possible to fix the boundaries of fairly homogeneous (for example, in terms of the way organizations are used in activity) zones of activity, to symbolize these fields (zones) through special schemes (in particular, through the signs of “positions”) and to consider the processes of transition (transfer) of various organizations from the same zones to others with a complete or partial change of functions, on the one hand, and with the imprinting of several functional structures (uses) on one material (morphology), on the other hand [10].

The main principle regulating the way of thinking about activity is the principle of the plurality of forms of existence of any organization in mental activity, and the main logical-epistemological concept is the concept of the life cycle of organization in the processes and systems of mental activity.

This set of concepts and methods of mental work is a radical innovation in relation to the entire tradition of philosophy and social sciences (cultural sciences, spiritual sciences, humanities). However, the translation of this innovation into disciplinary and interdisciplinary research programs requires additional and rather complex work on the formation of applied sciences and normative-activity subjects.

From this point of view, one of the main tasks in the near future is to analyze the research methodology. In this context, the most important issue is the issue of connection and correlation between formal and material ontology [11], as well as the articulation of programming and research. The fact that within programming there are blocks of “situation analysis” and “drawing object diagrams” (thematization) gives hope that such a connection is possible.

I have emphasized many times the importance of the thinking function in methodological work and now I would like to emphasize only two points.

The first is associated with the nature of the ultimate ontology or ontologization of the idea of the World Mind as a result of the consistent implementation of the principle of development in the organizational and activity plan. We are talking about a hypothetical or dotted ontology, the principles and form of organization of which are implemented in the form of a network of acts and situations of thought-communication (thought-speech) and mental action.

The most important point is the principle of diffusion (the leakiness of the boundaries of situations and regions of mental activity) and the reflexive assimilation of some acts (situations) by others.

The second is the result of an analysis of techniques and technologies of thinking. Here it is very important to understand that thinking develops in opposition to speech-language, in opposition to communication (including genetically) in connection with the deployment and complication of the function of representation, and then schematization.

In this regard, thought-communication, or thought-speech, is not a thought. The generative function for thinking, from my point of view, is what in the ancient and medieval tradition was called contemplation (eidetic function), representation, and what in the Greek philosophical tradition was called catalepsis (holistic grasp of the situation - a mental object) in contrast to hermeneia ( understanding that finds expression in speech) [12].

When I talk about methodological work, I first of all mean that the Moscow Methodological Circle, which implements the systems-thought-activity approach, created a machine of thought activity in which thinking is constantly created from non-thinking. It probably makes sense to use the concept of machine in the plural, i.e. talk about several machines identical in function (production of thinking), but different in design. One of these machines is the organizational-activity game, taken from the point of view of its mental-activity structure (without taking into account the specifics of the game form used in a particular case).

Questions of the relationship between the processes of development and functioning (machine organization), on the one hand, and questions of the relationship between the individual and the collective in machine and developing systems, on the other hand, are important issues for further discussion.

When analyzing the problem of thinking, it is necessary to clearly distinguish: a) different types of mental activity (research, programming, design, criticism, etc.) and b) mental activity processes (modeling, schematization, ontologization, etc.), in which thinking occupies different places and can enter in relationships and connections with other intellectual functions. Special analysis deserves those new formations that arise in the context of the development of mental activity (for example, mental reflection or understanding thinking) and can be consolidated and transmitted as a norm for further reproduction, as well as compensatory relationships that arise between intellectual functions in the processes of individual development (on separate media mental activity) or systems (situations) of collective mental activity.

On the basis of reduced forms of mental activity (fragments of various machines of mental activity), various modes of life activity arise, as well as groups (communities, microcorporations) that implement these methods.

Today, in my opinion, we are still in a situation where individual individuals and groups that functioned in various machines of mental activity, after the end of their working time, retain only the memory of their participation in events of mental activity, but in the overwhelming majority of cases do not retain enough for repetition and reproducing mental processes or launching new types of machines with a set of abilities, personal knowledge and subjectivized techniques.

This kind of approach can become the basis for broader research in the field of social ethology and can even form the basis of the sociology of thinking and the sociology of knowledge (I would like to remind you that this direction, announced at the end of the last century, still remains practically undeveloped) .

At the same time, methodological work has already become (and in the near future this trend will become even more obvious) the basis for a whole complex of anthroponic experiments [13]. In fact, system-thought-activity methodology claims to be a new philosophical anthropology, and also develops the concepts of pedagogical anthropology.

In my opinion, the idea of revolution (as it was formulated in German classical philosophy and then by K. Marx) was objectified not only and not so much in political economy and the theory of the historical process, but in philosophical anthropology. It is these ideas that, in my opinion, have not been assimilated either by political practice or by the social sciences. In any case, the key issue of philosophical and pedagogical anthropology within the framework of the systems-thought-activity approach is the question of methods and techniques for liberation from activity.

Theoretical ideas and experience in implementing development practices in local anthropodromes (including within the framework of so-called organizational and activity games) allow, from my point of view, to develop a whole range of disciplines united by a common program of anthropomaximalology.

I consider the most important to be the separation of the concepts of individual, personality and bioid, as well as the use of the concept of individuality (as a result of the history of the development of intellectual functions and individualized modes of activity).

I also think it is important to separate the three modes of human existence: as a carrier of activity, a source of mental activity and a guarantor of the development processes of mental activity, distinguishing between position and role, as well as role, status and role as different forms of realization of subjectivity in the processes of mental activity [14].

These are the main ideas I wanted to share with you.

Notes

[1] Initially, this thesis arose when analyzing early works on pedagogy within the framework of the MMC. The author drew attention to the fact that the theoretical and categorical-ontological ideas of G. Shchedrovitsky, N. Alekseev and others in the field of pedagogy arose from the process of reflection on the processes of translation and reproduction in the circle itself. Subsequently, a hypothesis arose that the translation task is “generative”, i.e. can contribute not only to the processing of existing knowledge, but also to the emergence of new formations in thinking and activity. The issues of the “generative” and “problematic” essence of translation processes are most fully covered in reports at the second competition at the School of Cultural Policy (December 1990) and in lectures in Kemerovo (January 1991).

[2] The concept of the “contour” of activity and the “framework” of activity arose in the analysis of the processes of reproduction of complex structures of activity containing (uniting) reflexively heterogeneous elements. The fact that it is not individual organizations (norms) that are “transmitted” and “implemented” in activities, but complex structures, has not yet received its detailed description in the works of the MMK (in particular, see the series of lectures by P. Shchedrovitsky “Concepts of programming and organizational design in the systems-thought-activity approach”, November 1991).

[3] The formulated considerations about the purpose, role and function of the methodological revolution and systematic thought-activity methodology in the history of thought of the 19th and 20th centuries are largely borrowed from the oral presentations and lectures of G. Shchedrovitsky, which the author listened to in the period from 1977 to 1982. The author’s own reflections and experience of understanding the ideas of the MMK were systematized in a special work (“Reflection of the Game-15, or Essays on Methodological Life”), which was written in the summer of 1986 and was distributed among the members of the MMK in the form of a manuscript.

[4] On this subject, see the materials of the discussion with Valery Podoroga at the round table “The Role of Philosophy in the Processes of Meaning Formation and Self-Determination” on February 12, 1992.

[5] The author’s interest in the concept of “development” took shape after participating in the discussion between G. Shchedrovitsky, B. Sazonov and S. Naumov at the Game-15 (the game was held under the leadership of S. Popov in June 1986), as well as in preparation for Game-50 in Krasnoyarsk in September 1986 on the problem of regional development and the creation of applied psychological services. Subsequently, quite a lot of attention was paid to this topic, but the author could not go beyond those interpretations of the concept of “development” that were given by G. Shchedrovitsky in the scheme called the “development step”. A radical step forward was made only in 1991 on the basis of well-known and new concepts: “internal form”, “zone of proximal development”, “zone of necessary failure”, “resource”. This concept was most fully expounded during the school of management on social policy in Yekaterinburg (March 1991), a seminar on the problems of reorganizing the management system of research and development at Yakutniproalmaz in Mirny (September 1991) and in the lectures “Concepts of programming and organizational design in systems-thinking activity approach” (November 1991).

[6] On the connection between the concept of “development” and the ontology of the World Mind, see the second lecture in the series “What I don’t understand about thinking” (November 1991).

[7] On the connection between thinking and activity within the framework of programming, see reports on the problem of programming (autumn 1987), as well as the author’s discussions with G. Shchedrovitsky during 1988. These ideas are presented in most detail in the article “The Program Approach in the Context of System-Mental Activity Methodology” (the article will be published in the collection of the Scientific Research Institute of Culture of the RSFSR in 1992).

[8] On the principle of the benchtop organization of methodological work, see discussions on the concept of “approach” and “activity approach” in 1978-1980, materials of Game-45 in Novaya Utka (summer 1985) in connection with the discussion of the method of constructing the concept of “region” and “regional development”, as well as the third, fourth and fifth reports of the author from the series “What I don’t understand about thinking” (December 1991 - January 1992).

[9] On the concept of ontological work in MMK, see the author’s report at the second methodological congress (January 1990), two preparatory reports for the third methodological congress (January 1991), a series of reports on the processes of self-determination and ontology in Kharkov in May 1991, as well as numerous discussions at the School of Cultural Policy seminar during 1990-1991. The author’s interest in this problem was largely caused by discussions with S. Naumov and Yu. Gromyko in 1979-1981, as well as with S. Popov in 1988-1989, for which the author would like to express gratitude to them (although the content of these discussions still cause him nothing but disgust). In his developments, the author relied on two cycles of discussions of the concept of “ontology” in MMC. The first cycle of discussions was associated with a logical-epistemological study of the structure of science and discussion of such concepts as “subject”, “object”, “knowledge”, “substitution”, “ontological picture”, “model”, “synthesis of knowledge”, “model” -configurator” (1962-1969); the second cycle of discussions was related to the concepts of “ontologization”, “objectification”, “ontological work”, “realization”, etc. (1978-1981)

[10] On the concept of “organization”, as well as on the difference and connection between “organization of activity” and “organization of material” in MMK, see the report at the third methodological congress (January 1991), as well as speeches at the seminar of the School of Cultural Policy in March 1990 of the year. The emergence of the concept of “organization” can be dated back to 1965 and is associated with the name of Vladimir Lefebvre. However, this was preceded by a fairly long history of the development of the conceptual apparatus of activity theory and system-structural methodology; in particular, the distinction between “structure” and “organization” (1959-1961), analysis of the connection between the concept of “organization” and the concepts of “place” and “filling” (1962-1963), analysis of the concepts of “functional” and “morphological structures” and, finally, the development of ideas about “social organization” (1964). Subsequently, the concept of “organization” is associated with the analysis of reflection and consciousness, with the analysis of reproduction processes and with the development of the “second category of the system.”

[11] In the period from 1980 to 1982, and then in 1984-1986, the author actively worked on his dissertation work on the topic “Organizational-activity game as a method of complex socio-psychological research.” In the work, which was never defended (and published), a rather original concept of research work (research type of mental activity) was developed based on the concepts of “understanding research”, “participant research”, “experiment”, etc.

[12] On this issue, see a series of reports on the method of constructing a systemic typological concept (spring 1984), the main ideas of which were further developed in works on the problem of research (1985), reflection (1986), understanding (catalepsis) and topics ( 1987-1988).

[13] The concept of “anthroponics” and “anthroponic experiment” was discussed by the author in discussions with S. Naumov in 1986, and then was developed in a series of lectures “Pedagogy and Anthroponics” at the Artek publishing house in the spring of 1988. The idea of building a “new science” of anthropomaximalology was inspired by discussions with Yu. Gromyko in 1982 (when Yuri Vyacheslavovich expressed the idea of building a special discipline of “extrematics” or “extremoanthropology”).

[14] On this subject, see the author’s articles on personality psychology and philosophical anthropology (Methodological notes on the problem of predicting human properties [1979], Origins of the cultural-historical concept of L.S. Vygotsky. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, W. Shakespeare [1980] , On some problems in constructing a theory of personality [1982], On the issue of the formation of personality psychology [1983], The universe of mental activity and man [1986], Artification of mental activity as a problem of applied psychology [1986], On the analysis of the topic of the organizational-activity game [1987], Active teaching methods and the problem of educational content [1988], On the problem of managing the activity of a study group [1988], etc.), as well as a series of lectures in Pushchino on educational anthropology (January 1991) and the report “Pedagogy of Freedom” on February 19, 1992 .

Bibliographic link

Shchedrovitsky P.G. Thinking, methodological work and development // Questions of methodology. 1992. No. 1-2. pp. 30-38.

The nature of thinking

The thinking processes receive information that we sensed and perceived from the surrounding reality. The functions of mental activity include:

expanding the boundaries of knowledge by going beyond sensory perception;
generalization;
planning.

The tasks of thinking are:

revealing relationships between objects;
defining connections;
clear distinction between connections and coincidences.

Definition 1
Thinking is a generalized form of mental reflection that establishes connections and relationships between cognitive objects.

Classification of human thought process

Structure of thinking:

visually effective (0-3 years);
visual-figurative (3-6 years);
verbal-logical and abstract (10-18 years).

Let's look at each of them.

Visual-real thinking is based on the direct perception of objects, the transformation of which occurs at the moment of interaction with objects.

Visual-figurative thinking is based on ideas and images. Those. a person imagines situations and changes in them what he ultimately wants to receive from his activities, i.e. he transforms the situation.

Verbal-logical thinking is based on the logic of operations with concepts.

The essence of the formation of thinking

When developing, thinking must go through two stages:

pre-conceptual;
conceptual.

Pre-conceptual mental activity is the initial stage of the development of thinking in a child. Children's judgments are singular, and they relate to objects. When you explain something, they reduce everything to the particular, the familiar. Their judgments are based on analogy or similarity. This is explained by the fact that during this period, memory plays the main role in the child’s thinking. The components of the pre-conceptual thought process are images. During the normal development of a child, there is a transition from this stage to the conceptual stage, where concepts are classified as components, and formal operations are referred to as application.

From the above we can conclude that conceptual thinking does not develop immediately, but gradually. It is formed through intermediate stages. This kind of thinking can be observed in younger schoolchildren. Mental operations are associated with specific, insufficiently generalized information, and concepts are clear in nature, i.e. thinking is conceptually concrete. At the age of 10-18, children develop a verbal-logical process in the form of abstract concepts. Thinking is already presented in the form:

practical actions;
visual images;
abstract concepts/reasoning.

And here we can already say that a transition is taking place from conceptual-concrete to abstract-conceptual thinking.

There are two levels of thinking:

reason;
intelligence.

Definition 2
Reason is a person’s ability to reason, the ability to constructively construct thoughts.

Definition 3

Reason is the highest level of theoretical knowledge, which includes the ability to comprehend the essence, laws, and contradictions of things.

Types and operations of human thinking

Thinking happens:

theoretical;
practical;
intuitive;
analytical;
realistic;
autistic;
productive;
reproductive.

Do you need help from a teacher? Describe the task - and our experts will help you!
List of thinking operations for solving various problems:

Comparison;
Analysis;
Synthesis;
Abstraction;
Generalization.

Let's look at each of them.

1. At this stage, things are compared, distinctive features and similarities are identified, which subsequently leads to classification.

2. Implies the mental decomposition of an object or situation into elements. This helps to separate the unimportant from the essential.

3. Reverse analysis process. Synthesis restores the whole, finds important connections and relationships.

4. At this stage, one side is highlighted and separated. Abstraction highlights non-sensory properties.

5. The generalization stage involves discarding individual features while retaining the general ones. This is also where important connections are revealed. Generalization is accomplished by thinking through comparison. This is considered a simple form of thinking, and a complex one is the disclosure of relationships, patterns, and connections.

Forms of thinking are reflected in the form:

concepts;
judgments;
inferences (deductive, inductive).

Mechanism of the thought process

Definition 4
The thought process is a conscious process based on concepts and images.

The thought process evaluates the situation. It ends when it achieves some results. Those. a problem is set, and the search for its solution begins.

Solving the problem has four stages:

preparation;
search for a solution;
inspiration;
checking the solution found.

Algorithm for the thought process of solving a problem:

Motivation.
Analysis of the problem (what is given, what remains to be found, etc.).
Finding a solution:
search based on choosing the optimal option from a variety of known algorithms;
solution based on mixing elements from different algorithms;
the search for a new solution (related to creative thinking) is based on: in-depth logic of reasoning (analysis, comparison, synthesis, etc.);
analogies;
heuristic techniques;
empirical method.

In case of failure, disappointment occurs and a switch to another type of activity occurs. In other words, a “period of incubation rest” arises, where new ideas are generated, inspiration and insight appear (instantly finding a solution).

Factors that influence insight:

strong passion for the problem;
belief in success;
experience, a large amount of information about the problem;
high associative brain activity (during sleep, during illness, etc.).

Proof of the found idea using logic.
Implementation of the solution.
Checking the solution found.
Correction if necessary (in this case you need to return to the second stage).

Harson's productive thinking model

Creativity is essential to solving any problem. If you are not creative and more logical, you will not be able to evaluate the problem from different points of view and come up with an unusual and simple solution. And if you combine critical and creative thinking, your effectiveness increases significantly. Harson's productive thinking model will help you do this. This model encourages using both sides of the brain and alternating between creative thinking and critical and logical thinking. This means that you can look at a problem from different angles and find the best solutions. Read more…

Individual characteristics of thinking

Each person is individual. Accordingly, mental activity differs among people:

depth (the ability to penetrate to the essence of complex issues);
breadth (the ability to handle the entire issue in its entirety, including details);
independence (searching for a solution to a problem without outside help);
flexibility of thought (freedom from the previous points, the ability to quickly change actions when the situation changes);
speed of thinking (the ability to quickly navigate a situation, think it through, and also the ability to quickly find the right solutions);
haste of mind (without fully thinking through the question, the thinker is in a hurry to give a solution);
slowness of thinking (the reason for this factor may be the type of human nervous system and its low mobility);
criticality of mind (the ability to objectively evaluate one’s own and others’ thoughts).

Also, individual characteristics of the thought process include the use of such types of thinking as:

visually effective;
visual-figurative;
abstract-logical.

Is it still difficult? Our experts will help you figure it out All services Problem solving from 1 day / from 150 rubles Coursework from 5 days / from 1800 rubles Abstract from 1 day / from 700 rubles

Is it possible to develop the thinking of an adult?

Perhaps another equally important reason for the reluctance to develop thinking is the belief that it is impossible for an adult to do this. And the only way to become even a little smarter is to accumulate knowledge.

But this point of view is wrong. It is not only possible, but also necessary to develop the thinking of an adult, but knowledge alone will not get you far. Information, regardless of its volume, is only a building material for thinking. Bricks alone are not enough for a mason to build a beautiful castle; he also needs skills, abilities, knowledge of techniques and craftsmanship as an alloy of all this combined.

One can, of course, recall the statement of the developers of intelligence tests that intelligence does not change with age. But thinking is not exactly intelligence. Thinking is an activity, and any activity requires the development and formation of skills. The process of developing thinking skills not only enriches a person with new ways and techniques of thinking, but also develops and complicates the brain itself.

Our brain is a very flexible and sensitive instrument that is designed to be constantly active. The effectiveness and quality of our thinking depend on it. Indeed, in the process of brain work, new connections are formed between neurons, neural networks become more complex, and therefore, thinking abilities develop.

So, the answer to the question “is it necessary to develop thinking” is obvious. It remains to figure out how to do this.

Speech structure

From the point of view of effective thinking, speech consists of two main parts.

The main course is a chain of statements that contains the main meaning.
Side dish - additional information that does not change the main meaning in any way, serves to captivate the audience and create the context of the “story”. In general, what is now called storytelling.

Very often speech looks like a huge station pie. It's big on the outside, but when you start eating it, you find that it takes quite a while to get to the filling.

After understanding this structure, it is important to separate the two types of perception. And consciously make a choice which perception to include now, and what the result will be after that.

The first type of perception is that we eat a side dish mixed with the main dish and enjoy the taste.

Pros - it is easier to immerse yourself in history, receive sensual - emotional pleasure. Cons - a skillful speaker will easily lead you to any conclusions. Well, if the content is completely truthful, then the quality of its development and understanding will be much worse. Don't rush to object. Try to apply, compare and see for yourself.

The second type of perception is that we strictly cut off the side dish and conduct a strict analysis of the main dish.

Pros - understanding becomes as great as possible. There is a clear understanding of what questions need to be asked in order to make the picture as clear as possible. It is these questions that will easily expose a charlatan in one case, or will give the impression of sincere interest to a good specialist in another.

After the work done, the reward will be a feeling of satisfaction.

Cons: You won’t be able to immerse yourself in the story and relax. If the subject of the conversation is complex, then you can get seriously tired.

Development of abstract logical thinking

Logical thinking is considered the highest form of the thought process, although this can be argued, since creativity is not associated with it, but with imaginative thinking. But, one way or another, logic is necessary for an adult to solve a wide variety of problems: from everyday, everyday, to professional and scientific.

What to develop

Logical thinking is based on several mental operations:

Analysis is the division of a single whole into separate significant elements, understanding the structure of things and phenomena, their systemic organization.
Comparison is a comparison of individual elements of a system, individual things and phenomena in order to determine their similarities and differences.
Synthesis is a transition from individual elements to the whole, a unification of parts, often associated with their combination in a new combination.
Abstraction is a distraction from the unimportant or a transition from objective thinking to thinking using abstract concepts (numbers, formulas), replacing specific images with abstract concepts.

The first three basic operations can be illustrated by the common children's game of color pyramid. A child disassembles an already assembled pyramid and examines its rings - this is an analysis. Then, during the assembly process, he compares the rings by size, sometimes by color and shape - this is a comparison. Then he assembles a pyramid of individual elements - synthesis. This is how the thought process proceeds at the level of visual and effective thinking accessible to the baby. And we want to develop the logical, so we will perform operations not with rings and cubes, but with concepts.

Logical thinking also requires developed speech, since this thinking occurs in a conceptual form. Moreover, this applies not only to oral, but also to written speech, which in itself is more logical and orderly.

How to develop

Logical thinking is based on strict laws and rules that were developed by ancient philosophers, and logic has always been considered the art of thinking. Theoretical knowledge, although useful, is not sufficient for development. If you don’t know them, then this is not an obstacle to development. Practice and mastering skills are more important here. And thinking skills, just like any other skills, are formed during training. And for those who want to develop logic skills, we can offer several exercises.

Exercises to develop logical thinking

There are many ways to develop logical thinking in activities. For example, psychologists advise reading more. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s fiction or scientific literature, the main thing is to comprehend what you read, write down your thoughts and conclusions, argue with the author, catch him in contradictions. Board and computer games based on it, for example, chess, checkers, sea battle and others, help well in the development of logic.

You can also use specially designed exercises for this purpose.

Exercise "Logical chains"

This is one of the most common training tasks for the development of logic. It has many forms, types, modifications for different ages. His goal is to learn to establish logical connections between things, phenomena, and concepts.

Option 1

Example: two objects are given - a fish and a bottle. Find what can connect them. Possible answers include the following:

both objects have a similar streamlined shape;
both the fish and the bottle are associated with water;
if the bottle is plastic, then it, like a fish, can swim;
the fish and the bottle may have the same color;
both objects contain substances useful to humans, etc.

You can continue the list further or choose new objects, making sure that at first glance they are completely different and have nothing in common (a cat and a chair, ice cream and a car, etc.).

Option 2

Two events occur, separated by a relatively short period of time:

A pencil falls from the desk of the head of the company to the floor.
A fire breaks out in a room at one of the southern resorts.

Establish a logical connection between the first and second events. See how many intermediate events are in your logical chain. Try to build another one, where there are more or less events.

If the exercise is carried out in a group, then it will be interesting to compare and analyze the logical chains of all participants and choose the most interesting one. You can continue the exercise by coming up with the next event and establishing a connection between the fire and it.

Exercise “Making sentences”

Logical thinking is closely related to speech activity; it generally occurs primarily in conceptual and symbolic form. Therefore, to develop logical thinking, it is useful to write short (and long) stories, essays, notes, and keep a diary.

And for those who are not very good at this or are sorry for the time, you can start with individual proposals. But not simple ones, but ones that unite unrelated concepts and objects. Your task is not just to write a sentence, but so that it looks completely logical.

Let's select three objects that are as unrelated to each other as possible. For example: “squirrel”, “helicopter” and “cup of cappuccino”. Now make up a phrase that logically combines these objects. For example, a sentence like this could be written: “I was relaxing on the veranda when a squirrel fell out of a helicopter flying above me and plopped right into my cup of cappuccino.”

Try to come up with your own sentence or choose the other three objects. For example: scissors, shark, kebab; book, lemon, circus, etc.

Exercise “I’ll say it differently”

This exercise is also for the development of verbal thinking, which is the basis of logical thinking. Come up with some simple, even banal phrase regarding an everyday event. For example: “We love Friday because it is the last day of the work week.”

Now express the same idea, but in different words. The main condition: not a single word from the original phrase should be repeated. How many new sentences with the same meaning can you create?

Logical thinking is undoubtedly important, and it is impossible to do without it in any area of life. But imaginative thinking is no less important.

Main forms

All of them are strongly interconnected and are an integral part of the implementation of the thought process, thanks to which we have the opportunity to carry out analysis, synthesis, and build a logical connection. This gradually leads to the development of intelligence. These varieties are studied in the sciences of psychology and logic.

Concept

It reflects general and abstract signs in the phenomena and objects that surround us. This reflection is varied. There is the following classification of features (similarities or differences) by volume:

Are common. Inherent in each personality (creation of tools, mastery of articulate speech, thinking skills).
Single. Belong to one person (physique, gait, gestures).

By content:

Specific – a set of objects that can exist independently (“reform”, “unity”, “state”).
Abstract – it is not the objective component that is meant, but its attribute (“responsiveness”, “injustice”). We do not perceive these terms as separate things, they only complement the statement, for example, “responsive people”, “unfair treatment”. The abstract type does not have a plural in Russian.

This form is also divided into the following types:

immediate, reflections are built “here and now”;
mediation, understanding is achieved through discussions and lengthy reasoning.

The concept reflects phenomena and their totality in an abstract form based on significant similarities or differences. It is associated with the main linguistic unit - the word. It is fixed in phrases, without which the formation of the conceptual process will not occur. Having formed a concept, scientific disciplines reflect the phenomena or objects being studied in them. For example, the science of “Economic theory” formed the terms: “capital”, “demand”, “supply”, “cost”, “products”.

Functions:

Cognitive – formed as a result of identifying common subject features. During conceptual formation, unified properties are comprehended that help to understand the essence of an object.
Communicative – proves that the concept is a component of communication. Having recorded our thoughts and knowledge, we exchange them when communicating with each other, and also, based on experience, pass them on to a new generation. This is how the social inheritance of knowledge occurs.

The most important indicator of assimilation of information is its awareness. For example, you may use a term without knowing exactly what it means, but if you fully understand its meaning, you will not appear incompetent. Therefore, awareness is considered an important link in connecting concept and understanding.

Judgment

This is a designation of the connection between the parameters, relationships and qualities of objects in the reality around us. The essence is the denial or justification of relationships. When forming an opinion, a person uses already conscious information and thereby affects both mental activity and the senses and memory.

Psychologist Daria Milai

Make an appointment

There are two types:

Formal. Characterizes the fact of the relationship of objects without indicating the truth of the statement or falsity (“cloudy weather”).
Empirical. Describes phenomena as a result of observation, and allows you to check for authenticity (“look how cloudy the weather is”).

Judgment reflects both falsehood and truth. According to the nature of the expression, there are two varieties:

True - all conclusions are confirmed by reality.
False – all assumptions are unproven and do not correspond to reality.

Components of opinion formation:

The subject is a statement that must either be confirmed or rejected.
A predicate is an affirmation or negation of the characteristics of objects.

An example would be: “The person has articulate speech.” Now let's try to distinguish the first term from the other. The subject in this case is “Man”, and the predicate is “has articulate speech”.

This form of thinking also varies in degree of complexity. There are two groups:

Simple (“Russian and mathematics are the main school disciplines”).
Difficult (“If you attend all lectures, you will pass all exams perfectly”).

Inference

This is the highest level of thinking, which leads to new knowledge using existing knowledge. Inference processes are carried out only using logic. Main components:

premises – initial judgments from which a new one follows;
conclusions – fresh information obtained in a logical way;
conclusions - the transition from premises to final information based on logic.

I will give the basic classification of species. Depending on the severity of the rules, there are:

Demonstrative. The main conclusion is formed from the premises.
Non-demonstrative. The conclusion does not depend on the initial judgments.

Based on the availability of knowledge and connections between them, they are divided into:

Induction is the transition of personality from the particular to the general. Specific assumptions are followed by uniform conclusions.
Deduction - here, on the contrary, a person goes from the general to the specific.
Analogy - when identifying important features of objects, a conclusion arises.
Assumption is a type that does not involve evidence. He only puts forward theories that can be criticized and refuted.

Imaginative thinking and its development

Imaginative thinking is controlled by the right hemisphere of the brain, where the center of human creative abilities is also located. This, in general, says it all. But the problem is that the right hemisphere first outstrips the left hemisphere in development, and at the age of 3-5 years it dominates in mental activity. But then the active development of the sign function (speech, writing, counting) stimulates the development of the left hemisphere, which is responsible for abstract logical thinking. The activity of the right hemisphere decreases, and imaginative thinking fades into the background.

“What about creativity?” - you ask. That's it. Creativity and the development of creative potential are impossible without operations with images. And outside of creativity, this thinking is needed. Associated with it is the ability to reproduce pictures, sounds, smells, movements, analyze them, combine them, and include them in mental and objective activity. Moreover, it has been proven that any mental act begins with the birth of images, and proceeds in close connection with them.

What to develop

Returning to the question of the development of imaginative thinking, let us determine in which direction to move, what properties and qualities of our psyche need to be developed:

figurative memory;
operations with images, their analysis, comparison, combination;
imagination, as the ability to create new images;
combinatorial activity - the ability to consciously and purposefully construct images from elements of what is stored in memory;
see the qualities and properties of things hidden from logical thinking;
ability to fantasize.

One of the most effective ways to develop imaginative thinking is to engage in creativity. It helps to constantly keep the right hemisphere in good shape, so many of the exercises contain an element of creativity.

Exercise “Recreation of images”

Most of us are concerned with accumulating knowledge. We strive to remember the necessary information, names, dates, numbers, rules. How often do we try to remember and consciously retain images in our memory? Are they any less important? For example, the image of an autumn park in your hometown or the face of a loved one, the smell of grandma’s pies or the sound of the sea surf. After all, most often what we remember are random snippets of impressions. Let's try to change this and practice reproducing images.

Let's start with something simple. Remember the face of someone close to you. Try to reproduce it in detail, remembering every stroke, wrinkle, and mole. Now imagine that this person smiles, is sad, frowns, winks at you.

Now let's move on to more complex tasks.

Imagine five colored objects. First, five red ones, for example, strawberry, balloon, etc. Then five orange ones, and so on throughout the spectrum. To avoid confusion, write down these seven groups of items in order.

Imagine an image of a tree you know (a birch under your window, a maple on your way to work). Try to remember it in detail and pay attention to what time of year you see this tree. Now imagine how the image will change at another time - autumn, winter, spring, summer. The image of a tree can be replaced with the image of a house or street, river or yard.

Remember and imagine different sounds: 5 sounds of nature (the sound of rain, rustling of autumn leaves, etc.), 5 sounds of the city, 5 sounds made by animals, 5 sounds of mechanisms.

Remember and imagine in detail some event (holiday, family dinner, meeting with your boss, etc.). Try to remember images of people, furniture, utensils, trying to imagine colors, sounds, tastes, and smells.

Exercises “Fantastic images”

Creative imagination is the “highest aerobatics” of imaginative thinking, so let’s practice creating new images. Of what? And from everything that is in our memory. But to make the process easier, let's take some basis. For example, a sign. This is an attribute of logical thinking, the more interesting it is to use it to develop figurative thinking.

A sign - it can be a number, a letter or some kind of mathematical symbol such as an integral - is an abstract object, it does not exist in the objective world. But we will eliminate this injustice. Imagine, for example, the number 4 in the form of a material and living being, endowed with its own characteristics, character, habits, and preferences. And write a short story. Try to make the image of the four as realistic as possible. Think about where she lives, what she prefers for lunch, who she is friends with, what she does.

At first it may seem difficult and even strange. But don’t give up, it’s our left hemisphere, outraged by the illogicality of thinking, that blocks the flight of fantasy. Don't let him suppress his imagination, connect him to work. What is more logical for the number 4? Which activity would be more suitable for her?

You can also create an image of a sound, such as the noise of a vacuum cleaner. What kind of person is he - good or evil, warm or cold? What color is the sound of a vacuum cleaner? Why are cats afraid of him? Maybe they see some kind of evil creature? What does it look like?

Both children and adults love games with images, but they are not just games, they are a very powerful tool for developing our thinking and psyche as a whole. After all, everything that goes beyond the boring and gray routine makes the gears of our brain turn faster. Don't let them rust without work. After all, the medieval philosopher Rene Descartes said: “Cogito ergo sum” - “I think, therefore I exist.”

Sources used:

https://psy.wikireading.ru/142749
https://psylogik.ru/218-myshlenie.html
https://zaochnik.com/spravochnik/psihologija/obschaja-psihologija/vidy-protsessy-myshlenija/
https://psychologist.tips/3659-razvitie-myshleniya-priemy-metody-uprazhneniya.html

Online program "Cognitive Science"

Within two months, with the help of special brain training, you will learn to apply more than 20 thinking techniques in your life. This will allow you to think logically and consistently, quickly make effective decisions and find innovative approaches to difficult problems. The lessons not only train general memory and logic skills, but also provide specific models and algorithms of thinking. While participating in the program, you will learn to apply your knowledge and skills in practice, receive examples, case studies, special games and exercises, and short lessons of 15-20 minutes will help you develop your thinking without distraction from your main activity and show results in the first week . Find out more...

We hope that now you will have more faith in your own strengths and confidence that getting rid of templates and ossified thinking is very simple. Good luck!