#LogicalReasoning

[sentimentalsol]

It’s not about Halacha anymore

I am a homosexual and a (at least in public) Orthodox jew. I would love if you could hear what I have to say.

It seems to be that the anti-homosexual sentiment in Judaism is no longer halachic. It never was. The torah prohibits a man lying with a man as one does with a woman. Most people, including the rabbinical interpretation (Which is generally considered full authority.) have said that anal male-male intercourse is what is forbidden, along with the separate prohibition of spilling seed. I have asked quite a few people whom I’m “supposed” to talk with this about on their opinions and they all get avoidant, and a few of them had never shied away from any sort of sensitive topics. I have asked with sincerity on how to have a loving relationship with another man without breaking these two prohibitions, but still, I am tossed to the side by these people. Also note that the people I have confided in are much more open minded than the average orthodox religious (Frum) jew. I thought the prohibition of homosexuality was simply halachic, possibly kabbalistic as well, but no, even when halachic concerns are no longer a problem, we still are shunned and not allowed to live a life without loneliness. This is akin to any unfair bias, and it causes pain. No harm is done to the parties who participate in a halachically permissible relationship, so why should it not be allowed, or at least tolerated as long as it’s kept private? I’m not a proponent of forcing my opinions on others, but think for a second, where is this even coming from?

I rest my case.

[firmflexing]

Smack about Crypto.

Smack is a mini-podcast in which I try to tackle topics with common sense and logical reasoning, without bad intentions or ulterior motives. If a take happens to align with any political, religious or other kind of ideology, that is purely coincidental. It will inevitably upset someone, but please hear me out and remain civil.

[gayandconfusedmotherfucker]

Alright, I know tumblr isn’t exactly the best place to ask this question but, is it possible to “logically reason” yourself through a paranoid delusion/hallucination? I want to preface this by saying I almost always try to use logic/reasoning throughout all my thought processes, however I am wondering if someone struggling with hallucinations/delusions can use logic to help them cope??

When I am feeling especially vulnerable (I usually have to sleep with the lights on, have my dogs around, etc.) then I will “logically reason” myself into thinking that if anyone was actually in my room then I would see their shadow and be alerted before they could actually do something (or something along those lines). Now Im just wondering if this is normal or if this is just paranoia or what lmao.

[thedeductionpage]

WHAT PRACTICE MAKES

The good thing about being in robot mode is you get to channel all that into things like old hobbies. Let’s be honest, I’m probably not gonna post in a long time, after this.

So, everyone knows the saying: “practice makes perfect”, and if you hadn’t heard of it, there you go. When it comes to deduction and most things, practice is essential. What you practice is nearly irrelevant. When you practice, getting warmer— consistency is key. However, I wanna talk about how you practice.

If you’ve circulated the deduction community, you’ll see all these pioneer deductionists who have years and years, maybe even decades of experience. Are all of them good? Not really. A person doing it for 6 months could get better results than them, but why? Why, after all these years are some deductionists still inadequate after so much experience?

The truth is, practice does not exactly make perfect, it makes normal.

These deductionists are practicing incorrectly. They go on reddit or facebook and deduce people, maybe go out in real life and get their material there and simply assume they’re right. They have no confirmation. Now, this may seem a little ironic, but I don’t believe in people getting involved in your process. You only need yourself, and whoever your deducing (or the extension of them, like their belongings). Unfortunately, this means you have to socialize and do research.

Don’t just assume you’re right.

Whenever you’re deducing someone, make sure you have them there, available to confirm and deny.

Don’t just ask what you got right and wrong. Try to explore why it is you were wrong, what set them apart from the baseline.

When you get a lucky, improbable deduction, still ask which factors contributed to this phenomenon. Ask, ask, ask.

How do you ask? Just be as mysterious and ominous, then direct as possible. That’s the 1-2-step. Be enticing and mysterious, then tell the truth. I go on whisper or reddit. I make a post that goes: “I bet you I could tell you who you are by seeing a picture of you or anything you own. NO NUDES OR FOOT PICS.”

Just being honest about that last part. People get confused.

So, what’s the moral of the story? Practice makes normal, perfect practice makes progress. I am coining that and you all have to monetarily compensate me whenever you use that, thanks. This is a pretty short post, but if you have any questions, feel free to ask them. I’ve got nothing going on in my life and I may just throw myself into deduction, who knows? This may be my renaissance, or something.

TDP

[connieaaa]

Adjacent to "were you cringe or were you 11?"

I apologize on behalf of 16-year-old me to the person from the college group at church. He opened up about depression and suicidal ideation, and I helpfully tried to share my personal brain hack - if you are worthless, you aren't actually worth the effort it takes to kill yourself.

I didn't know what life could be like yet. Also I am quite proud of 9-year-old us for coming up with logic bomb.

I also have to say that neutral self-talk has been life changing for me.

I love myself ❌

I hate myself❌

I appreciate who I have become✔️

[yoursharkybitch]

On a scale from 1 to 10 if you were on a desert island which board game would you bring

we eat whoever loses at chutes and ladders

[iqmatrix]

NEW IQ MATRIX: Realistic Thinking [#0507]

The Realistic Thinking IQ Matrix explores the fundamental principles and dynamics that build the groundwork for thinking realistically, objectively, and logically about everyday problems and circumstances. To think realistically, you must become aware of the world around you. Only in this way will you gain an accurate view of the world and your place in it. With that awareness, you will be better able to make more informed decisions based on the available information.

This map walks you through how to develop realistic thinking when facing various issues, problems, or circumstances that require an objective and logical approach. Developing the ability to think realistically will help you set achievable goals and take responsibility for your actions and the consequences that come with them.

You can read a more detailed outline of this map at https://store.iqmatrix.com/shop/realistic-thinking

[snowandkai]

*ignores all 5 dog beds and sleeps on metal rod instead*

[lsatpractice]

Logical Reasoning: Assumption Family

Flaws

Examples:

[arunkumarblog]

Best CAT Exam Coaching Institute in Mumbai

For CAT aspirants in Mumbai, The Prayas India is the ultimate destination for success. Renowned for its expert faculty, personalized mentoring, and result-oriented approach, this institute ensures top-notch preparation for the CAT exam. With comprehensive study materials, regular mock tests, and tailored strategies, students are empowered to achieve their dream B-schools. To kickstart your CAT journey with the best guidance, contact The Prayas India at 07710013217 today!

[firmflexing]

Smack about Anger.

Smack is a mini-podcast in which I try to tackle topics with common sense and logical reasoning, without bad intentions or ulterior motives. If a take happens to align with any political, religious or other kind of ideology, that is purely coincidental. It will inevitably upset someone, but please hear me out and remain civil.

[hometuition-01]

How to solve Logical Aptitude questions

Learn how to solve logical aptitude questions with ease! This guide covers key strategies, tips, and tricks to help you master logical reasoning and ace any aptitude test. Perfect for students and job seekers, improve your problem-solving skills and confidence with proven methods for tackling logical aptitude questions

[thedeductionpage]

How To Get Accurate But Interesting Deductions

Note: I’m working on…working on a little project on deduction, I think it’ll be pretty interesting, once finished. It’s a pretty laborious one that requires the collection of information and a lot more bullshit, so…you probably won’t be seeing that, anytime soon. 

Okay, so back to the topic: How to get accurate but interesting deductions. This is very broad. Honestly, I chose this title because I knew that the kind of people who’d be attracted to it would probably be the ones who need to hear it. Some phrases these people may use while reasoning: 

“Because they’re an idiot” 

“Because they want to impress potential romantic partners” 

“Because they’re slow” 

“Because they’re shallow” 

“They’re mentally unwell *insert mental illness here*” 

If you find yourself saying these things, then you probably need to read this post. Humanization: it’s important. I’m not here to be the morality police, or whatever— it’s just a fact.

Do you want to stop getting the same, surface level, inaccurate, blanket statement deductions? Then deduce people, not a version of your projections. If you haven’t guessed, I lean more towards the psychological aspect of deduction, and I’ve gathered that humanizing the people you deduce will help you psychologically profile them. 

The thing is, deductionists sometimes underestimate or dehumanize the people they’re deducing. Whether they do it to feel better about themselves, to force a more interesting story onto their person in order to come up with more exciting conclusions, or whatever they’ve got going on, doesn’t matter. The point is, they don’t think other people are allowed to be intelligent, or substantial and interesting. 

As a deductionist, one of the worst things you can do is judge the person you’re deducing. It’s not your job to judge them, you’re supposed to be analyzing them.

Your projections and clumsy methodology will only get in the way of that. When you deduce them, give your person a chance. Give them as much justice as you would want to be done onto you. If you want accurate deductions, then actually treat people like…people. Look for meaning in everything, then just discard the ones that don’t fit into the picture— it’s better than missing a piece. 

For example, a person I was deducing, along with others, had an old blanket with cartoons on it. Here’s how one person went wrong:

Cartoon blanket—> immature, possibly autistic/ADHD, not many friends. 

Can’t they just be young or sentimental? 

Either attached to childhood, looking for comfort, or financially unstable?

No books—> stupid, shallow, immature. 

E-books are a thing. His book could’ve been in his locker, at school, or hell, in his backpack in another room.

Shoes inside the room—> messy, no parents at home, slob. 

Could be, or it could be a matter of convenience. It could be a matter of routine. Or, he could have extracurriculars and has to be somewhere, after. He could have a social thing, which would go against the whole “no friends, loser” thing. 

When you deduce someone, treat it like a courtroom inside your head. There are two attorneys, the defense, and the prosecutor. One person looks for meaning, stretches and bends over backwards to redeem your person, while the other just goes buckwild and absolutely shits all over their little head.  It’s called balance.

People are allowed to be as smart and interesting, maybe even moreso, than you. People are allowed to be complex.

Anyways, I know I neglect this blog a lot. In my defense, you hit a certain plateau, when you’ve been deducing for a while. I don’t know when I’ll upload again, but…ya’ll eatin’ today. Bye. 

[7darknightmares7]

My skin is brown but I would like to feel black on the inside, when I had white on the outside I was not in my best condition. Now yes this is racism, and possibly sexist, but in the most chronological way I could possibly type it.

…Oooo mysterious what does it mean… which derogatory term do you use … AAAHHH