Linear vs. Logical thinking
- Thread starter Gaze
- Start date
Linear seems to be step by step, relying on explicit procedures and defined methods, conditional, and concrete.
Nonlinear is multidirectional, may be independent of steps and methods, multiconditional and abstract.
Both can be logic or logical.
An example might be programming a game, where in it the player tries to give a mushroom to a character, and the character reacts differently depending on if it is awake or asleep.
The linear method might be to write a bunch of if statements in order: if you give the mushroom, if the character is asleep, do blahblahblah, else if they are awake, do some other blah.
The nonlinear method doesn't require any conditionals, instead the event which causes the character to sleep sets a 'sleep' flag, whatever causes it to be awake sets an 'awake' flag, and the action of giving the mushroom simply triggers a crosscheck of nodes, or an array of responses. Moreover, one might have a function, object, or procedure premade that checks sleep/wake actions and be able to just call it from here, and any other character in the game. So if you had 100 characters you can give mushrooms to, it would be silly to make a separate code for all of them when you can define it once and just point to it within the action.
Nonlinear is multidirectional, may be independent of steps and methods, multiconditional and abstract.
Both can be logic or logical.
An example might be programming a game, where in it the player tries to give a mushroom to a character, and the character reacts differently depending on if it is awake or asleep.
The linear method might be to write a bunch of if statements in order: if you give the mushroom, if the character is asleep, do blahblahblah, else if they are awake, do some other blah.
The nonlinear method doesn't require any conditionals, instead the event which causes the character to sleep sets a 'sleep' flag, whatever causes it to be awake sets an 'awake' flag, and the action of giving the mushroom simply triggers a crosscheck of nodes, or an array of responses. Moreover, one might have a function, object, or procedure premade that checks sleep/wake actions and be able to just call it from here, and any other character in the game. So if you had 100 characters you can give mushrooms to, it would be silly to make a separate code for all of them when you can define it once and just point to it within the action.
ok, I think I understood what you said. Can you use an example that's not related to a video game, maybe a more practical example?
Logical thinking critically challenges the assumptions made by the structure by evaluating, analyzing and checking the integrity of data points. It is concerned with validity.
Linear thinking is ordered thinking. It categorizes and determines relationships between data step by step, like a stair. It is concerned with order. Linear thinking may be utilized in logical thinking, but it is not necessarily logical in nature.
Linear thinking is ordered thinking. It categorizes and determines relationships between data step by step, like a stair. It is concerned with order. Linear thinking may be utilized in logical thinking, but it is not necessarily logical in nature.
Basically this.
Linear thinking structures information point-by-point,
while logical thinking ascertains veracity.
Linearity is a part of logical analysis,
discriminating between items in the set,
but can be used illogically.
If-then statements, for example,
are linear, but not necessarily
logical; relationships between
premises may be invalid.
Ex: If I dance around this tree, gold will rain from the sky.
There is a clear cause-effect component,
but it is ludicrous. Linear thinking,
I think, is quite vulnerable to
cognitive errors in
daily life;
misattribution, snap judgments from incomplete information,
representative heuristics, and confirmation biases
can all pollute the quality of linear thinking
when separated from logical deconstruction.
If someone is calling you a linear thinker they're basically calling you an XSTJ. If someone is calling you a logical thinker they're calling you an INTX. Mind you much of human thinking is flawed and the pipe dream of being completely rational and logical can be fetishized by people, the latter of these types especially.
Perhaps based on stereotype only, but otherwise, this is a problematic assumption.
All types utilize linear thinking, though as a preference, it is most noticeable in EXXJs and IXXJs. IXXPs and EXXPs are concerned with the validity of their environments and utilize (or fetishize, as you put it) logic the most. How proficient each type is at using logic and linear thinking as an order of course is highly dependent on their function stack. Those types with T lower in their function stack usually have thinking as a source of ego and value it highly as it is something that they unconsciously perceive as a vulnerability of theirs. As such, may seek to compensate for it/project onto others. This is why XXFPs and XXFJs are especially adept at identifying illogical behaviour in other people but have a blind-spot in their own thinking. When feeling is introverted, it may even make XXFPs appear more stereotypically thinker-like than their XXTP counterparts at first blush.
Last edited:
What have you been reading/watching/listening to which has prompted this question, [MENTION=1669]Maven[/MENTION]? I should think this kind of thing is pretty straightforward, but given how you've asked the question I'd be interested in the source material.
Linear thinking is not a properly defined concept, but a metaphor (i.e. meta-inference) about reasoning and follows from idiomatic expressions as to follow one's line of reasoning.
Logic is more concerned with the 'grammar' or 'rules' of reasoning, and as such it is stylistically more of a metalanguage.
Logic is more concerned with the 'grammar' or 'rules' of reasoning, and as such it is stylistically more of a metalanguage.
I associate linear thinking with Te so I strongly associate it with INTJ and ENTJ. Te seeks to organize the outer world and put things into the most efficient order to achieve objective results. So what is more visible externally seems like the product of linear thinking whether it is or not. Because nonlinear has to be more systemic to work, I associate this more with Ti.
Probably sensors with Te high in their stacks would also seem this way to me but historically I have not worked with as many sensors as I have worked primarily in software, which is less tabgible by its nature. I would suspect that because sensors have a focus on the physical that this alone may seern more like the product of linear thinking too even though anything observed there would also not necessarily reflect the actual thinking process that produces what is externally visible. I think this would be a little misleading.
Probably sensors with Te high in their stacks would also seem this way to me but historically I have not worked with as many sensors as I have worked primarily in software, which is less tabgible by its nature. I would suspect that because sensors have a focus on the physical that this alone may seern more like the product of linear thinking too even though anything observed there would also not necessarily reflect the actual thinking process that produces what is externally visible. I think this would be a little misleading.
Last edited:
Put another way: a linear traveler vs. a nonlinear traveler.
The linear traveler wants and needs directions which they need to follow in order to get to town. They need to know what road to be on, where to turn, what road they will be on next. If they deviate too far from their instructions they consider themselves lost.
Nonlinear traveler doesn't need directions. This doesn't mean they know how to get to town either, it might be the first time they've ever been in the area, but they can infer where town is on their own - for example guessing the general direction of town. The nonlinear traveler won't consider their self lost, they know where they are going and they can get there, but it doesn't take any set rules or directions. They just pick a way that goes there, and there are no right or wrong ways perhaps. Additionally for some even getting there might not be all that important.
Yes. Additionally logic is not necessarily linear, insofar that it doesn't have to be sequential.
Example is that a king + rook can checkmate a lone king eventually. This is actually linear though based on the superposition principle, but it is not linear in the sense of procedural thinking because the solution is not dependent on the position - it is inferred from many positions and has many solutions such that there's nothing that the lone king can do unless the other player makes an obvious mistake, and even then the lone king can't actually win, the best they can do is draw.
This could be proven procedurally by displaying all the move combinations, but one need not do that if they simply imagine the rook as having a fence line that the opposing king cannot cross, which will slowly but inevitably herd the lone king in.
In especially state and stateoriented/owned corporations I`ve noticed linear thinking is the most favoured. Logic always get booted out if it doesn`t apply to the interests.
This is probably cause if you deal with things logically you may just be to effective, wich leads to your own unemployment eventually. Logic is always based on reality Imo, Linear is how you do things when you do to much strategy.
Ok that was my own idealistic nature shining through. My logic is telling me that you do linear thinking when you plan something versus logic thinking when you execute them plans.
This is probably cause if you deal with things logically you may just be to effective, wich leads to your own unemployment eventually. Logic is always based on reality Imo, Linear is how you do things when you do to much strategy.
Ok that was my own idealistic nature shining through. My logic is telling me that you do linear thinking when you plan something versus logic thinking when you execute them plans.
Could be the Einstellung effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstellung_effect
Edit:
Or more to the point
No not an effect, a disease. Well anyways maybe your right sprinkles, but I`m sorry to say the cynic in me is have a really good day today. Many people dont seem to understand that our society is built on hard work taken out of our backs. State apparatus is just growing and the people that should be making somekind of product to contribute to us all is put at benches doing bogus work with no outcome other than that they took a bit of the hospitals and schools money, potentially making it harder for the ones making bacon. Doesnt anyone realise these kind of things?
About the effect :
Interesting and I can relate to it to, I work with forrestry and excavation-work. It`s interesting but ofcourse the machines often have small brakedowns and such.
These take a great effort to solve and many times there are new problems. In the beginning of my career, the Einstellung effect was very evident. Ofcourse your experience grows everyday and past problems help you solve the new ones but they are not solved in same ways necessary.
About the effect :
Interesting and I can relate to it to, I work with forrestry and excavation-work. It`s interesting but ofcourse the machines often have small brakedowns and such.
These take a great effort to solve and many times there are new problems. In the beginning of my career, the Einstellung effect was very evident. Ofcourse your experience grows everyday and past problems help you solve the new ones but they are not solved in same ways necessary.
thanks for the responses. A good amount to digest. The reason I was curious about the difference is because I always thought that linear thinking was by nature logical. I also assumed logical thinking was naturally linear. Then one day I wondered whether my assumptions were well founded so I thought I'd ask. Someone pointed out that linear thinking is sequential thinking which implies a natural step-by-step "logical" process in the order or ideas. Then another member said linear thinking is defined as line of reasoning which I tend to see as separate from linear thinking. Anyone can use a particular logic (way of thinking) to justify their line of reasoning but that does not make the reasoning they use logical or sequential. However linear thinking suggests there's a more natural sense of progression from one thought or idea to another. In other words, there's usually some justifiable reasoning involved in linear thinking. For example, solving a math problem. Yes, there are more than one formulae for solving a quadratic equation. However, each method will likely be linear unless you're solving it intuitively. The linearity in solving a math problem implies logical progression of steps. Although they are not the same, there are strong similarities.
Last edited:
Let me tell you a story.
My dad's a tugboat captain. Hauls barges around and moves ships around. At one point he and his crew had to move this boat between cities. I can't remember exactly where but I think they stopped by NYC or something.
Anyway. There were some low bridges they had to cross under to get to where they were taking the boat, and the bridges didn't raise, and they had the boat lowered in the water as much as it would go safely. However it still would not have fit under these bridges. So, what did they do?
They cut the top of the boat off. Welded it back on later. May seem crazy, but it isn't in the world of ships - they gotta do what they gotta do. Some ships have been cut in half and had a section added into the middle to make it bigger, while the ship was basically still in the water. They do that sort of thing.