The basic content of the same is: any correct thinking has certain determinism. The formula of the same is "a is A". A indicates any idea (concept or judgment) that appears in the same thinking and discussion. "A is A" is to say that in the correct thinking and discussion, A this idea has its own identity. "A is A" This logic law is the correct reflection of the relative stability and quality of objective things. In the same way, the concept and judgment of thinking must be determined during the same thinking process. The ugly person violates the patriator of the patriarch: stealing the concept and transfer topic; discuss the problem, Dongli wei, Hu Shi, or use "double standard"; and play with a relativism of denying things and concepts, etc. Wait. Example analysis "Drake"? Mr. Lu Xun said such a thing in a scribble: A: B, when you are a reliable person, so several about the revolutionary thing, there is no more you. How did you tell the enemy? B: Do you have this! How is it to tell! I said, because they asked me. A: You can't help but know? B: What is! I didn't have a lie in my life. I am not a person who can't rely! ("The end of the tall tall": "Half Summit" (5), p. 107) In a specific context, a concept of a concept is determined. A "reliable" refers to a person stand firm, and never leaks the secrets inside the revolutionary team to the enemy. B deliberately convert it to a person "Never talk to lie '(including" To the enemy "), this is to defend your own betrayal behavior. This is the concept of violating the same appointment on the same discussion It is necessary to have certain request. With the concept of stealing, it is a trick that the evils is the usual trick. In the past few years, there is a small number of people with a small family in Japan to write Japanese primary and secondary school historical textbooks, actually put the 1937 Japanese army. The invasion of China Territory is "entered", and the Japanese army has a comprehensive aggression of China, and it is "comprehensive attack on China", "enter", "attack" to steal "invasion" and "aggression" I want to overthrow the historical case of the historic case that has been convailed, deceive the Japanese adolescents, and try to resurrect Japanese militarism. This despicable behavior has agreed to provoke the general opposition of China and international public opinion. China's government has also put forward strong protests for the Japanese government. Logically, the practice of Japan's small people is open to violation of the same law. The basic content of cascriptal unfair to violate the non-contradictory law is: any correct thinking is not self-contradictory. On the same thinking, discussion During the process, two mutually negative ideas (two judgments with opposition or contradictory relationship) cannot be true, there must be a fake. The failed formula is "A is not non-A" .a and non-A, express two mutual Negative ideas (concept or judgment). "A is not non-A" is said that this thought is not a non-A thinking, the two cannot be established at the same time. "A is not non-A", this logic rule is to exist on objective things. The correct reflection of the quality of the quality. The non-contradiction requires that the concept or judgment of two mutually negative or judgments should not be affirmed at the same thinking, the concept or judgment of "can't be two". The sophistication of the ulsender violates the unfair Yes: 出 反 反, contradictory; see the wind to make the rudder; reverse the black and white, confused is right; and the conditions for the conversion of contradictions, deny the difference in the concept, and so on.
An example analysis of a weapon businessman's sales technique for the Warring States Period, Han Dai told a fable story of "self-contradictory": Chu State has a businessman who sells spear and shield, he took the shield for a while to say, my shield Very sturdy, there is nothing to pierce it; for a while, I will pick up the spear to boast, my spear is very sharp, there is nothing I can't pierce. Someone asked him next to: "How do you use your spear?" How do you do it? "The person who sells spear and shields will be slogan. Why can't this Chu country can't answer the questions raised by others? The reason is that he cannot be established at the same time about the spear and the Shield. Because "I" shield "There is no thing to pierce it" this sentence contains "my spear can't pierce my shield"; and "I" spear "There is no thing it can't pierce" this sentence. It also contains "my spear can pierce my shield". The two judgments contained in these two sentences (single name denies and monitic affirmation) are contradictory relationships: can't be a fake. According to the non-contradictory, if the former is really true, it must be recognized the latter false; if the latter is really true, you must admit the former fake. Faced with such choices, this bragvous businessman is unable to answer. It can be seen from this story that logical contradictions often have inner contacts with people's interests. The reason why this Chu people will be contradictory, because he only wants to sell his own things as soon as possible, so it will not take care of the logic. This is called "Lingling Full". The basic content of the casualty in violation of the row of the row is that any correct thinking has a clearness. In the same thinking, during the discussion, two mutual contradictory judgments cannot be true. The formula of the row is "either A or not A". The formula indicates that there must be one of the two contradictory judges in A and Non A, excluding the possibility of existence. Like not contradictory, "either A, either" This logic law is the correct reflection of the difference between the quality of objective things. The discipline requires that during the same thinking, the discussion, the judgment of two mutual contradiction should not be negated at the same time, ie "can't be two". The sophistication of the ulsender violates the row of the row, there is: ambiguous word, ambiguous; blending compromise, seems to be fair; fabricate "complex syndries", tempting; and stronger, quite unreasonable, and so on. The example analysis of the "Su Xize" is the official Tang Dynasty, and there is a prime minister named Su Wei, although this person is quite a talent, but the official is not. He did a few years of prime minister, in order to keep personal status and safety, handling anything always containing confidential, so that it can be done, and it can not explicitly attitudes and opinions. He has its own set of official way. He said: Treatment cannot make a clear decision, otherwise, there is a mistake, it is necessary to lose their responsibility. As long as "ambiguous" is on both ends. According to this feature of Su Wei, some people gave him a foreign number called "Su Watch". The row of the law requires our thoughts and remarks to have clearness. The fundamental feature of the row is that the judgment of the two contradictions cannot be assigned, so if the judgment of the two contradictions is negative, it violates the row of the rhythm, and the idea must lose the clearness. The Tang Dynasty prime minister said, when he deals with the problem, for the two conflict processing methods, it is believed that "doing this, it can be done like this," this is violating the non-contradictory law, but also violates the row of row (while It is true that two contradictions are judged, and there is a fake of concluding two contradictions. Its purpose is to shirk responsibility and keep your own dark cap. In our real life, it is not lack of Su flavor type. This kind of person is a lot of people, and eight faces are leaving, and there is no principle.
