(1) The problem of cognition. Cognition is the sum of a series of information about what you have learned, what you have experienced, what you have seen in the news, what your friends have exchanged, what your family has taught you, and so on.
There are huge differences in the level of cognition between people. This is because each of us has a different level of cognitive level of the boundary. This boundary is determined by each of our innate personality traits, experiences from childhood, the education received, and other factors **** the same. Each person has a different level of brain development, a different capacity for information, and a different level of cognitive development, which largely determines that many people can't reason, or can't reason.
(2) The problem of logical thinking. Logical thinking is your use of concepts, judgment, reasoning and other thinking to interpret your cognitive processes. The most classic form of logical thinking is the "triad": if the major premise is something, and the minor premise is part of the major premise, then the minor premise is also something. For example, the famous Socratic syllogism: (Major premise) All men are to die → (Minor premise) Socrates is a man → (Conclusion) Therefore Socrates is to die.
We know that the development of a thing is often a comprehensive result of the superposition of various influences. When the scale and complexity of a thing is large to a certain extent, we often have to use the trinitarian theory, using the information you have, using the concept as a major premise, do a series of judgments and deductions, it is possible to make a more accurate analysis of the development of a thing. However, as emotional and rational people, it is difficult to see all the influencing factors and the overall situation, the so-called overall situation is only a relative concept. Therefore, when we face a complex thing, we tend to see the results presented by a certain localization first according to our personal psychological preference and habitual thinking mode, and then assume and find the reasons based on the results. In this part of the process, our assumptions often carry strong preconceptions of conclusions, which leads to the fact that although we can grasp a large amount of information, it is very difficult to make sense out of it.
Two, some people don't want to be reasonable. In this world, there are a lot of people, their cognitive level are good, but also have specialized training in logical thinking, but based on their own interests in the choice, they just do not want to reason.
This kind of people and people debate, the best is to first create a cramped and hostile public **** space, the first to debate the opponent placed in the situation can not form a meaningful expression. Then, based on their own interests, often also disguise their own interests as the collective interests of a group, to occupy the moral high ground, and then refute the debate opponent's views or remarks. At this point, even if the debate opponent dares to argue, the first thing such people do is to question the other party's motives pure or not, rather than the inquiry into the facts, the pursuit of the truth. The purpose of such a debate or reasoning is not to communicate better, but to make you submit to his own interests, which is a typical coercion instead of logical reasoning, moral constraints on rational thinking, to represent the interests of a few rules to adjudicate the reasonable assertions of others.
By extension, in the face of such a situation, whether you can reason well or not, it is really about your and my freedom, equality and dignity value issues. Living in this complex world, we desire tolerance, hope that people respect each other's right to speak, and oppose the suppression of different opinions.