Violations of the logic of thinking. Concept disorders

Researchers have not yet decided what constitutes a thought process. It is believed that it should be understood as one of the highest mental functions, through which a person perceives and generalizes information about the reality surrounding him.

However, under the influence of external factors, people can partially or completely lose this ability. Thinking disorders are both temporary and permanent, and may be the result of mental and other disorders.

About thinking

Thinking is a specific feature that a person possesses. Through mental activity, people establish the existing relationships between various external objects and phenomena. Also, this process allows you to determine the subjective attitude of a person to objects and events in the real world. As a result, due to thinking, a certain perception of the surrounding reality (point of view) is formed, which people can express with the help of speech.

In fact, this process allows a person not only to get an idea of ​​the real world, but also to understand it. Moreover, mental activity is associated not only with specific objects, but also with abstract concepts.

In the latter case, we are talking about the process of generalizing current realities: natural disasters, furniture, and so on. In the course of evolutionary development, a person has developed the ability to combine several objects or phenomena according to a certain attribute. Such skills are called abstract thinking.

The formation of pictures of the inner and outer world occurs through the analysis of cause-and-effect relationships. At the same time, a person, relying on his own abilities, subjects the results obtained during the thought process to verification, based in his judgments on previously acquired experience. For example, if a child, having approached the edge of the bed, fell, then in the future, having reached the same point, he will be able to imagine further developments and make an appropriate decision.

A thinking disorder is diagnosed if a person does not meet the following criteria:

It is important to note that these criteria are general. That is, non-compliance with one of them cannot be considered a deviation within the accepted empirical, logical and other grounds.

For example, it has been found that eating after 9 pm is injurious to health. If most people follow this rule, but a few people refuse, then the behavior of the latter is not considered a sign of mental disorders.

In medical practice, it is customary to distinguish the following types of thought disorders:

• dynamics of thinking;
• logical (personal) thinking;
• associative (operational) thinking.

Due to the fact that thinking is a complex process that undergoes changes under the influence of many factors, it is not always possible even for an experienced specialist to determine the presence of violations.

Features of mental dynamics disorders

Violation of the dynamics of thinking manifests itself in the form of the following processes.

Increasing the speed of the thought process

This disorder of thinking is characterized by leaps and bounds of ideas. A person cannot stop and constantly produces them through speech, giving out a huge stream of associations to the outside world. Moreover, the speech itself remains incoherent and spasmodic. Any conclusions arise unexpectedly under the influence of some external or internal stimulus. Judgments about objects are superficial. Due to the endless flow of information, a person with this type of impairment often loses his voice.

These symptoms are complemented by the following symptoms:

An important feature of this type of disorder is that in the statements of the patient, despite their surface, a certain meaning is hidden. A person with a violation of dynamic thinking is aware of his actions and understands the mistakes made. He retains the ability to eliminate them.

Inertia of thinking

Violation of thinking of this type is characterized by the following features:

• slow process of formation of associations;
• the presence of inhibition;
• lack of ability to form their own thoughts.

The person retains the ability to speak, but the answers to questions will be short and monosyllabic. A patient with serious difficulties moves on to a new topic of conversation.

Lack of consistency in judgments

With such a deviation, the unstable nature of judgments and associations is observed. However, the patient can analyze the current situation quite well, perceive and generalize the information received. Violation of thinking of this type occurs against the background of mental disorders, as well as in pathologies of the brain (trauma, vascular disease).

Emergence of responsiveness

Responsiveness is understood as behavior uncharacteristic for a healthy person, in which the patient constantly and incoherently includes visible objects in his speech. In addition, patients experience spatial and temporal disorientation and may forget certain dates, names, and events. The patient's speech becomes incoherent.

Basically, responsiveness is diagnosed in people with vascular pathologies of the brain.

slipping

This effect manifests itself in the form of an unexpected departure from the current topic of discussion. Moreover, a person slips into incoherent associations. Over time, the patient returns to the initial theme. Slippage occurs episodically and suddenly. Most often, this effect is observed in schizophrenic disorders.

Disorders of personal thinking

The violations of logical thinking include the following phenomena.

Inability to generalize thoughts

The diversity of thinking is characterized by the lack of purposefulness in the actions of the patient. The latter is simply not able to generalize several objects, highlighting one or more features in them. At the same time, the patient retains the ability to classify objects, but performs such actions based on personal preferences: habit, taste sensations, and more. There is no objective judgment in the conclusions of the patient.

reasoning

A characteristic feature of reasoning is incoherent and lengthy arguments that are conducted without a specific goal. The logic of judgments in speech is completely or partially absent. Words and phrases have no visible connection with each other. A person at the moment when he makes a speech does not need a listener. It does not matter to him whether someone responds to the thoughts he expresses. The patient needs to speak. Reasoning is often noted in people suffering from schizophrenia.

Delirium

A delusional state is a violation of the thought process, in which the information expressed by the patient is abstract.

That is, there is no visible connection with objective reality and the environment in the spoken words and phrases. Moreover, the person himself is completely sure that his conclusions are true. It is impossible to convince him otherwise. An example of such phenomena is the state of anorexia. A person "sees" excess weight and seeks to get rid of it in all possible ways.

Lack of critical thinking and obsession

The lack of critical perception leads to the fact that purposefulness disappears in the patient's actions. The patient is unable to regulate his actions.

A characteristic sign of an obsessive state are phobias.

As it develops, this problem leads to a gradual personality disorder.

Associative Thinking Disorders

Disorders of associative thinking are manifested in the form of:

It has already been noted above that violations of the thought process arise for a variety of reasons. Moreover, today there is no consensus about the relationship between individual diseases and pathological changes. The violations in question often occur due to the following problems:

1. Cognitive disorders. The decrease in intellectual abilities occurs against the background of the development of dementia, Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia. With such violations, a person is not always and not fully aware of what is happening, loses the ability to control his actions. Depending on the area of ​​brain damage, there is a possibility that the patient will begin to perceive the surrounding reality in a distorted form.
2. Psychoses. Psychoses have a negative impact on a person's thought processes, as a result of which the latter ceases to adequately respond and perceive the world around him. His judgments often do not correspond to generally accepted logic. The patient expresses incoherent thoughts.

Methods for the study of violations

The study of mental disorders is carried out by a psychologist. If such pathological changes are suspected, instrumental methods are initially used to diagnose them:

Instrumental research methods make it possible to establish the presence of a lesion in the brain and identify pathologies that can lead to impaired thinking. After completion of this stage of diagnostics, a psychologist conducts work with the patient.

In order to establish the nature of the changes and the form of pathological disorders, various tests are carried out. In particular, for disorders of operational thinking, the following methods are used:

• classification;
• exceptions;
• formation of analogies;
• defining concepts by comparing several items;
• identification of the figurative meaning of established expressions (proverbs, metaphors);
• drawing pictograms.

Each of these methods allows assessing a person's ability to generalize incoming information, form an idea about them, and other important factors on the basis of which the final diagnosis is made.

Violations of the mental abilities of a person occur mainly in mental disorders and diseases that affect the structure of the brain. Such disorders manifest themselves in the form of incoherent expression of one's own thoughts, incorrect judgments about objects and processes of the real world. To make an accurate diagnosis and reveal the true nature of thought disorders, psychological testing of the patient will be required.

Don't lose. Subscribe and receive a link to the article in your email.

In the field of view of logic as a science of cognitive activity, there are not only forms, but also the relationships that arise between them in the thought process. The fact is that not every set of concepts, judgments, and conclusions makes it possible to build effective thinking. For him, the mandatory attributes are consistency, consistency, reasonable connection. These aspects, necessary for effective thinking, are designed to provide logical laws.

In the training on our website, we give a brief description of the basic logical laws. In this article, we will consider 4 laws of logic in more detail, with examples, because, as the author of the textbook on logic Nikiforov A.L. rightly noted: “An attempt to violate the law of nature can kill you, but in the same way an attempt to violate the law of logic kills your mind” .

logical laws

To avoid a distorted idea of ​​the subject of the article, we point out that, speaking of the basic laws of logic, we mean the laws of formal logic ( identity, non-contradiction, excluded middle, sufficient reason) rather than predicate logic.

A logical law is an internal, essential, necessary connection between logical forms in the process of constructing thinking. Under the logical law, Aristotle, who, by the way, was the first to formulate three of the four laws of formal logic, meant a prerequisite for the objective, “natural” correctness of reasoning.

Many teaching materials often offer the following formulas to write down the basic laws of logic:

• The law of identity - A \u003d A, or A ⊃ A;
• The law of non-contradiction - A ∧ A;
• Law of the excluded middle – A ∨ A;
• The law of sufficient reason is A ⊃ B.

It is worth remembering that such a designation is largely arbitrary and, as scientists note, are not always fully able to reveal the essence of the laws themselves.

1. The law of identity

Aristotle in his "Metaphysics" pointed out the fact that thinking is impossible "unless you think one thing every time." Most modern educational materials formulate the law of identity as follows: "Any statement (thought, concept, judgment) throughout the entire reasoning must retain the same meaning."

This implies an important requirement: it is forbidden to take identical thoughts for different ones, and different ones for identical ones. Since natural language allows one and the same thought to be expressed through various linguistic forms, this can lead to the substitution of the original meaning of concepts and to the replacement of one thought with another.

To confirm the law of identity, Aristotle turned to the analysis of sophisms - false statements that, on a superficial examination, seem correct. Everyone has probably heard the most famous sophisms. For example: “Half-empty is the same as half-full. If the halves are equal, then the whole ones are equal. Therefore, empty is the same as full. or “6 and 3 are even and odd. 6 and 3 are nine. Therefore, 9 is both even and odd.”

Outwardly, the form of reasoning is correct, but when analyzing the course of reasoning, an error is found related to the violation of the law of identity. So, in the second example, everyone understands that the number 9 cannot be both even and odd at the same time. The mistake is that the union "and" in the condition is used in different meanings: in the first as a union, the simultaneous characteristic of the numbers 6 and 3, and in the second - as an arithmetic operation of addition. Hence the fallacy of the conclusion, because in the process of reasoning different meanings were applied to the subject. In essence, the law of identity is a requirement for certainty and immutability of thoughts in the process of reasoning.

Extracting everyday meaning from the foregoing, let us dwell on understanding what the law of identity refers to. In accordance with it, it is always worth remembering that before starting a discussion of any issue, you need to clearly define its content and follow it invariably, without mixing concepts and avoiding ambiguities.

The law of identity does not imply that things, phenomena and concepts are unchanged at some points, it is based on the fact that a thought fixed in a certain linguistic expression, despite all possible transformations, must remain identical to itself within a specific consideration.

2. Law of non-contradiction (contradiction)

The formal-logical law of non-contradiction is based on the argument that two judgments incompatible with each other cannot be true at the same time; at least one of them is false. It follows from an understanding of the content of the law of identity: at the same time, in one respect, two judgments about an object cannot be true, if one of them affirms something about it, and the second one denies it.

Aristotle himself wrote: “It is impossible that the same thing both be and not be inherent in the same thing, in the same sense.”

Let's deal with this law on a specific example - consider the following judgments:

1. Each visitor to the 4brain website has a higher education.
2. Not a single visitor to the 4brain website has a higher education.

In order to determine which statement is true, we turn to logic. We can assert that both statements cannot be true at the same time, since they are contradictory. It follows from this that if one of them is proved to be true, then the second will necessarily be erroneous. If one proves the fallacy of one, then the second can be both true and untruthful. To find out the truth, it is enough to check the initial data, for example, using a metric.

In fact, this law prohibits affirming and denying the same thing at the same time. Outwardly, the law of contradiction may seem obvious and cause fair doubt about the expediency of separating such a simple conclusion into a logical law. But there are some nuances here and they are connected with the nature of the contradictions themselves. So, contact contradictions (when something is affirmed and denied almost at the same time, for example, already by the next sentence in a speech) are more than obvious and practically never occur. Unlike the first variety, distant contradictions (when there is a significant interval between conflicting judgments in a speech or text) are more common and should be avoided.

To effectively use the law of contradiction, it is enough to correctly take into account the conditions for its use. The main requirement is the observance in the expressed thought of the unity of time and the relationship between objects. In other words, affirmative and negative judgments that refer to different times or are used in different ways cannot be considered a violation of the law of non-contradiction. Let's give examples. Yes, statements "Moscow is the capital" And Moscow is not the capital can be both correct if we are talking about modernity in the first case, and about the era of Peter I, who, as is known, moved the capital to St. Petersburg in the second case.

In terms of the difference in relations, the truth of contradictory judgments can be conveyed by the following example: "My girlfriend speaks Spanish well" And "My girlfriend doesn't speak Spanish well." Both statements can be true if at the moment of speech in the first case it is said about the success in learning the language in the university program, and in the second about the possibility of working as a professional translator.

Thus, the law of contradiction fixes the relationship between opposite judgments (logical contradictions) and in no way concerns the opposite sides of one essence. Its knowledge is necessary for the discipline of the process and the elimination of possible inaccuracies that arise in the event of a violation.

3. Law of the excluded middle

Much more "famous" than the previous two laws of Aristotle, in wide circles, due to the significant prevalence of the maxim "tertium non datur", which means "no third is given" and reflects the essence of the law. The Law of the Excluded Middle is a requirement for the thought process, according to which if something about an object is affirmed in one of two expressions, and something is denied in the second, then one of them is necessarily true.

Aristotle in Book 3 of Metaphysics wrote: "... nothing can be in the middle between two contradictory judgments about one, each individual predicate must either be affirmed or denied." The ancient Greek sage noted that the law of the excluded middle is applicable only in the case of statements used in the past or present tense and does not work with the future tense, because it is impossible to say with a sufficient degree of certainty that something will or will not happen.

Obviously, the law of non-contradiction and the law of the excluded middle are closely related. Indeed, those judgments that fall under the law of the excluded middle also fall under the law of non-contradiction, but not all judgments of the latter fall under the law of the former.

The law of the excluded middle applies to the following forms of judgment:

• "A is B", "A is not B".

One judgment affirms something about the subject in the same respect at the same time, and the second denies the same thing. For example: "Ostrich Birds" And Ostriches are not birds.

• "All A are B", "Some A are not B".

One judgment affirms something with respect to the whole class of objects, the second one denies the same, but with respect to only a certain part of the objects. For example: “All students of the IN-14 group passed the session with excellent marks” And "Some students of the IN-14 group did not pass the session with excellent marks."

• "No A is B", "Some A is B".

One judgment denies the characteristic of a class of objects, and the second affirms the same characteristic in relation to some part of the objects. Example: “Not a single resident of our house uses the Internet” And "Some residents of our house use the Internet."

Later, starting from the era of modern times, the law was criticized. A well-known formulation used for this is: “How true is it to say that all swans are black, based on the fact that we have so far met only black ones?”. The fact is that the law is applicable only in the Aristotelian two-valued logic, which is based on abstraction. Since the number of elements is infinite, it is very difficult to check all alternatives in such judgments, and other logical principles must be applied here.

4. Law of sufficient reason

The fourth of the basic laws of formal or classical logic was formulated after a significant period of time after Aristotle's justification of the first three. Its author is a prominent German scientist (philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian; this list of activities can be continued) - Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. In his work on simple substances (“Monadology”, 1714), he wrote: “... not a single phenomenon can turn out to be true or real, not a single statement is fair, without sufficient reason why this is the case, and not otherwise, although these reasons in most cases cannot be known to us at all.

The modern definition of Leibniz's law is based on the understanding that any statement, in order to be considered completely reliable, must be proven; sufficient grounds must be known on the strength of which it is considered true.

The functional purpose of this law is expressed in the requirement to observe in thinking such a feature as validity. G. W. Leibniz, in fact, combined the laws of Aristotle with their conditions for certainty, consistency and consistency of reasoning, and on the basis of this developed the concept of sufficient reason for the nature of thinking to be logical. The German logician wanted to show by this law that in the cognitive or practical activity of a person, sooner or later there comes a moment when it is not enough to simply have a true statement, it must be justified.

When analyzed in detail, it turns out that we apply the law of sufficient reason in everyday life quite often. To draw conclusions based on facts is to apply this law. A schoolboy who indicates a list of references at the end of the essay and a student who makes references to sources in a term paper - this is how they reinforce their conclusions and provisions, therefore, they use the law of sufficient reason. People of different professions face the same thing in the course of their work: an assistant professor when searching for material for a scientific article, a speech writer when, a prosecutor when preparing an accusatory speech.

Violation of the law of sufficient reason is also widespread. Sometimes the reason for this is illiteracy, sometimes - special tricks for the purpose of obtaining benefits (for example, building an argument in violation of the law to win a dispute). For example, statements: “This man is not sick, he does not have a cough” or "Citizen Ivanov could not commit a crime, because he is an excellent worker, a caring father and a good family man." In both cases, it is clear that the arguments presented do not sufficiently substantiate the thesis, and, therefore, are a direct violation of one of the basic laws of logic - the law of sufficient reason.

Are you interested in the development of logical thinking and thinking globally? Pay attention to the course.

violation of the logic of reasoning- 1) A type of logical error, signaling a contradiction between the content of the text and extralinguistic conditions. 2) One of the elements of the information model of the logic of speech, carrying information about the contradictions in the text that appeared under the influence of ... ...

Linguistic philosophy- (philosophy of "ordinary language") a philosophical direction that has set as its main task the analysis of natural language by rigorous methods. The analysis was undertaken in order to determine philosophically significant concepts (such as "good", "evil", "duty", ... ... Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary

information model of logic of speech- includes the following components: I. meaning: one of the main communicative qualities of speech; semantic linkage of language units in speech, compliance with the laws of logic and correct thinking; II. forms of consistency: 1) subject consistency; 2) conceptual ... ... Dictionary of linguistic terms T.V. Foal

Logic of speech- the communicative quality of speech, which arises on the basis of the ratio of speech thinking. L.r. associated with the semantic and syntactic organization of both the utterance and the text. To achieve L.R. semantic consistency should be achieved ... ... Pedagogical speech science

errors signaling a contradiction between the content of the text and extralinguistic conditions- 1) The type of errors that violate the logic of speech. These include the following types: violation of the logic of reasoning, use of language means inadequate to the situation of communication 2) One of the elements of the information model of the logic of speech, which contains ... ... Dictionary of linguistic terms T.V. Foal

RAVE- - a painful condition in which obsessive ideas, ideas, judgments completely capture a person and have such an impact on his thinking and behavior, as a result of which he loses the ability to distinguish between fiction and ... ...

B. r. are symptoms of meaningful thinking disorders. Kaplan and Sadok define delusions as false beliefs that cannot be eliminated by logical reasoning and that do not correspond to the intellect and cultural ... ... Psychological Encyclopedia

contradictions, cf. 1. A thought or position that is incompatible with another, refuting another, inconsistency in thoughts, statements and actions, violation of logic or truth. Fall into conflict. A contradiction in theory. Contradiction in their own ... ... Explanatory Dictionary of Ushakov

- ... Wikipedia

Infectious diseases Leukoencephalitis Leukoencephalitis is a variant of inflammatory lesions of the brain, in which predominantly conduction pathways are affected, i.e. white matter of the brain. It is assumed that leukoencephalitis is infectious ... ... Wikipedia

THOUGHT EXPERIMENT- a type of cognitive activity that is built according to the type of a real experiment and has its structure, but develops entirely in an ideal plan. It is in this fundamental position that the activity of the imagination is manifested here, which gives ... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

Books

• Money, bank credit and economic cycles / Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles, Huerta de Soto H. / Huerta de Soto. 663 pages. The book is devoted to a comprehensive examination of the central institution of the modern economic order of banking on a fractional reserve basis with a central bank and ...

We have considered the laws of logic, which, as indicated at the beginning of the paragraph, describe the basic properties of thinking. This function is also performed by laws in physics or biology. They also describe the main properties of the objects under study and their relationships. However, it is easy to see that when formulating the laws of logic, we had to use the word "should", "should", etc. This indicates that the laws of logic are similar not only to the laws of physics and biology, but also to the laws of law and morality, which describe what a person should do. This analogy between the laws of logic, on the one hand, and the laws of law and morality, on the other hand, was accurately expressed by the famous Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget, who said that “ logic is the morality of thinking».

The laws of logic can be broken and are often broken. However, there is one important condition here: if we strive for the truth of judgments and the correctness of reasoning, then we must comply with the laws of logic, just as if we strive for respectable behavior in society, then we must comply with the laws of law and morality. Observance of the laws of logic does not yet guarantee us the truth of our thoughts and, therefore, is not a sufficient basis for the truth of judgments, since truth requires that what is affirmed or denied in the judgment correspond to the position in the world outside the judgment. However, without observing the laws of logic, there can be no question of the truth of the judgments under consideration. However, for correctness of reasoning observance of the laws of logic in the generalized sense, which was mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph, is also a sufficient condition.

The laws of logic can be broken consciously, or involuntarily.

Sophismis a violation of the laws of logic, deliberately designed to mislead the interlocutor.

Example . In Chapter 2, we considered a case in which at least some of the readers of this tutorial acquired horns. This is the famous sophism of antiquity Horned". In the same place, I analyzed the logical error on which the "acquisition" of horns is based. Now we can say that it was violated the law of identity, which requires the constancy of the concepts and judgments used throughout the argument. In the sophism "Horned" there is a substitution of concepts: instead of the concept " what you have not lost, from what you have"use the concept" what is not lost' whether you had it or not.

Example . Another well-known sophism is built on the violation of the law of identity - “ Coated". It consists in the following: a person is brought to another person who is sitting, covered with a veil, and they ask: “ Do you know this person? The questioner naturally replies that he does not know. Then the veil is thrown away and there is the father of the person to whom this question was asked. Since the subject answered that he did not know this person, it is concluded that he does not know his father. The source of the error here lies in the ambiguity of the verb "to know". In the question and in the answer of the subject, the verb "know" is used in the sense of "learn", and in the final conclusion - in the proper sense. Thus, there is also a substitution of concepts.

Example . Another sophistry: The seated person stood up. He who has risen is standing, therefore, the one who is sitting is standing.". Here, too, there is a substitution of concepts arising from the violation of the law of identity. This substitution is masked by an abbreviated form of reasoning.

These and other sophisms were formulated in antiquity. They take their name from the school sophists- professional teachers of wisdom who undertook to teach young people the art of public administration and jurisprudence. The main thesis of the sophists was as follows: truth has nothing to do with public administration and jurisprudence, the one who manages to convince the people's assembly or the court wins. Therefore, they undertook to train young men to convince other people of everything they please. Even in sheer nonsense. And sophisms served as examples of the fact that a person can be convinced of anything, if suitable means were used. In a certain sense, it can be said that the logic based on respect for the truth was built with the aim of exposing, criticizing sophisms that mislead the interlocutor. Aristotle's predecessors, Socrates and Plato, devoted a lot of effort to such criticism of sophists and sophisms, and on the soil fertilized by them, Aristotle managed to grow a beautiful tree of logic. Sophisms were common in antiquity, they are still found today. The ancient Roman philosopher Epictetus gave us the following advice in the fight against sophisms: “Against sophistic reasoning, one must be guided by logic, exercise and experience in it ...”.

Paralogism- violation of the laws of logic, allowed involuntarily.­

In its logical essence, paralogism does not differ from sophism. Its difference is only in motive. I. Kant in his "Logic" notes that by means of paralogism "they try to deceive themselves." However, we know that “other simplicity is worse than theft”, and “ignorance of the law does not exempt from liability for its violation.” The price for violating the laws of logic in this case also turns out to be truth, and the situation is all the more tragic because a person who admits paralogism can quite sincerely strive for it. And this also helps "logic, exercise and experience in it."

Anton Shutov

BREAKING LOGIC PRINCIPLE

I opened a hundred books

find a desiring remedy

establish the nature of light...

Daniil Kharms

My head was spinning when I jumped out of the trolley bus… the stop swayed, the lights tilted, and passers-by flew like swallows right from under my feet. Carousel. Need more fresh air.

As I make my way to the supermarket, avoiding puddles, I think about my plans to expose the universe. The whole worldly essence, far-fetched and absurd, twisted in fake rings, and tightly surrounded me from head to toe for some time. It used to be that I strayed through the nooks and crannies of conjectures, but finally an explosive wave of conjectures threw me out of the well-trodden rut of life and left me on the stretch, out of the human current.

The sky wavered, reflected in the dirt on the pavement. I was numb, looking at the flying overturned birds in the puddles, until someone with a determined gait forked the reflection, and then the flock of winged ones, scattered, blossomed in strands and seemed to tremble from barely restrained chest laughter, slowly converging into the original. The puddles quivered in amazement under the shot of the variegated shoes of others... neat shoes, elegant boots, artificially ugly sneakers, clumsy boots with cabalistic patterned ligature.

Pedestrian paths, overlapping each other, converged and diverged, collided at the corner and suddenly broke off at the doors of shops and desks; some, as if on the wane, froze at stops like on piers, waiting for transport.

You don’t know where the tangled maze of trampled asphalt will lead you, if you stare at your feet like that, everything is the same everywhere and everywhere there are different pictures ... dirty green lawns, and here, with a steep cascade of steps, the building gently tastes the wet slabs.

The tight and heavy doors of the supermarket, fluttering from the oncoming one, slammed loudly, champing right in front of the nose. Inside, as if outside the windows of public transport, a thick mess of a crowd of people, adorned with goods, was mixed up. Shivering, I nevertheless pulled the door towards me, inhaled and dived inside.

Large propellers hidden behind a crumpled grate blow over anyone who steps into this vestibule. A warm, heated stream of air gently pressed and rumbled, drowning out all sounds. Once in front of the second doors, he looked around the space. This tambourchik is a clear indication of the unconsciousness of natural selection, there is no road out of the general crowd without a special filter, just as you won’t get inside without it. But then another vision immediately loomed - the entire supermarket has a disordered digestive system, and such intermediate lobbies are the oral compartment, where approbation and processing takes place. They try you there, blow them over and now you can go further. Trying not to touch the digestive tract with his shoulders, he stepped on the floor tiles of the supermarket.

Directly from the bowels - a firm and evaluating look of the guard. Or not a security guard. Or an administrator. Or not an administrator. Dark thick eyebrows, hard cheekbones and a facial expression that inspires a reserved demeanor. Eyebrows trembled and the look again became indifferent and absent-minded, the task at this stage has been completed - the new client has been scanned, does not require tracking.

I climbed the steps of a wide staircase, at the top there was another securier of the same kind. Or maybe they are not security guards at all, and not administrators - but simply make sure that everything goes as planned? The one upstairs is now pretending not to follow me, and when I turn my back on him, he will relentlessly follow where I put my feet, where the wet soles of my boots are imprinted and watch everyone around.

I passed the first flight of stairs, passed the imaginary guard, and lo and behold, the moment came when I turned my back on him. Slowly silently count to seven and turn around sharply. All the people around pretend...

All the people around pretend to be careless and themselves, if they are people at all. As soon as I get to the city center, everyone actively begins to portray that life is also in full swing here. But in fact, they all know what I'm thinking, every neiro of mine is calculated, present or future thought, they know, and they start from my electrical potentials, slide along the dendrites to build everything around. In front of the store today they specially cleaned ...

Was the front of the store specially cleaned today when they found out that I was coming? Surely behind the gate with a sign forbidding entry there is a pile of garbage, which was hastily hidden from view, and at that time I was driving here. And on what basis do they choose people?

And on what basis do they choose people who will travel with me today on the same public transport, who will push in the shops? On a competitive basis, or they already have everything discussed there, who is who. Or maybe they're not human at all...

Or maybe they aren't people at all. Just when I'm at home, everything around freezes and ceases to be. People are caught, the batteries are pulled out, or the driving mechanisms are turned off, and they are all herded into one big long hangar. Imagine only a long building with a high roof and hundreds of thousands of human dolls with glass eyes. Where do they hide these buildings.

They are pompously walking around now and think that I do not notice their supposedly gliding and random glances at me. Right now, many of them are annoying and I can now go up and tell them about what I don’t like. Then, perhaps, they will be deported somewhere... but where... Probably nowhere. They'll just be destroyed because I said so. Somewhere they're sure...

Somewhere they probably have a schedule of my life, in which they build scripts, scenery and characters. Why are they doing this. When I was a child - this is understandable, but now why arrange the whole circus? It's time to stop, because the performance did not take place, because I already know everything perfectly, thanks to my own analytics of the mind and their stupidity.

Seven. Go.

I turn around sharply, meet the gaze of the “guard”. This one also bounces his eyebrows, he carefully looks into his eyes, then the usual picture begins. At first he has nowhere to put his hands, he immediately assumes an unnatural pose, blushes, averts his eyes a couple of times and, as if slowly and naturally, but in fact labored and nervously, rises from his chair and walks supposedly on business. D-e-d-s-t-in-u-e-t.

I don't worry anymore.

If someone needed to disable some kind of logical mechanism, chain or mechanics, then he simply violates the logic of the consequences and, behold, the result is obvious - an imbalance and further stop or distortion of the mechanism's actions. For example, in a watch with a winding, you can insert some extra part, or remove one of the gears. Then the leaders will open and in their role the clock will no longer take place. Then someone serious will definitely ask ... "Why did they break the clock?"

Nobody will ask me.

And I won’t answer that I’m tired of the commotion of role-playing games, that I don’t know the purpose of all the stage turmoil around, it delivers a very vivid fear, it’s like a scarlet flash of pain. After all, it is better to live in agreement than to pretend to be a fool. Let them put them further under a glass cap and blow off dust particles, maybe I am the very center of the universe on which life is based, maybe it is because of this that they care so much and care more for themselves than for me, knowing that their life would not be without mine.

Breaking logic is a simple process. Simply, something inadequate - and then a spectacular performance is wrapped up, when everything unsteady and the past collapses. It is only necessary to carry out something simple, but on the other hand, not quite simple, because if, for example, I get and light a cigarette here in the supermarket, then the maximum that this act will cost me will be taken out of the store spectacularly. Something tougher is needed.

... And not in the supermarket.

Now back, in vain I went so deep into the bowels of the store. Again a staircase, a guard who is no longer here, flight after flight, a hall, another guard who pretends not to know anything about that upper door, a digestive vestibule and fresh air.

Before you start, you need something as an epigraph. It will be necessary to discourage the first person who leaves the store after me.

Here comes a woman in a gray coat.

Hello, - I say, smiling disarmingly, but she still doesn’t know that even more disarming is spinning on my tongue, - but I know everything perfectly, you don’t have to pretend!

The woman shudders, stops, with a wandering indifferent look runs over my figure and steps on.

Woman!

Zero emotions, only accelerated gait. What didn't work this time? No, it worked great, it just wasn't programmed to talk, they didn't expect me to talk to anyone in the store. I can imagine what a panic has begun inside now, everyone quickly figure out what can be done. But all in vain, I felt all the action of their mechanism, I know all the principles of their actions.

Let them think, but all in vain!

in vain! - I shout for clarity of my own thoughts to everyone around, I look around. Many stop, turn around, almost everyone looks in my direction.

“In vain!”, I shout so that my ears ring and tears well up. Some of the people around have already turned away and continue to go about their own business, as if there were some business. Some group of young people are smiling and looking at each other, and an old woman nearby is shaking her head, her face written in pain and sucking ...