Today we started with the group discussion on the “digital camera” case. Each group presented their own conclusion and stories to logically support it.
I found a very common mistake in their logic development.
When they develop a logical structure which is called logic pyramid, you have to make sure that lower layer has to be a reason of the upper layer. In such case you can ask yourself, WHY SO? And SO WHAT?
You can make sure by asking “WHY SO?” that the lower layer is a direct reason of the upper layer.
In the same way, you can make sure by asking “SO WHAT” that upper layer is a conclusion of the lower layer.
For example, let’s assume that your conclusion is “digital camera business is being shifted from Japan to the emerging countries”. And a reason to support this conclusion, which comes lower layer, is “parts used for digital camera is being communized”.
Obviously this is NOT a direct reason of the final conclusion. You have logic gap between the two. I made sure that we still need to repeat those exercise more for each student to develop a logical storyline by themselves.