• Question
• Methods
  • conclusion precedes
  • evidence follows
  • introduction
• Advantages

Question

Human thinking tends to be networked, where the approach to a given topic typically involves diverging into various related events, finding correlations, and further deducing, ultimately leading to a conclusion. However, this mode of thinking is not conducive to presenting to others due to its non-linear structure, making serialization difficult and leading to an excess of content without clear emphasis. Hence, Pyramid Thinking proposes a method for expressing and arguing viewpoints: starting with a conclusion, then elaborating on the evidence separately. The output method of Pyramid Thinking provides a path and clues for thinking, aiding in expanding the networked thinking of individuals.

Methods

conclusion precedes

Firstly, conclusion precedes, where a specific conclusion is given first, focusing on two aspects: matching top and bottom to determine which aspect of the conclusion to support. For example, for the conclusion “A’s friend is B”, there may be three focal points, such as compared to “C’s friend is B”, the focus is on “A”. Secondly, based on questions, considering the questions that the given conclusion may raise. Audiences naturally generate questions, typically related to causal chains, such as events leading to occurrence, how they occurred, and their impact on the conclusion. These questions are crucial for the causal chain of the final conclusion.

evidence follows

Secondly, evidence follows, where evidence needs to support the conclusion according to a certain logical structure. Deduction is one approach, combining major and minor premises to derive a conclusion, which is rigorous but may face issues if the major premise is negated. The organization of evidence should follow a logical sequence. Induction involves synthesizing multiple pieces of evidence to derive a conclusion, complementing each other, but may not be comprehensive. Classification of evidence according to the MECE principle ensures completeness and independence. The organization of evidence can be arranged in chronological order, structural order, or order of importance.

introduction

Lastly, emphasis should also be placed on introduction. The introduction should fill in the audience’s information gap, increase their interest and attention. The SCQ (Situation-Conflict-Question) approach can be used to organize the introduction, based on recognized facts to generate questions. For example, for the conclusion “Single-player games consume more attention than online games”, the introduction can be based on the recognized fact that “single-player games often have much larger volume and content than online games”, leading to the question of whether single-player games make players more involved than online games, and guiding to the conclusion.

Advantages

The logical structure of Pyramid Thinking has three advantages: compared with networked thinking, it is easier to understand, remember, and focus. Its introduction structure can transition from known background information to unknown conclusions, enabling the audience to gradually understand the topic. In the vertical structure, the conclusion precedes, followed by evidence support, conforming to a deductive or inductive logical structure, with clear logic. In the horizontal structure, deduction or induction of evidence is organized in a reasonable sequence, making information easier to remember and understand, helping to form a comprehensive and strong chain of reasoning.