Thinking as an object of study of logic (page 1 of 5)

Introductory section. Logic as a science

Logic has a long and rich history, inextricably linked with the history of the development of society as a whole.

The emergence of logic as a theory was preceded by the practice of thinking going back thousands of years. With the development of labor, material and production activities of people, there was a gradual improvement and development of their thinking abilities, especially the ability to abstraction and inference. And this, sooner or later, but inevitably should have led to the fact that the object of research became thinking itself with its forms and laws.

History shows that individual logical problems appeared before the human mind over 2.5 thousand years ago - first in Ancient India and Ancient China. They then receive more complete development in Ancient Greece and Rome. Only gradually does a more or less coherent system of logical knowledge take shape and an independent science take shape.

What are the reasons for the emergence of logic? There are two main ones. One of them is the origin and initial development of sciences

, especially astronomy and mathematics. This process dates back to the 6th century. BC e. and receives its most complete development in Ancient Greece. Born in the struggle against mythology and religion, science was based on theoretical thinking, involving inferences and evidence. Hence the need to study the nature of thinking itself as a means of cognition.

Logic arose primarily as an attempt to identify and justify those requirements that scientific thinking must satisfy in order for its results to correspond to reality.

Another, perhaps even more important reason, which is especially useful for lawyers to know, is the development of oratory

, including the judiciary, which flourished under the conditions of ancient Greek democracy. The greatest Roman orator and scientist M. Cicero, speaking about the power of the orator, the owner of the “divine gift” of eloquence, emphasized: “He can safely remain even among armed enemies, protected not so much by his staff as by his title of orator; he can, with his word, arouse the indignation of his fellow citizens and bring down punishment on the guilty of crime and deception, and save the innocent from trial and punishment by the power of his talent; he is able to motivate timid and indecisive people to heroism, is able to lead them out of error, is able to inflame them against scoundrels and calm the grumbling against worthy men; he knows how, finally, with one word he can both excite and calm any human passions when the circumstances of the case require it.”4

In addition to political and solemn speeches, the development of eloquence was especially promoted by the multitude, variety and significance of judicial cases. Well-prepared judicial speeches revealed an enormous power of persuasion that shook the minds of the listeners and, at the same time, great coercive power. She literally forced them to lean towards one opinion or another, to draw one conclusion or another.

Logic also arose as an attempt to reveal the “secret” of this coercive power of speeches. It was necessary to identify and understand what exactly its source is, what it is based on, and, finally, to show what properties speech should have in order to convince listeners, and at the same time force them to agree or disagree with something, to recognize to recognize something as true or not to recognize it.

According to Cicero, Greece “truly burned with a passion for eloquence and was famous for it for a long time...”5. It is no coincidence that it was Ancient Greece that became the birthplace of logic as a science. It is also natural that the term “logic” itself is of ancient Greek origin.

The founder of logic - or, as they sometimes say, the “father of logic” - is considered to be the greatest ancient Greek philosopher and encyclopedist Aristotle (384–322 BC). It should, however, be taken into account that the first fairly detailed and systematic presentation of logical problems was actually given by the earlier ancient Greek philosopher and naturalist Democritus (460 - approximately 370 BC). Among his numerous works was an extensive treatise in three books, “On Logical, or On the Canons” (from the Greek kanon - prescription, rule). Here, not only were the essence of knowledge, its basic forms and criteria of truth revealed, but also the huge role of logical reasoning in knowledge was shown, a classification of judgments was given, some types of inferential knowledge were strongly criticized, and an attempt was made to develop inductive logic - the logic of experimental knowledge.

Unfortunately, this treatise of Democritus, like all the others, has not reached us. However, it was widely used by Aristotle in his development of a grand system of logic. And modern logic directly stems from it.

Aristotle owns a number of treatises on logic, later united under the name “Organon” (from the Greek organon - tool, instrument).

The focus of all his logical reflections is the theory of inferential knowledge

–
deductive reasoning and evidence
. It was developed with such depth and care that it has passed through centuries and has largely retained its meaning to this day. Aristotle also gave a classification of categories - the most general concepts and a classification of judgments close to Democritus; he formulated three fundamental laws of thinking - the law of identity, the law of contradiction and the law of the excluded middle. Aristotle's logical teaching is remarkable in that in embryo it contains, in essence, all the later sections, directions and types of logic - inductive, symbolic, dialectical. True, Aristotle himself called the science he created not “logic,” but primarily “analytics,” although he used the term “logical.” The term “logic” itself entered scientific circulation somewhat later, in the 3rd century. BC e. Moreover, in accordance with the dual meaning of the ancient Greek word “logos” (both “word” and “thought”), he combined both the art of thinking - dialectics, and the art of reasoning - rhetoric. Only with the progress of scientific knowledge did this term begin to designate logical problems proper, and dialectics and rhetoric emerged as other independent branches of knowledge.

Being a gigantic generalization of the previous practice of thinking, Aristotle's logic had a powerful influence on its subsequent development, and above all on scientific knowledge. Thus, under the strong impression of this science, the famous “Elements” of Euclid (about 323–283 BC) were written. They summed up the majestic result of the development of Greek mathematics over the previous three centuries and for the first time the deductive method of constructing a scientific theory was manifested in practice with such force. Assessing the historical significance of Euclid's work as a practical application of logic, A. Einstein emphasized that this amazing work gave the human mind the self-confidence that was so necessary for its subsequent activities.

Aristotle's logic also significantly influenced the development of oratory, especially judicial speeches. Thus, one of the theorists of rhetoric, Hermagorus, around the middle of the 2nd century. BC e. developed the famous “system of finding,” which was the highest achievement of the rhetorical theory of the Hellenistic era. All the variety of judicial “incidents” (cases) is reduced in it to a single scheme of types and varieties (“statutes”), which was used by speakers in speeches.

In turn, logic itself received further development both in Greece and in other countries, both in the West and in the East. This development was caused, on the one hand, by the continuous improvement and enrichment of the practice of thinking (in which scientific knowledge occupied an increasingly greater share), and on the other, by an ever deeper penetration into the essence of thought processes. And it manifested itself not only in an increasingly complete and accurate interpretation of the existing range of problems, but also in the consistent expansion of the subject of logic by putting forward and analyzing more and more new problems. Initially this was expressed, for example, in the detailing and generalization of Aristotle's theory of deduction. Along with the intensified development of the theory of inferences from simple judgments, new forms of deductive inference from complex judgments were also studied. This is, for example, the logic of the Stoics (Zeno, Chrysippus - 3rd century BC). By the way, it is they who have the honor of introducing the term “logic” into scientific circulation.

In the Middle Ages, the problem of general concepts - “universals” - received great public attention. The dispute about them lasted for centuries and had a significant influence on the subsequent development of logic. However, in general, Aristotelian logic acquired a scholastic character, divorced from life and science; the pace of its development has slowed down significantly.

During the Renaissance, logic was experiencing a real crisis. It was regarded as the logic of “artificial thinking” based on faith, which was opposed to natural thinking based on intuition and imagination.

A new, higher stage in the development of logic begins in the 17th century. This stage is organically connected with the creation within its framework, along with deductive logic, of inductive logic.

. It reflects the diverse processes of obtaining general knowledge based on increasingly accumulated empirical material. The need for obtaining such knowledge was most fully realized and expressed in his works by the outstanding English philosopher and natural scientist F. Bacon (1561–1626). He became the founder of inductive logic. “... The logic that we now have is useless for the discovery of knowledge,”6 he pronounced his harsh verdict. Therefore, as if in contrast to Aristotle’s old “Organon,” Bacon wrote “The New Organon...”, where he outlined inductive logic, which he regarded as the “art of discovery.” He paid his main attention to the development of inductive methods for determining the causal dependence of phenomena. This is Bacon's great merit. However, the doctrine of induction he created, ironically, turned out to be not a denial of previous logic, but its further enrichment and development. It contributed to the creation of a generalized theory of inference. And this is natural, because, as will be shown below, induction and deduction do not exclude, but presuppose each other and are in organic unity. Bacon’s dreams of creating a logic of “scientific discovery” also turned out to be unrealistic.

Inductive logic was later systematized and developed by the English philosopher and scientist J. St. Mill (1806–1873) in his two-volume work “A System of Syllogistic and Inductive Logic.” It significantly influenced the further development of scientific knowledge and contributed to its achievement of new heights.

The needs of scientific knowledge not only in the inductive, but also in the deductive method in the 17th century. most fully embodied by the French philosopher and scientist R. Descartes (1596–1650). In his main work, “Discourse on the Method...”, based primarily on data from mathematics, he emphasized the importance of rational deduction as the main method of scientific knowledge.

Followers of Descartes from the monastery in Port-Royal, A. Arno and P. Nicole, created the work “Logic, or the Art of Thinking.” It became known as the Port-Royal Logic and was used for a long time as a textbook on this science. In it, the authors went far beyond the boundaries of traditional logic and paid main attention to the methodology of scientific knowledge and the logic of discovery. Logic was considered by them as a cognitive tool of all sciences. The creation of such “extended logics” became typical in the 19th–20th centuries.

Russian scientists made a well-known contribution to the development of traditional formal logic. Thus, already in the first treatises on logic, starting around the 10th century. attempts were made to independently comment on the works of Aristotle and other scientists. Original logical concepts in Russia were developed in the 18th century. and were associated primarily with the names of M. Lomonosov (1711–1765) and A. Radishchev (1749–1802). The heyday of logical research in our country dates back to the end of the 19th century. Thus, M. Karinsky (1840–1917) created an original general theory of inferences - both deductive and inductive. The works of his student L. Rutkovsky (1859–1920) were devoted primarily to the main types of inferences, their further development, and represented, in fact, a special case of a more general theory of logical relations. S. Povarnin (1870–1952) sought to develop a general theory of relations in logic. Traditional logic received further development during the years of Soviet power. It is being successfully developed to this day.

Task No. 1

Check the accuracy of the following evidence and refutations:

A)
If there had been no Columbus, America would still have been discovered.
If Newton had not existed, the law of universal gravitation would have been discovered by someone else. This means that every great person can be replaced by another. Therefore, humanity can do without great people. If there had been no Columbus, America would still have been discovered.

Yes, sooner or later, but his greatness lies in the fact that he finally got to America (although he was looking for India, like many others at that time).

If Newton had not existed, the law of universal gravitation would have been discovered by someone else.

Yes, sooner or later, but his greatness lies in the fact that he understood the pattern of an apple falling depending on the law of universal gravitation (although apples fell on the heads of others).

This means that every great person can be replaced by another

No, because not everyone else will get to America, and not everyone else will understand why the apple still falls down.

Therefore, humanity can do without great people.

No, greatness lies precisely in the fact that their discoveries have global significance and influence the development of all mankind.

B) The novel by writer
N is trustworthy because N is truthful.
And his writings testify to the writer’s veracity. Incorrect, since it is stated that OTHER works are true, and not this particular novel.

C) In his defense speech, the lawyer convincingly showed that the main argument on which the prosecution is based, namely the expert’s fingerprint report on the match between the fingerprints found at the crime scene and the fingerprints of the accused, was carried out unskillfully.

Based on this, the lawyer argued that the defendant was in fact innocent.

Incorrect, because an unqualified expert opinion cannot yet mean that the fingerprints do not belong to the defendant.

Logical mental operations

Logical mental operations consist of:

comparisons,
abstractions,
generalizations
specification,
analysis,
synthesis.

Through comparison we can understand the reason for our failure and subsequently pay due attention to the problem and the conditions under which it was created.

The process of abstraction allows one to divert the attention of one object from other closely related objects. Abstraction makes it possible to see an object, determine its essence and give your own definition of this object. Abstraction refers to human mental activity. It allows us to comprehend the phenomenon, touching on its most significant characteristic features. By abstracting from problems, a person learns the truth.

Generalization allows you to combine similar objects and phenomena based on common characteristics. Typically, generalization is used to summarize or draw up rules.

The thought process of concretization is completely opposite to generalization. It serves for correct awareness of reality, not allowing thinking to break away from the real perception of phenomena. Concretization does not allow our knowledge to acquire abstract images, which in reality become useless.

Our brain uses analysis to separate in detail an object or phenomenon that is necessary for us. By analyzing a phenomenon or object, we can identify its most necessary elements, which will further help us improve our skills and knowledge.

We recommend that you read: How to negotiate with a client or contractor: take the rope from the tiger

Synthesis, on the contrary, allows you to create an overall picture of what is happening from small details. With its help, you can compare current events by going through several individual facts. An example of synthesis is puzzles. When assembling a mosaic, we imagine one or another part of it, putting aside what is unnecessary and adding what is necessary.