Test work specifics of logic as a science. Logical thinking - development of logic The place of logic in the system of sciences about thinking
LOGIC AS SCIENCE
1. Subject of logic
2. The emergence and development of logic
3. Language of logic
4. Forms and laws of thinking
1. Subject of logic
Key words: logic, thinking, sensory cognition, abstract thinking.
Logic (from Greek: logos - word, concept, reason) is the science of the forms and laws of correct thinking. The mechanism of thinking is studied by a number of sciences: psychology, epistemology, cybernetics, etc. The subject of scientific logical analysis is the forms, techniques and laws of thinking with the help of which a person cognizes the world around him and himself. Thinking is the process of indirectly reflecting reality in the form of ideal images.
Forms and techniques of thinking that contribute to the knowledge of truth. A person acquires knowledge about the phenomena of the world in the process of active, purposeful cognition: the subject - the object interaction of a person with fragments of reality. Cognition is represented by several levels, a number of forms and techniques that lead the researcher to correct conclusions, when the truth of the initial knowledge presupposes the truth of the conclusions.
We know that the first level is sensory knowledge. It is carried out on the basis of the senses, their comprehension and synthesis. Let us recall the main forms of sensory knowledge:
1) sensation;
2) perception;
3) presentation.
This level of cognition has a number of important techniques, among which are the analysis and systematization of sensations, arranging impressions into a holistic image, memorization and recollection of previously acquired knowledge, imagination, etc. Sensory cognition provides knowledge about the external, individual properties and qualities of phenomena. Man strives to understand the deep properties and essences of things and phenomena, the laws of existence of the world and society. Therefore, he resorts to studying the problems that interest him at an abstract theoretical level. At this level, such forms of abstract cognition develop as:
a) concept;
b) judgment;
c) inference.
When resorting to these forms of cognition, a person is guided by such techniques as abstraction, generalization, abstraction from the particular, isolation of the essential, derivation of new knowledge from previously known, etc.
The difference between abstract thinking and sensory-figurative reflection and knowledge of the world. As a result of sensory cognition, a person develops knowledge obtained directly from experience in the form of ideal images based on sensations, experiences, impressions, etc. Abstract thinking marks the transition from the study of individual aspects of objects to the comprehension of laws, general connections and relationships. At this stage of cognition, fragments of reality are reproduced without direct contact with the sensory-objective world by replacing them with abstractions. Abstracting from a single object and temporary state, thinking is able to highlight in them the general and repetitive, essential and necessary.
Abstract thinking is inextricably linked with language. Language is the main means of fixing thoughts. Not only substantive meanings are expressed in linguistic form, but also logical ones. With the help of language, a person formulates, expresses and conveys thoughts, records knowledge.
It is important to understand that our thinking indirectly reflects reality: through a series of interconnected knowledge through logical sequences, it becomes possible to arrive at new knowledge without directly coming into contact with the objective-sensory world.
The importance of logic in cognition follows from the possibilities of deducing reliable knowledge not only by a formal logical way, but also by a dialectical one.
The task of logical action is, first of all, to discover such rules and forms of thinking that, regardless of specific meanings, will always lead to true conclusions.
Logic studies the structures of thinking that lead to a consistent transition from one judgment to another and form a consistent system of reasoning. It performs an important methodological function. Its essence is to develop research programs and technologies suitable for obtaining objective knowledge. This helps equip a person with the basic means, methods and methods of scientific and theoretical knowledge.
The second main function of logic is analytical-critical, implementing which it acts as a means of detecting errors in reasoning and monitoring the correctness of thought construction.
Logic is also capable of performing epistemological tasks. Without stopping at the construction of formal connections and elements of thinking, logical knowledge is able to adequately explain the meaning and meaning of language expressions, express the relationship between the knowing subject and the cognitive object, and also reveal the logical-dialectical development of the objective world.
Tasks and exercises
1. The same cube, on the sides of which there are numbers (0, 1, 4, 5, 6, 8), is in three different positions.
| 0 |
| 4 |
| 0 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Introduction
In the system of humanities logic has a special place, its importance cannot be overestimated. Logic helps to prove true conclusions and refute false ones; it teaches us to think clearly, concisely, correctly; it is the observance of its rules that protects us from erroneous conclusions. In fact, logic was created by Aristotle as a science that allows one to distinguish correct definitions and conclusions from incorrect ones and thereby reveal errors in the reasoning and public speeches of speakers. Currently, interest in logic is caused by many circumstances, and primarily by a significant expansion of the sphere of logical knowledge, the specific area of application of which is law.
High requirements for lawmaking, law enforcement practice and legal theory also apply to the professional thinking of a lawyer and are relevant in a modern legal society. At the same time, being logically prepared, a lawyer will be able to accurately and convincingly build his arguments, identify inconsistencies in the testimony of victims, witnesses, suspects, and in written sources. Logic will help him convincingly refute the erroneous arguments of his opponents, correctly draw up a work plan, official documents, build investigative leads, etc.
Obviously, the study of logic by a lawyer cannot replace special legal knowledge. However, it helps ensure that every future lawyer becomes good specialist in your area. No wonder the famous Russian lawyer A.F. Koni believed that an educated lawyer should be a person in whom general education comes before special education. And in the system general education One of the leading places belongs to formal-logical preparation. That is why, according to the outstanding domestic teacher K.D. Ushinsky, logic should stand on the threshold of all sciences. At the same time, knowledge of the rules and laws of logic is not the ultimate goal of its study. The ultimate goal of studying logic is the ability to apply its rules and laws in the process of thinking.
1. The subject of logic as a science
Term « LOGICS» comes from the ancient Greek word lpgykYu- “the science of reasoning”, “the art of reasoning” - from lgpt- which means “thought”, “mind”, “word”, “speech”, “reasoning”, “regularity”, and is currently used in three main meanings. Firstly, to designate any objective pattern in the interconnection of phenomena, for example, “logic of facts”, “logic of things”, “logic of history” and so on. Secondly, to designate a pattern in the development of thought, for example, “logic of reasoning”, “logic of thinking” and so on. Thirdly, logic is the science of the laws of correct thinking. Let us consider logic in its final meaning.
Thinking is studied by many sciences: psychology, cybernetics, physiology and others. The peculiarity of logic is that its subject is the forms and methods of correct thinking. So, logics - This is the science of the methods and forms of correct thinking. The main type of thinking is conceptual (or abstract-logical). This is what logic studies, that is, the object of logic is abstract thinking.
Abstract thinking- this is the process of rational reflection of the objective world in concepts, judgments, conclusions, hypotheses, theories, which allows one to penetrate into the essence, into the natural connections of reality, and creatively transform it, first in theory, and then in practice.
As you know, all objects, phenomena and processes have both content and form. Our knowledge of form is quite diverse. Logical form is also understood in a variety of ways. Our thoughts are composed of certain meaningful parts. The way they are connected represents the form of thought.
Thus, various objects are reflected in abstract thinking in the same way - as a certain connection of their essential features, that is, in the form of a concept. The form of judgments reflects the relationships between objects and their properties. Changes in the properties of objects and relationships between them are reflected in the form of inferences.
Consequently, each of the main forms of abstract thinking has something in common that does not depend on the specific content of thoughts, namely: the way of connecting the elements of thought - features in a concept, concepts in a judgment and judgments in an inference. The content of thoughts determined by these connections does not exist on its own, but in certain logical forms: concepts, judgments and conclusions, each of which has its own specific structure.
Take, for example, two statements: “Some lawyers are teachers” and “Some socially dangerous acts are crimes against the personal property of citizens.” Let's replace all their meaningful components with symbols. Let's say that what we think about is the Latin letter S, and what we think about S is the Latin letter P. As a result, in both cases we get the same elements of thought: “Some S are P.” This is the logical form of the above judgments. It is obtained as a result of abstraction from specific content.
Thus, logical form(or a form of abstract thinking) is a way of connecting the elements of thought, its structure, thanks to which the content exists and reflects reality.
In the real process of thinking, the content and form of thought exist in inextricable unity. There is no pure, formless content, no pure, contentless logical forms. For example, the above logical form of the proposition “Some S are P” still has some content. From it we learn that every object of thought, denoted by the letter S (subject), has a characteristic, denoted by the letter P (predicate). Moreover, the word “some” shows that the attribute P belongs only to part of the elements that make up the subject of thought. This is “formal content”.
However, for the purpose of special analysis, we can abstract from the specific content of a thought, making its form the subject of study. The study of logical forms, regardless of their specific content, is the most important task of the science of logic. Hence its name - formal.
It should be borne in mind that formal logic, while studying the forms of thinking, does not ignore its content. Forms, as has already been canceled, are filled with specific content and are associated with a very specific, specific subject area. Outside of this specific content, form cannot exist, and in itself does not determine anything from a practical point of view. The form is always meaningful, and the content is always formalized. The distinction between its truth and correctness is connected with these aspects of thinking. Truth refers to the content of thoughts, and correctness refers to their form.
Considering the truth of thinking, formal (two-valued) logic proceeds from the fact that truth is understood as the content of thought that corresponds to reality itself. The concept of “truth” in the legal sphere is closely related to the concept of “truth” (“I undertake to tell the truth and only the truth!”). Truthful is not only true, but also correct, honest, just. If the thought in its content does not correspond to reality, then it is false. From here truth of thinking- this is its fundamental property, manifested in the ability to reproduce reality as it is, to correspond to it in its content. A falsity- the property of thinking to distort this content, to pervert it.
Another important characteristic thinking is its correctness. Correct thinking- this is its fundamental property, which also manifests itself in relation to reality. It means the ability of thinking to reproduce the objective structure of being in the structure of thought, to correspond to the actual relationships of objects and phenomena. Conversely, incorrect thinking means its ability to distort structural connections and relationships of being.
Formal logic is abstracted from the specific content of thoughts, and not on the content in general. Therefore, it takes into account the truth or falsity of the judgments being studied. However, she shifts the center of gravity to correct thinking. Moreover, the logical structures themselves are considered regardless of their logical content. Since the task of logic includes the analysis of precisely correct thinking, it is also called logical by the name of this science. Correct (logical) thinking has the following essential features or PROPERTIES: certainty, consistency, consistency and validity.
Certainty- this is the property of correct thinking to reproduce in the structure of thought the real signs and relationships of the objects and phenomena themselves, their relative stability. It finds its expression in the accuracy and clarity of thought, the absence of confusion and confusion in the elements of thought and the thoughts themselves.
Consistency- the property of correct thinking to avoid contradictions in the structure of thought that do not exist in the reflected reality. It manifests itself in the inadmissibility of logical contradictions in strict reasoning.
Subsequence- the property of correct thinking to reproduce by the structure of thought those structural connections and relationships that are inherent in reality itself, the ability to follow the “logic of things and events.” It is revealed in the consistency of thought with itself.
Validity there is the property of correct thinking to reflect objective cause-and-effect relationships and relationships between objects and phenomena of the surrounding world. It manifests itself in establishing the truth or falsity of a thought on the basis of other thoughts, the truth of which was previously established.
The indicated essential signs of correct thinking are not arbitrary. They are the result of human interaction with the outside world. They can neither be identified with the fundamental properties of reality itself, nor separated from them. Correct thinking, reflecting, first of all, the objective laws of the world, arises and exists spontaneously, long before the emergence of any rules. The logical rules themselves are only milestones on the path to comprehending the features of correct thinking, the laws operating in them, which are immeasurably richer than any, even the most complete, set of such rules. But the rules are developed on the basis of these laws precisely in order to regulate subsequent mental activity, to ensure its correctness consciously.
Thus, the logical correctness of reasoning is determined by the laws of abstract thinking. Violation of the requirements arising from them leads to logical errors. Law of Thinking- this is a necessary, essential, stable connection of thoughts in the process of reasoning. These laws are the same for all people, regardless of their social and national origin. Logical laws operate independently of the will of people and are not created at their request. They are a reflection of the connections between things in the objective world. In this case, a person not only enters the sphere of action of a certain logical law, not only passively submits to its regulatory influence, but also develops a conscious attitude towards objectively occurring thought processes. Knowledge of the laws of logic, determination of their objective basis allows us to put forward and formulate its principles. The principles of formal logic, like the principles of any science, represent the unity of the objective and the subjective. On the one hand, they express the objective content of the laws of logic, on the other hand, they act as the rules of human mental activity. It is through the conscious formulation of principles that the laws of logic become regulators of people’s mental activity.
Thus, formal logic, in order to be a means of discovering truth, must, based on the study of the formal structures of abstract thinking, preserve and take into account the logical correctness of reasoning determined by logical laws.
What aspects of abstract thinking does formal logic study? Firstly, it considers abstract thinking as a tool for understanding the world, as a means of obtaining formally true knowledge.
Secondly, she is interested in the practical effectiveness and correctness of indirect (inferential) knowledge obtained from previously established and verified truths without recourse to experience, but only as a result of taking into account formal logical laws and applying the corresponding rules of abstract thinking.
Thirdly, abstract thinking is considered as a formal process that has its own special structure, which differs from the structure of the objectively true content of thinking.
That is why formal logic allows one to abstract from the content of an object and focus attention only on the forms in which a particular thought process occurs. These aspects of the interdependence of Logic and thinking determine the features of formal logic as a science.
So, formal logic- is the science of generally valid forms and means of thought necessary for rational knowledge of existence and its specific types. Generally valid forms of thought include concepts, judgments, and inferences. The generally valid means of thought are rules (principles), logical operations, techniques and procedures, formal logical laws underlying them, that is, everything that serves the purpose of implementing correct abstract thinking.
Consequently, the subject of formal logic is:
1) forms of the thought process - concept, judgment, inference, hypothesis, proof, etc.;
2) the laws to which abstract thinking is subject in the process of cognition of the objective world and thinking itself;
3) methods for obtaining new inferential knowledge - similarities, differences, accompanying changes, residues, etc.;
4) ways of proving the truth or falsity of the acquired knowledge - direct or indirect confirmation, refutation, etc.
Thus, logic in the broadest understanding of its subject explores the structure of abstract thinking and reveals the underlying patterns. However, abstract thinking, generalized, indirectly and actively reflecting reality, is inextricably linked with language. Linguistic expressions are that reality, the structure and method of use of which gives us knowledge not only about the content of thoughts, but also about their form, about the laws of thinking. Therefore, logic sees one of its main tasks in the study of linguistic expressions and the relationships between them.
2. Specifics of logic as a science
logic thinking formal abstract
Logic as a science includes such sections as formal logic, dialectical, symbolic, modal and others. The purpose of this work is formal logic.
The principles and rules of logic are universal in nature, since in any science conclusions are constantly drawn, concepts are defined and clarified, statements are formulated, facts are generalized, hypotheses are tested, etc. From this point of view, every science can be considered as applied logic. But especially close connections exist between logic and those sciences that are engaged in the study of human mental activity, both individually and socially.
A clear delineation of the spheres of research in the sciences of spiritual activity is directly related to the definition of the subject and methods of research in logic.
The view of logic as a technology of thinking also has a number of attractive features, if only because in practice we most need to skillfully use the rules of reasoning, recommendations on how to effectively find arguments (premises for conclusions), build and test hypotheses, - in a word, everything that is characterized as the art of thinking or guessing.
PnatureAlawslogic as science in that they reflect the basic, constantly occurring connections and relationships that exist in the real world. This is why logic can be used to their studying. But real world, its specific patterns serve as the subject of study of specific natural, social and technical sciences. Through the analysis of concepts, judgments and inferences used in these sciences, logic plays its role - a theoretical tool that serves to control the correctness and validity of reasoning and thereby contributes to the search and proof of truth.
The applied role of logic in specific sciences is not limited only to the direct analysis of reasoning. Its methods are widely used in the methodology of scientific knowledge to analyze such forms of scientific thinking as hypothesis, law, theory, as well as to reveal the logical structure of explanation and prediction, as the most important functions of any science. This direction of applied research in recent decades has given rise to logic of science, in which the concepts, laws and methods of logic are successfully applied to study not only purely logical, but also methodological problems arising in scientific knowledge.
IN modern conditions development of social processes in Russia, logic as a science does not lose its relevance. This is due to two main circumstances. One of them is peculiarities modern stage development of society itself. This stage is characterized by an ever-increasing role of science in the development of all aspects of social life, its penetration into all pores of the social organism. Accordingly, the importance of logic, which studies the means and laws of scientific knowledge, increases. And in the conditions of modernization of the Russian economy, which requires understanding new, complex, diverse economic and social processes occurring in the life of society, the role of science, and therefore logic, increases many times over.
Another circumstance - new, high-quality breakthroughscientific and technicalth progress. In the 21st century, science and technology open up previously unknown horizons of knowledge to society, and basic research allow you to penetrate into the secrets of the universe. At the same time, the importance of abstract thinking, and in this regard the growing importance of logic that studies its structure, forms and laws, cannot be overestimated. In modern conditions of the unfolding of a new stage of the scientific and technological revolution associated with profound structural and information changes in production and management, the implementation of the achievements of cybernetics and nanoindustry, the need for logic, especially symbolic, becomes even more tangible and necessary.
3. The place of logic amongother sciences that study thinking
Logic is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon of the spiritual life of mankind. Currently, there are a great many different branches of scientific knowledge. Depending on the object of study, they are divided into sciences about nature - natural sciences and sciences about society - social sciences. In comparison with them, the uniqueness of logic lies in the fact that its object is thinking.
What is the place of logic among other sciences that study thinking?
Philosophy studies thinking in general. It solves a fundamental philosophical question related to the relationship of man and his thinking to the world around him.
Psychology studies thinking as one of the mental processes along with emotions, will, etc. It reveals the interaction of thinking with them in the course of practical activity and scientific knowledge, analyzes the incentive motives of human mental activity, reveals the peculiarities of thinking of children, adults, mentally normal people and persons with disabilities.
Physiology reveals material, physiological processes, explores the patterns of these processes, their physicochemical and biological mechanisms.
Cybernetics reveals general patterns of control and communication in a living organism, technical device and in a person’s thinking, associated primarily with his management activities.
Linguistics shows the inextricable connection between thinking and language, their unity and difference, their interaction with each other. It reveals ways of expressing thoughts using linguistic means.
The uniqueness of logic as a science of thinking lies precisely in the fact that it considers this object common to a number of sciences from the point of view of its functions and structure, that is, its role and meaning in cognition and practical activity, and at the same time from the point of view its constituent elements, as well as connections and relationships between them. This is its own, specific subject of logic. Therefore, it is defined as the science of the forms and laws of correct thinking leading to truth.
There is an opinion that the ability to reason logically is inherent in people by nature. It is wrong.
But if logical culture is not given to a person by nature, then how is it formed?
A logical culture of thinking is acquired through communication, studying at school and university, and in the process of reading literature. By repeatedly encountering certain methods of reasoning, we gradually assimilate them and begin to understand which of them are correct and which are not. The logical culture of a lawyer increases in the process of his professional activity.
This way of forming a logical culture can be called spontaneous. It is not the best, since people who have not studied logic, as a rule, do not master certain logical techniques, and, in addition, they have different logical cultures, which does not contribute to mutual understanding.
The importance of logic for lawyers.
The specificity of a lawyer’s work lies in the constant use of special logical techniques and methods: definitions and classifications, arguments and refutations, etc. The degree of proficiency in these techniques, methods and other logical means is an indicator of the level of logical culture of a lawyer.
Knowledge of logic is an integral part of legal education. It allows you to correctly build forensic investigative leads, draw up clear plans for investigating crimes, and avoid mistakes when drawing up official documents, protocols, indictments, decisions and resolutions.
Famous lawyers have always used knowledge of logic. In court, they usually did not limit themselves to simple disagreement, for example, with the prosecution’s arguments if they saw a logical error in them. They explained what error had been made, saying that this error was specially considered in logic and had a special name. This argument had an impact on everyone present, even if those present had never studied logic.
Knowledge of the rules and laws of logic is not the ultimate goal of its study. The ultimate goal of studying logic is the ability to apply its rules and laws in the process of thinking.
Truth and logic are interconnected, so the importance of logic cannot be overestimated. Logic helps to prove true conclusions and refute false ones; it teaches you to think clearly, concisely, and correctly. Logic is needed by all people, workers of various professions.
Conclusion
Human thinking is subject to logical laws and proceeds in logical forms, regardless of the science of logic. Many people think logically without knowing its rules. Of course, you can think correctly without studying logic, but you cannot underestimate the practical significance of this science.
The task of logic is to teach a person to consciously apply laws and forms of thinking and, on the basis of this, to think more logically and to correctly understand the world around him. Knowledge of logic improves the culture of thinking, develops the skill of thinking “competently,” and develops a critical attitude towards one’s own and others’ thoughts.
Logic - necessary tool, freeing you from personal, unnecessary memories, helping you find in the mass of information that valuable thing that a person needs. “Any specialist, be he a mathematician, a physician, or a biologist,” needs it. (Anokhin N.K.).
To think logically means to think accurately and consistently, to avoid contradictions in your reasoning, and to be able to identify logical errors. These qualities of thinking are of great importance in any field of scientific and practical activity, including in the work of a lawyer.
Knowledge of logic helps a lawyer prepare a logically coherent, well-reasoned speech, reveal contradictions in testimony, and so on. All this is important in the work of a lawyer aimed at strengthening law and order.
List of usedliterature
1. Geitmanova A.D. Logic textbook. Moscow 1995
2. Demidov I.V. Logic - training manual Moscow 2000
3. Ruzavin G.I. Logic and argumentation. Moscow 1997
4. Brief dictionary according to logic. Edited by Gorsky. Moscow Enlightenment 1991
5. Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A. Logics. 5th edition 2004
Posted on Allbest.ru
Similar documents
Logic as an independent science. Subject and meaning of logic. Theoretical problems of logic. The main stages of the development of logic. Logic and thinking. The subject of formal logic and its features. Thinking and language. Basic rules of scientific research.
course of lectures, added 10/09/2008
Logic as the science of the forms and laws of correct thinking. The difference between abstract thinking and sensory-figurative reflection and knowledge of the world. The meaning of logic in cognition, the task of logical action, its two main functions. The emergence and development of logic.
lecture, added 10/05/2009
The specifics of logic as a science, its content and specific features, its place in the system of sciences. The essence of the basic laws of thinking, their features. Laws of formal logic: excluded middle, sufficient reason, main requirements arising from them.
test, added 12/27/2010
The concept of thinking, its laws and forms. Human mental activity. Basic forms of sensory knowledge. Logic as the science of thinking. Logic is formal and dialectical. The role and logic in legal activity. Rules of logical inference.
abstract, added 09.29.2008
Formal logic: concept, meaning, laws. The origin and content of dialectical logic. The main features of the principle of considering a subject in its development and change. The essence of dialectical negation, the ascent from the abstract to the concrete.
test, added 11/06/2013
Subject and meaning of logic. Thinking as a logical stage of cognition. Subject and predicate are the main elements of thought. The relationship between formal and dialectical logic. Social purpose and functions of logic. Logical forms and rules for connecting our thoughts.
abstract, added 10/31/2010
The essence of thinking in the cognitive system, methods of mutual understanding, logic of explanation. Subject and semantic categories of traditional formal logic. Stages of the formation of logic as a science. A simple judgment and its logical analysis. Basics of the theory of argumentation.
course of lectures, added 03/02/2011
Sensation, perception and representation as forms of sensory cognition. Features and laws of abstract thinking, the relationship of its forms: concepts, judgments and inferences. The main functions and composition of the language, the specifics of the language of logic. History of logic as a science.
test, added 05/14/2011
Subject, object and meaning of logic. Cognition as a dialectical process of reflecting the world in people's minds. Concept, judgment and inference. Language as a sign information system, which performs the function of generating, storing and transmitting information.
abstract, added 09/13/2015
Thinking as an object of logic. Subject of the science of logic. Obtaining true knowledge. Stages of development of logic. Direct and indirect knowledge. Laws of abstract thinking. Methods for obtaining new inferential knowledge. Characteristics of correct thinking.
Classification of methods of argumentation 2. The task of argumentation is to develop a belief or opinion in the truth of a statement. Conviction and opinion can, of course, be developed not only on the basis of argumentation or observation and practical activity, but also through suggestion on the basis of faith, etc. The statement that is justified is called the thesis of the argument.
Share your work on social networks
If this work does not suit you, at the bottom of the page there is a list of similar works. You can also use the search button
PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2
Introduction. Specifics of logic as a science
1. Argumentation and its main forms
1.1.Absolute and comparative justification
1.2. Classification of methods of argumentation
2. Practical part
2.1. Example No. 1
2.2. Example No. 2
2.3. Example No. 3
2.4. Example No. 4
2.5. Example No. 5
Conclusion
References
Introduction. Specifics of logic as a science.
Logic got its name from the ancient Greek word “logos”, which meant, on the one hand, word, speech, and on the other, thought, meaning, reason.
Logic is one of ancient sciences, arose in the problematic field of philosophy, more than 2300 years ago, and in the works of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, for the first time showed how thinking should be done in order for the truth to be achieved.
Emerging within the framework of ancient philosophy as a single body of knowledge about the surrounding world, not yet divided into separate sciences, it was already considered as a unique, namely rational, or speculative, form of philosophy - in contrast to natural philosophy (philosophy of nature) and ethics (social philosophy).
In its subsequent development, logic became an increasingly complex, multifaceted phenomenon of the spiritual life of mankind. Therefore, it is natural that in different historical periods it received different assessments from different thinkers. Some spoke of it as a kind of technical means, a practical “instrument of thought” (“Organon”). Others saw in it a special “art” - the art of thinking and reasoning. Still others found in it a kind of “regulator” - a set or set of rules, regulations and norms of mental activity (“Canon”). There were even attempts to present it as a kind of “medicine” - a means of improving the mind.
All such assessments undoubtedly contain some truth. But only a share. The main thing that characterizes logic, especially at the present time, is that it is a science - and, moreover, a very developed and important one. And like any science, it is capable of performing various functions in society, therefore, acquiring various “faces”. What place does logic occupy in the system of sciences?
Nowadays there are a great many different branches of scientific knowledge. Depending on the object of study, they are known to be divided primarily into natural sciences - natural sciences (astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) and social sciences - social sciences (history, sociology, legal sciences).
In comparison with them, the uniqueness of logic lies in the fact that its object is thinking. This is the science of thinking. But if we give logic only this definition and put an end to it, we will make a serious mistake. The fact is that thinking itself, being a very complex phenomenon, is the object of study not only of logic, but also of a number of other sciences - philosophy, psychology, physiology of higher nervous activity of man, cybernetics, linguistics...
What is the specificity of logic in comparison with these sciences that study thinking? What, in other words, is its own subject of study?
Philosophy, the most important section of which is the theory of knowledge, studies thinking as a whole. It solves a fundamental philosophical question related to the relationship of a person, and therefore his thinking, to the world around him: how does our thinking relate to the world itself, can we have a correct mental picture of it in our knowledge?
Psychology studies thinking as one of the mental processes along with emotions, will, etc. It reveals interaction with them; thinking in the course of practical activity and scientific knowledge, analyzes the incentive motives of human mental activity, identifies the characteristics of the thinking of children, adults, mentally normal people and persons with certain mental disorders.
The physiology of human higher nervous activity reveals the material, namely physiological processes occurring in the cerebral cortex of the human brain, explores the patterns of these processes, their physicochemical and biological mechanisms.
Cybernetics reveals general patterns of control and communication in a living organism, a technical device, and, consequently, in human thinking, associated primarily with his management activities.
Linguistics shows the inextricable connection between thinking and language, their unity and difference, their interaction with each other. It reveals ways of expressing thoughts using linguistic means.
The uniqueness of logic, as a science of thinking, lies precisely in the fact that it considers this object, common to a number of sciences, from the point of view of its functions and structure, that is, from the point of view of its role and meaning as a means of cognition of reality and at the same time the same time from the point of view of its constituent elements and the connections between them. This is its own, specific subject of logic.
Therefore, logic is the science of the forms and laws of correct thinking leading to truth or the science of the laws to which correct thinking is subject. Correct thinking is thinking with the help of which truth is achieved.
1. Argumentation and its main forms.
Argumentation is one of the ways to substantiate statements (judgments, hypotheses, concepts, etc.). Statements can be substantiated by direct appeal to reality (through observation, experiment and other types of practical activities), as well as with the help of already known provisions (arguments) and means of logic. In the second case, justification is also carried out by referring to reality, but directly, but indirectly.
Argumentation is a complete or partial substantiation of a statement using other statements. It is assumed that in good (correct) arguments, other statements are fully or at least partially justified and the position being justified logically follows from them, or at least they confirm it.
The task of argumentation is to develop a belief or opinion in the truth of a statement. Conviction is complete confidence in the truth, opinion is also confidence, but not complete. Conviction and opinion can, of course, be developed not only on the basis of argumentation or observation and practical activity, but also through suggestion, on the basis of faith, etc.
Argumentation is the process of forming a belief or opinion regarding the truth of a statement (judgment, hypothesis, concept, etc.) using other statements.
The statement that is justified is called the thesis of the argument. The statements used to substantiate a thesis are called arguments, or reasons. The logical structure of the argument, i.e. a way of logical substantiation of a thesis through arguments is called a form of argumentation.
A special case of argumentation is evidence.
Proof is an argumentation in which the arguments are statements whose truth has been established, and the form is demonstrative reasoning (reasoning that ensures a true conclusion with true premises). Argumentation can be divided into evidentiary and non-evidential.
There are three types of non-evidential (correct) arguments:
1) arguments are not reliable, but only plausible statements, and the form is demonstrative reasoning. The thesis in such an argument is only plausible due to the unreliability of the arguments.
2) arguments in which the arguments are reliable statements, and the form is non-demonstrative reasoning. In these arguments, the thesis is only a plausible statement due to the non-demonstrative form.
3) In non-demonstrative argumentation of the third type, the arguments are fully justified statements, and the form is non-demonstrative reasoning.
On another basis, two types of (correct) argumentation can be distinguished: direct and indirect types of argumentation. In direct argumentation, reasoning proceeds from arguments to the thesis. With indirect argumentation, you need to substantiate a certain statement (thesis). Indirect arguments can be evidential or non-evidential.
1.1.Absolute and comparative justification.
The structure of absolute and comparative justification. In the very in a general sense to substantiate a statement means to give those convincing or sufficient reasons by virtue of which it should be accepted.
Absolute justification is the presentation of convincing arguments by virtue of which the justified position should be accepted. This justification refers to a single statement and represents a body of evidence in support of it.
Comparative justification is a system of convincing arguments in support of the fact that it is better to accept the justified position than another position opposed to it. It concerns a pair of related propositions and is a system of arguments in support of why one of the propositions should be accepted rather than the other.
The basis of justification is the set of arguments given in support of the position being justified.
Argumentation techniques can be, and almost always are, richer and more incisive than justification techniques. But all methods of argumentation that go beyond the scope of methods of justification are obviously less universal and, in most audiences, less convincing than methods of justification.
1.2. Classification of methods of argumentation.
Universal and contextual argumentation.
It is proposed to use the nature of the audience affected by the argumentation as the basis for classification. Then all methods of argumentation can be divided into universal and contextual.
Universal argumentation is applicable to any audience. Universal methods of argumentation include direct (empirical) confirmation, indirect empirical confirmation (in particular, confirmation of consequences), various methods of theoretical argumentation: deductive justification, systemic argumentation, methodological argumentation, etc.
Contextual argumentation is only effective with certain audiences. Contextual methods of argumentation cover arguments to tradition and authority, to intuition and faith, to common sense and taste, etc.
The line between universal and contextual argumentation is relative. Methods of argumentation that seem universally applicable at first glance may turn out to be ineffective for a specific audience. Conversely, some contextual arguments, like arguments from tradition or intuition, can be persuasive to almost any audience.
Universal argumentation is sometimes characterized as "rational" and contextual argumentation as "non-rational" or even "irrational". Such a distinction is not, as will be clear from what follows, justified. It sharply narrows the sphere of the “rational”, excluding from it most of the humanitarian and practical reasoning, unthinkable without the use of “classics” (authorities), continuation of tradition, appeal to common sense, taste, etc.
Empirical and theoretical argumentation. All the diverse methods of universal argumentation can be divided into empirical and theoretical.
Empirical argumentation is argumentation, an integral element of which is a reference to experience, to empirical data.
Theoretical argumentation is argumentation that is based on reasoning and does not directly use references to experience.
The difference between empirical and theoretical argumentation is relative, just as the very boundary between empirical and theoretical knowledge is relative. There are often cases when both references to experience and theoretical reasoning are combined in the same process of argumentation.
General classification. From different ways theoretical argumentation is of particular importance:
*deductive argumentation (derivation of a justified statement from other previously accepted statements),
*systematic argumentation (justification of a statement by including it in a well-tested system of statements, or theory),
*principal verifiability and fundamental refutability (demonstration of the fundamental possibility of empirical confirmation and empirical refutation of the substantiated statement),
*compatibility condition (showing that the position being justified is in good agreement with the laws, principles and theories related to the field of phenomena under study),
*methodological argumentation (substantiation of a statement by reference to the reliable method by which it was obtained).
All of the mentioned methods of universal (empirical and theoretical) and contextual argumentation form the basis of all methods of argumentation, but, of course, they do not exhaust the many possible methods of persuasion.
Direct confirmation is the direct observation of the phenomena referred to in the substantiated statement.
With indirect confirmation, we are talking about confirming the logical consequences of the substantiated statement, and not about direct confirmation of the statement itself.
Deduction and induction. In science, and not only in it, direct observation of what is said in a testable statement is rare. Typically, empirical confirmation is inductive confirmation, and empirical argumentation is in the form of inductive inference.
Depending on whether the conclusion has a connection of logical consequence between its premises and conclusion, two types of conclusions are distinguished: deductive and inductive.
In a deductive inference, the connection between the premises of the conclusion is based on the law of logic, due to which the conclusion logically follows (logically follows) from the premises. Such an inference always leads from true premises to a true conclusion.
In inductive reasoning, the premises and conclusion are not interconnected by the law of logic and the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. The reliability of the premises does not guarantee the reliability of the conclusion inductively derived from them. It follows from the premises not necessarily, but only with some probability. The concept of deduction (deductive inference) is not, as will be shown later, completely clear. Induction (inductive reasoning) is essentially defined as “non-deduction” and is an even less clear concept. It is possible, however, to identify a relatively defined “core” of inductive modes of reasoning. It includes, in particular, incomplete induction, inductive methods for establishing causal relationships, analogy, the so-called inverted laws of logic, etc.
The persuasiveness of inductive generalizations depends on the number of cases cited in support. The broader the basis of induction, the more plausible the inductive conclusion. But sometimes, even with a sufficiently large number of confirmations, an inductive generalization still turns out to be erroneous.
Verification and falsification. Special attention requires the problem of criticizing the hypotheses and theories put forward. If criticism aimed at refuting them is based on empirical data, then, we can say, it is directly related to the topic of their empirical justification.
Falsification, or empirical refutation, manifests itself through the procedure of establishing falsity or logical verification.
According to modern logic, two interrelated operations - confirmation and refutation - are significantly unequal. One contradictory fact is enough to completely refute a general statement, and at the same time, no matter how large a number of confirming examples is capable of once and for all confirming such a statement and turning it into the truth.
The principle of falsification is a law of classical logic, formed at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. he was completely unaffected by criticism of logic, which began in the 20s and became especially active in the 50s. XX century This law is accepted in all known non-classical logical systems, claiming to have a more adequate description of the relation of logical implication.
Falsification as a procedure includes two stages:
* establishing the truth of the conditional connection “if A, then B”, where B is an empirically verifiable consequence;
* establishing the truth of “false B”, i.e. falsity of B. Failure to falsify means failure to establish the falsity of B. The result of this failure is the probabilistic judgment “It is possible that A is true, i.e. IN". Thus, the failure of falsification is an inductive reasoning that has the following scheme:
“if it is true that if A, then B, and false not-B, then A” (“if it is true that if A, then B, and B, then A”)
This scheme coincides with the indirect verification scheme. The failure of the falsification is, however, a weakened verification: in the case. ordinary indirect verification assumes that premise B is a true statement; in a failed falsification, this premise represents only a plausible statement. Thus, the decisive but unsuccessful criticism that Popper highly values and which he opposes as an independent method of verification is in fact only a weakened version of verification.
Positive justification is the usual indirect empirical verification, which is a type of absolute justification. Its result: “Statement A, the consequence of which has been confirmed, is justified.” Critical justification is justification through criticism; his result: “Assertion A is more acceptable than its counterpart, assertion B, because A has withstood harsher criticism than B.” Critical justification is comparative justification: just because proposition A is more resistant to criticism and therefore more justified than proposition B does not mean that A is true or even plausible.
2. Practical part.
2.1. Example No. 1.
1) Type of compatibility: equivalence (identity) differ in their content, but the volumes are the same.
Advance (A) amount of money issued against upcoming payments for material assets, work performed and services provided.
Earnest money (B) a sum of money given by one of the parties to the contract to the other party on account of payments due.
2) Type of compatibility: crossing volumes partially coincide, i.e. contain common elements.
Director (A) head of an institution, enterprise, educational institution.
Accountant (B) accounting specialist; accounting employee (in small enterprises, the duties of an accountant can be performed by a director).
3) Type of compatibility: subordination (subordination) the scope of one concept is entirely included (included) in the scope of another concept, but does not exhaust it.
Tax (A) mandatory and non-equivalent payments paid by taxpayers to the budget of the corresponding level and state extra-budgetary funds on the basis of federal laws on taxes and acts of legislative bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
Value added tax (B) a type of turnover tax. Object of taxation the difference between revenue received from the sale of goods or provision of services and the cost of purchases from various suppliers.
4) Type of incompatibility: subordination (coordination) this is the relationship of two or more concepts that exclude each other, but belong to some more general generic concept.
Payment order (A) a settlement document containing a written order from the payer to the bank to transfer a certain amount from his account to the recipient’s account.
Payment request (B) a settlement document containing the request of the recipient of funds to the payer to pay a certain amount through the bank.
Settlement documents (C) execution in writing of a request or instruction of associations, enterprises, organizations for transfer cash in a non-cash manner.
5) Type of incompatibility: opposition (contrast) volumes of two concepts that are species of the same genus, and moreover, one of them contains some characteristics, and the other not only denies these characteristics, but also replaces them with others that exclude .
Debtor (A) legal or individual having a monetary or property debt to an enterprise, organization or institution.
Creditor (B) legal entity or individual to whom the enterprise has a debt.
2.2. Example No. 2
Check (A) a monetary document of the established form containing an unconditional order from the drawer to the credit institution to pay the holder of the check the amount specified in it.
Invoice (B) a document indicating the amount of money due for payment for a product sold or service provided.
Financial document (C) business paper that legally confirms certain rights of its owner.
2.3. Example No. 3
Audit financial analysis, accounting control, audit of the financial and economic activities of enterprises, organizations, firms, joint-stock companies, carried out by independent services of qualified specialists (audit services, auditors).
Let us generalize and limit the concept of audit in Table 1.
Table No. 1.
Audit.
|
Generalization |
Limitation |
|
Financial analysis |
Mandatory audit |
|
Accounting control |
Initiative audit |
|
Audit of financial and economic activities of the enterprise |
Audit of automated accounting systems Compliance audit Operational audit |
2.4. Example No. 4.
A No entrepreneur can avoid paying taxes (true),
E An entrepreneur may not pay taxes (false),
I Some entrepreneurs cannot avoid paying taxes (true),
A Some entrepreneurs may not pay taxes (false).
Relation of logical subordination: A and I, E and O the truth of a general judgment is determined by the truth of a particular, subordinate judgment. But the falsity of the general judgment leaves the particular judgment uncertain.
Partial coincidence (subcontrast) relation: I and O have the same subjects and the same predicates, but differ in quality.
Relation of opposites (contrast): A and E.
Relation of contradiction (contradictority): A and O, E and I two contradictory propositions cannot be both true and false at the same time.
2.5. Example No. 5.
Inference is a form of thinking in which from one or more judgments based on certain rules or conclusions, a new judgment is obtained, which necessarily or with a certain degree of probability follows from them.
Conclusion.
Using reasoning similar to that of A. A. Makarov, it is easy to conclude that not only logic, but also other sciences should have different interpretations (after all, logic is the basis of each of them). So, for example, from one point on a plane you can draw an unlimited number of perpendiculars onto one straight line, and parallel straight lines can intersect; the exception confirms the rule, even if under the heap of exceptions there is no room for the rule, etc.
Getmanova and thousands of scientists like her do not recognize the simple fact that every specific question has a specific answer (the truth is always specific). A person either knows it or he doesn’t. There is no third option (although you can say the eightieth). And the fact that the comprehension of truth (truths) is infinite does not mean that specific knowledge can have an infinite gradation. Each established fact is marked with a truth value and the accumulation of such facts leads to an increase in the number of concrete truths, but not to a qualitative change in some “abstract truth”.
The amount of madness in the world is great and each madman has his own logic, his own physics, his own aesthetics, ethics, ethics, the concept of conscience and honor... truth, usefulness, justice. Your own concept of progress. Why then have any concepts at all, if they are different for everyone and the dialogue is based on their substitution? Some kind of limitless lection and a struggle of polyphonies.
References.
1. Bocharov V.A., Markin V.I. Basics of logic. Textbook. M.: Infra M, 2000. Rec.
2. Voishvillo E.K., Degtyarev M.G. Logics. Textbook. M.: Vlados Press, 2001. Rec.
3. Getmanova A.D. Logics. Textbook. M.: Omega L, 2002. Rec.
4.Ivanov E.A. Logics. Textbook. M.: BEK, 2001
5. Ivlev Yu.V. Logics. Textbook. M.: Logos, 1998, 2001. Rec
6. Kirillov V.I., Orlov G.A., Fokina N.I. Logic exercises. M., 2000. Rec.
7. Logic / A. A. Ivin. M.: Higher School, 2004. 304 p.
8. Logic: Textbook / Ruzavin G. I. M.: UNITI, 2002. 256 p.
9. Ogorodnikov V.P. Logics. Laws and principles of correct thinking. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2004. Rec.
10. Textbook of logic. With a collection of problems / A. D. Getmanova. 6th ed., revised. M.: KNORUS, 2006. 448 p.
Other similar works that may interest you.vshm> |
|||
| 8890. | SUBJECT AND MEANING OF LOGIC. LANGUAGE OF LOGIC | 21.87 KB | |
| Subject of formal logic. Alphabets of symbols in the language of propositional logic and predicate logic. Inference is a form of thinking in which from one or more judgments called premises of an inference, based on certain rules of logic, a new judgment is obtained as a consequence of a conclusion. | |||
| 16505. | The influence of capitalization on the reproduction of science: problems of the development of Russian science in the context of a shortage of funding for scientific research | 28.24 KB | |
| The global financial and economic crisis of 2008-2009 renewed the debate about the problems of transition to an intensive type of economic growth, to strengthening the role of the scientific, technological, cultural and educational potential of the national economy. The key point of these discussions is the question of under what conditions Russian science will begin to play the role of a leading force in innovative economic development. | |||
| 17888. | Types of logic | 25.95 KB | |
| Many hypotheses and logical conclusions are not as easily perceived as, say, descriptions of an early morning or pictures from the life of nations. The purpose of the work is to consider the types of logic. From the goal, the following tasks can be identified: - study the history of the emergence of logic; - consider inductive, deductive and dialectical logic in economic theory. Main part The history of the emergence of logic Logic was developed as an independent science more than two thousand years ago in the 4th century. | |||
| 13729. | Elements of algebra logic | 26.07 KB | |
| In digital technology, to transmit information, code words are used, consisting of a set of logical “0s” and “1s”, which are sent to the input of each computer node, and at the output a new code word is formed, which is the result of processing the input words. | |||
| 9022. | LOGIC ALGEBRA FUNCTIONS | 113.63 KB | |
| The theory of functional systems deals with the study of functions that describe the operation of discrete converters. The most important classes of functions include Boolean functions, valued logic functions, automata and computable functions. Each of these classes has operations associated with it. | |||
| 7128. | Elements of mathematical logic | 3.98 MB | |
| Not every sentence is a statement. In particular, all interrogative and exclamatory sentences are not statements, as well as sentences that are a definition of something | |||
| 21770. | Basic laws of logic | 23.67 KB | |
| Logical laws form the basis of human thinking. Without a logical law, it is impossible to understand what logical consequence is and, thereby, what proof is. Correct or, as they usually say, logical thinking is thinking according to the laws of logic according to the abstract patterns that are fixed by them. | |||
| 2009. | Introduction to Fuzzy Logic Basics | 864.09 KB | |
| Definition of a fuzzy set A fuzzy set is a collection of elements of an arbitrary nature regarding which it is impossible to state with complete certainty whether one or another element of the collection under consideration belongs to this set or not. In other words, a fuzzy set differs from an ordinary set in that for all or part of its elements there is no unambiguous answer to the question: Does this or that element belong or does not belong to the fuzzy set under consideration? You can ask this question and... | |||
| 3757. | Basic concepts of logical algebra | 68.13 KB | |
| Algebra of logic is a specific part of mathematical logic called propositional calculus. A statement is a statement that can be true (“yes”) or false (“no”). The same statement cannot be both true and false. | |||
| 4472. | Fuzzy Logic PID Tuning | 58.66 KB | |
| Studying the principles of calculating the initial values of the parameters of the PID controller. Study of the principles of operation and rules for setting parameters of a PID controller based on fuzzy logic. Using the TRACE MODE 6 SCADA system to simulate a control system with a PID controller. | |||
Book: LOGIC FOR LAWYERS: LECTURES. / Law College of LNU named after. Franco
2. Logic as a science: its subject, method, as well as practical significance her knowledge.
When determining the subject of the science of logic in logical-philosophical literature, they take into account three aspects: ontological (philosophical doctrine of being), epistemological (cognitive) and formal-logical . IN ontological aspect, the objective basis of the science of logic is determined - the objective existence of objects, phenomena, processes (empirical objects), between which there are various relationships (cause-and-effect, spatial, temporal, genetic, etc.), that is, what is called the “logic of things”. IN epistemological (late shaft) aspect the process of mapping the “logic of things”, the “logic of events” into the “logic of concepts” and the formation of a system of concepts (categories) that capture the essence of objectively existing things, phenomena and processes are determined. IN formal-logical aspect the necessary relationships between logical forms of thinking (concepts, judgments, conclusions) are determined, which are determined not by the content of thinking, but only by its structure. All these aspects appear in unity. Taking this unity into account, we can give the following definition of the subject of the science of logic:
Logic is a science that studies the laws and forms of people’s mental activity, the principles and means of constructing correct judgments and reasoning about objects and phenomena of the objective world, methods of formalizing knowledge as a result of the cognitive process.
Features of logic as a science:
- studies the laws and forms of mental activity of people based on the analysis of theirlinguistic utterances, that is, through the implementation (materialization) of the results of mental activity in language; creates its own specific language (logical language) to analyze the structure of thinking and formalize knowledge.
- The study of logic requires concentration and a systematic approach. All sections of the textbook are interconnected; it is impossible to understand the next topic without mastering the previous one. Learning logic requires a lot of time and effort. As one wise man said: “In the waters of logic one should not sail with sails raised.”
- theoretical assimilationThe amount of material from logic does not mean that a person will be able to apply it in practice. It is possible to find a way out of this situation by combining theory with solving practical problems. In this regard, after studying a particular topic, it is recommended to carry out the appropriate practical tasks, and also consciously apply the acquired logical skills in everyday life, when writing tests and coursework, mastering the material of legal disciplines, in discussions, disputes, etc. Only under these conditions can a person learn to think logically correctly, avoiding elementary logical errors in his reasoning and recognizing them in the reasoning of other people.
As a result of successfully mastering theoretical material and practicing it in practice, the student will be able to:
♦ identify basic concepts in the text, clarify their structure, establish the relationship between them;
♦ logically correctly divide, classify, define concepts;
♦ find errors in sections, classifications, definitions, criticize them and not allow them in your reasoning;
♦ identify the logical structure of statements and interpret them based on this;
♦ reason in accordance with the laws of logic; find pardons in the texts and reasoning of other people related to their violation;
♦ analyze question-and-answer situations, logically ask questions and give answers to them;
♦ demonstrate reasoning, starting points and consequences contained in the text;
♦ draw rational conclusions from the available information according to the rules and laws of logic;
♦ construct your reasoning logically and correctly and find errors in your opponents’ reasoning;
♦ construct correct argumentation;
♦ convincingly criticize your opponent’s argumentation;
♦ avoid typical mistakes in argumentation and criticism;
♦ recognize techniques for manipulating your interlocutor and resist them.
Mastering logical thinking skills is of particular importance for lawyers, whose specific work is the constant use of logical techniques and methods: definitions and classifications, divisions, argumentations, refutations, etc.
Knowledge of logic greatly helps a lawyer:
♦ analyze legal terminology in codes and other regulations; find out whether a certain norm follows from other norms, including it in legal document it will not be superfluous whether the new normative act is an addition or negation of the old one, etc.;
♦ apply logical methods in the process of criminal legal classification of a crime;
♦ build forensic investigative versions using logical methods;
♦ draw up clear crime investigation plans;
♦ apply logical methods in the process of predicting crime and assessing the activities of law enforcement agencies;
♦ avoid logical errors when drawing up official documents: protocols of interrogation and inspection of the crime scene, decisions And resolutions, reports, contracts, etc.;
♦ conduct disputes in court at a high level: defend
own opinion and criticize the opponent’s opinion; quickly find logical errors during a court hearing;
♦ apply methods of logic to study scientific problems in jurisprudence.
| 1. | LOGIC FOR LAWYERS: LECTURES. / Law College of LNU named after. Franco |
| 2. | 2. Logic as a science: its subject, method, as well as the practical significance of its knowledge. |
| 3. | 3. Historical stages in the development of logical knowledge: logic of Ancient India, logic of Ancient Greece |
| 4. | 4. Features of general or traditional (Aristotelian) logic. |
| 5. | 5. Features of symbolic or mathematical logic. |
| 6. | 6. Theoretical and practical logic. |
| 7. | Topic 2: THINKING AND SPEECH 1. Thinking (reasoning): definition and features. |
| 8. | 2. Activity and thinking |
| 9. | 3. Structure of thinking |
| 10. | 4. Correct and incorrect reasoning. Concept of logical fallacy |
| 11. | 5. Logical form of reasoning |
| 12. | 6. Types and types of thinking. |
| 13. | 7. Features of a lawyer’s thinking |
| 14. | 8. The importance of logic for lawyers |
| 15. | Topic 3: Semiotics as the science of signs. Language as a sign system. 1. Semiotics as the science of signs |
| 16. | 2. The concept of a sign. Types of interchangeable signs |
| 17. | 3. Language as a sign system. Language signs. |
| 18. | 4. Structure of the sign process. Structure of the meaning of a sign. Typical logical errors |
| 19. | 5. Dimensions and levels of the sign process |
| 20. | 6. Language of law |
| 21. | Section III. METHODOLOGICAL FUNCTION OF FORMAL LOGIC 1. Method and methodology. |
| 22. | 2. Logical methods of research (cognition) |
| 23. | 3. Method of formalization |
| 24. | BASIC FORMS AND LAWS OF ABSTRACT LOGICAL THINKING 1. General characteristics of the concept as a form of thinking. Concept structure |
| 25. | 2. Types of concepts. Logical characteristics of concepts |
| 26. | 3. Types of relationships between concepts |
| 27. | 4. Operations with concepts 4.1. Limitation and generalization of concepts |
| 28. | 4.2. Concept division operation |
| 29. | 4.3. Addition, multiplication and subtraction of concepts (more precisely, their volumes) |
| 30. | 4.4 Concept definition operation |
| 31. | BASIC FORMS AND LAWS OF ABSTRACT LOGICAL THINKING II. Statements. 1. General characteristics of the statement |
| 32. | 2. The truth and falsity of the statement. |
| 33. | 3. Simple statements, their structure and types |
| 34. |
The term "logic" comes from the Greek. Logos- “thought”, “word”, “mind”, “regularity”, and is currently used in three main meanings. Firstly, to designate any objective pattern in the interconnection of phenomena, for example, “logic of facts”, “logic of things”, “logic of history”, etc. Secondly, to designate a pattern in the development of thought, for example “logic of reasoning”, “logic of thinking”, etc. Thirdly, logic is the science of the laws of thinking.
Thinking is studied by many sciences: psychology, cybernetics, physiology, etc. A feature of logic is that its subject is the forms and methods of correct thinking. Logic as a science includes such sections as formal logic, dialectical, symbolic, modal, etc.
So, logics – This is the science of the methods and forms of correct thinking. The logical form of a specific thought is the structure of this thought, i.e. the way it is connected components. Let us explain with an example the meaning of the concept “form of thinking”. Let's take two sentences: “All people are mortal” and “All rivers flow into the sea.” One of them is correct, the other is not. But they are the same in shape. Each one states something about a different subject. If we designate the object that is being spoken about by the letter S, and what is being said by the letter P, we obtain the form of thought: all S is P; You can insert different content into it. Formal logic examines the basic forms of thinking: concept, judgment and inference, as well as the laws of their interrelation, by observing which one can obtain correct conclusions, provided that the initial provisions are true. Logical form, or the form of thinking, is a way of connecting the elements of thought, its structure, thanks to which the content exists and reflects reality.
In the real process of thinking, the content and form of thought exist in inextricable unity. There is no “pure” content devoid of form, there are no “pure” contentless logical forms. However, for the purpose of special analysis, we have the right to abstract from the specific content of a thought, making its form the subject of study.
Knowledge of logic improves the culture of thinking, promotes clarity, consistency and evidence of reasoning, enhances the effectiveness and persuasiveness of speech. Knowledge of the basics of logic is especially important in the process of mastering new knowledge; it helps to spot logical errors in oral speech and in the written works of other people, find shorter and more correct ways to refute these mistakes, and prevent them yourself.
Logic contributes to the formation of self-awareness, the intellectual development of the individual, and helps the formation of a scientific worldview.
Knowledge of logic is urgently needed for media representatives and medical workers, whose activities can affect the fate of people.
A court decision can be correct if not only its legal grounds are correct, but also the course of reasoning and logic are correct. Logic is of great importance for solving the entire range of legal problems, regulating labor, property and other relations, social and legal protection of citizens, etc.
No. 2 basic forms of cognition. Sensory knowledge and abstract thinking and their relationship. Features of abstract thinking
Making pancakes with sausage is an easy and rewarding task
I dreamed of a squirrel: different interpretations from dream books
The best games about knights Strategy with large-scale battles on PC
Nekrasov's poem "Grandfather": analysis and characteristics of the work
Why do you dream about a house fire?
Red fish in the oven - the best recipes for simple and original dishes
How to solve irrational equations