Logical Thinking
Ancient Greece is the cradle of many knowledge and technologies that we own today. (τεχνη-TEHNE);it is the cradle of European science and philosophy. In that cultural tradition, logic has very early started to develop like a special philosophical discipline.
The creator of logic is Aristotle (384-322). Although he himself still didn't use the name LOGIC, he wrote many discussions about those questions that enter the boundaries of logic as science.
Those scriptures about logical questions, further on, his students gathered up into one book and named it "ORGANON" - which means tool.
That name comes out from Aristotle's attitude that ''the right thinking is the tool of every science''.
The name ''Logic'' is dating a little bit later. It was used by the representatives of Stoic school from Megara, sharing philosophy on three basic areas:
1) Physic (that studies the substance of everything that exists);
2) Ethic (that studies the rightful human behavior in life); and
3) Logic or Dialectic (that studies knowledge and its expression in language).
The therm ''Logic'' comes from Greek word λόγος that in ancient philosophical tradition had a very broad specter of meanings exp.word, speech, mind...In all of those meanings of this words is dominating the idea of rightfulness that is common for the substance of the reality itself, the human opinion about that reality, and for expressing of that thought and reality in language.
When the therm ''Logic'' is used to mark certain philosophical discipline, under that should be understood the rightfulness of truth opinion.
Logic is a philosophical discipline about the shapes of truthful thought and methods of knowledge.
In it, get formatted various rules that we should respect and follow if we want to reach the truth thinking (knowledge).
The position of logic in system of knowledge is extraordinary because thanks to it, capturing the forms of thinking and speech from one hand, and relations of those forms from the other hand, logic is shown like anatomy of total system of knowledge.
If logic's position in system of knowledge is like that, then it gives to logic the position to show on the thoughtful structure of all that exists.
In that sense logic could be understood like special aspect of Metaphysics (study about existence like existence, about first causes and first principles-Aristotle).
To achieve the cause of logic, that is, to be able to formulate basic rules that are worthy for entire knowledge, logic scientists start from explaining processes of how the thinking is really working in every day life and in practice of certain sciences. They before all analyze that thinking, extract the elements that the thinking consists of (essence, definition, judgment, conclusion), and what are the measurements and premises that people often subconsciously use in their thinking.
The logic scientists are questioning those premises, explore if they are valid for every thinking, what is their mutual relationship, what is their value.
On those basics logic scientists build further, formulating rules that should be respected in order to think with reason and truthfully.
The relationship between logic and other sciences is characterized by mutual dependence.
The other sciences are offering to the scientists material for their analysis and knowing of logic on the other side gives to the scientists critically over questioned weapon which they use in work on discovery truth in certain area of science and on connecting of results in one entity.
Since the thinking is the component of every real human activity, that makes logic as a science of truthfulness important for every human activity.
Knowledge of logic (naturally not only remembering logic rules, but art of using logic during bringing decisions and judgments) gives very big advantage.
If we know how to use logic, we will easier be able to control our thinking and to conduct it towards bringing rightful judgments and decisions.
The knowledge of logic is developing our ability for thinking and corrects the looks that all our conclusions be truthful because every thinking that pretends to be truth must also be logically correct.
(Naturally, one logically correct thinking is not truthful by itself.)
We can sort the criteria in following:
1) Clear lingual formulation of what we want to know.
2) Ability of identifying the experience conditions in which is possible to identify the appearance that according to our opinion we know.
3) Ability to explain the known appearance.
4) Ability to mark in which practical motions can the known appearance be revoked and shown.
Knowledge is a consciousness about certain appearance that is satisfying these four criteria.
Knowledge includes in itself ability of lingual description, explanation and practical approach to the known appearance.
1) Experience of sensations
Attitude in the theory of knowledge (gnoseology-GNOSIS-knowledge) according to which all human knowledge is coming out of experience, that is from sensations, and according to which all human knowledge is based on experience that in bottom line decides about their reliability.
That attitude is named Empeirism (EMPEIRIA-experience, skill).
Representatives are John Lock and David Hewm.
2) Reason
Attitude according to which reason is the most important or the only source of knowledge.
That attitude is named Rationalism ( RATIO-mind, INTELLECTUS-reason).
Representative is Rene Decart.
3) Intuition
Intuition is the power of observing the substance of appearance. It is the look at entity of appearance for one moment. The attitude according to which intuition is the highest and the most important source of knowledge is named Intuitionalism (INTUOR-im looking into...).
Representative is Henry Bergson.
ALL POTENT spirit or IMPOTENT spirit.
As an example for the first thesis can be used the famous text from Hegel's ''Accessing speech'' (Berlin 1818).
Hegel says:''Courage of truth, faith in the power of spirit is the first condition of philosophic studies; human should respect himself and to consider himself dignified of what is the supreme. About magnificence and power of spirit he can not think broad enough. Closed substance of universe doesn't have power in itself that could reject the courage of knowledge, which means that closed structure of universe must open in front the knowledge and show its wealth and depth in front of human eyes and let him enjoy in it''.
As an example for the second thesis, thesis of impotent spirit we can show another direction that is named skepticism. (SKEPSIS-doubt).
Skepticism is a direction according to which is not possible to have absolutely reliable knowledge not about a single judgment of common, universal or speculative character, not even about degree of possibility of judgments.
The skepticism of health mind(dogmatism) comes out of preposition that our senses are absolutely accurately informing us about reality, and that what we see means it is.
Critic towards some sources of our knowledge is developed depending on illusions of the experience with senses, errors in thinking, mistaken intuitions.
There always exists open problem if the things really ARE what they seems to be.
If for accepting of some knowledge is not needed to lean on any other testimony, then on your senses and the meaning of word which describes it, then that testification is named direct.
More often are the cases that testimony is built of various complex reasons, and that complex testimony we call indirect.
We can also observe testimony considering reliability with which we accept some knowledge.
From that point of view testimony can be COMPLETE and INCOMPLETE.
Testimony on basis of which some knowledge is with certainty accepted we call complete.
Testimony is incomplete if even after its acceptance still exist open doubt.
Complete testimony can contain ENOUGH and NECESSARY reasons.
Reasons are ENOUGH if by accepting them with certainty we accept the knowledge that they testify, but their negation doesn't have to be the reason for negation of entire knowledge.
Reasons are NECESSARY if negation of those reasons brings to the negation of knowledge itself.
Testimony must contain final number of reasons and by testifying we must come to an end eventually.
There are knowledges that doesn't have to be testified or verified, and those knowledge doesn't have to be proven because they are beyond all doubts. Such knowledge are called AXIOMS.
Their characteristics are following: they are followed with feeling of impotence to deny them and with feeling that questioning about reasons for their acceptance would be ridiculous.
There doesn't exist absolute axiom, that is, there doesn't exist knowledge that has never and under no circumstances been brought in doubt, but there exist relative axioms in certain conditions and considering certain context.
OPINION (DOXA-opinion EPISTEME-knowledge)
People often accept some attitudes, and even struggle for their truthfulness, even though they never tried to find the real reasons for those attitudes, but they accept them on the basis of subjective motifs.
On the question ''Why?(on the basis of what)" is something considered truth, you can often hear the answer that is calling upon the authority( the authority of individual, or majority).
Opinion is created by uncritical accepting of other people's attitudes (without knowing reasons for acceptance).
Opinion is often created by accepting insufficient reasons like sufficient or incomplete testimony like complete.
Often the source of opinion is acceptance of surfaced explanations of some appearances that are in other cases well explained.
Because of all of this, opinion (since it is based on delusional reasons that can't even stand trough critical interrogation) even in those cases when its content is relatively truthful, remains delusional knowledge.
BELIEF
Belief is very similar to the opinion. It is acceptance of appearances from reasons that are neither enough nor complete. Its difference from opinion is in the content itself(what is believed in).
To be continued...
Being Logical: A Guide to Good Thinking
A Rulebook for Arguments
The creator of logic is Aristotle (384-322). Although he himself still didn't use the name LOGIC, he wrote many discussions about those questions that enter the boundaries of logic as science.
Those scriptures about logical questions, further on, his students gathered up into one book and named it "ORGANON" - which means tool.
That name comes out from Aristotle's attitude that ''the right thinking is the tool of every science''.
The name ''Logic'' is dating a little bit later. It was used by the representatives of Stoic school from Megara, sharing philosophy on three basic areas:
1) Physic (that studies the substance of everything that exists);
2) Ethic (that studies the rightful human behavior in life); and
3) Logic or Dialectic (that studies knowledge and its expression in language).
The therm ''Logic'' comes from Greek word λόγος that in ancient philosophical tradition had a very broad specter of meanings exp.word, speech, mind...In all of those meanings of this words is dominating the idea of rightfulness that is common for the substance of the reality itself, the human opinion about that reality, and for expressing of that thought and reality in language.
When the therm ''Logic'' is used to mark certain philosophical discipline, under that should be understood the rightfulness of truth opinion.
What is logic?
It is science in which is studied those conditions of human knowledge that can be expressed in common (universal) manner,that is, those conditions that are accurate for every knowledge, and not only for some sorts or areas of knowledge.Logic is a philosophical discipline about the shapes of truthful thought and methods of knowledge.
In it, get formatted various rules that we should respect and follow if we want to reach the truth thinking (knowledge).
Relation of philosophy, logic and other sciences
The name of the ''Logic'' itself etymologically is bound for λόγος and contains the same double meaning like logic. Logic is a science that studies at first thinking, but after that also the speech that thinking is expressed with.The position of logic in system of knowledge is extraordinary because thanks to it, capturing the forms of thinking and speech from one hand, and relations of those forms from the other hand, logic is shown like anatomy of total system of knowledge.
If logic's position in system of knowledge is like that, then it gives to logic the position to show on the thoughtful structure of all that exists.
In that sense logic could be understood like special aspect of Metaphysics (study about existence like existence, about first causes and first principles-Aristotle).
To achieve the cause of logic, that is, to be able to formulate basic rules that are worthy for entire knowledge, logic scientists start from explaining processes of how the thinking is really working in every day life and in practice of certain sciences. They before all analyze that thinking, extract the elements that the thinking consists of (essence, definition, judgment, conclusion), and what are the measurements and premises that people often subconsciously use in their thinking.
The logic scientists are questioning those premises, explore if they are valid for every thinking, what is their mutual relationship, what is their value.
On those basics logic scientists build further, formulating rules that should be respected in order to think with reason and truthfully.
The relationship between logic and other sciences is characterized by mutual dependence.
The other sciences are offering to the scientists material for their analysis and knowing of logic on the other side gives to the scientists critically over questioned weapon which they use in work on discovery truth in certain area of science and on connecting of results in one entity.
Why is important?
As a philosophical discipline that studies the shapes of valid thinking, it has extraordinary meaning for all the kind of human craft in which is included human thought, and in which is important for that thought to be truthful.Since the thinking is the component of every real human activity, that makes logic as a science of truthfulness important for every human activity.
Knowledge of logic (naturally not only remembering logic rules, but art of using logic during bringing decisions and judgments) gives very big advantage.
If we know how to use logic, we will easier be able to control our thinking and to conduct it towards bringing rightful judgments and decisions.
The knowledge of logic is developing our ability for thinking and corrects the looks that all our conclusions be truthful because every thinking that pretends to be truth must also be logically correct.
(Naturally, one logically correct thinking is not truthful by itself.)
Criteria of knowledge
To know some appearance of reality means before everything to become aware of its important substances and relationship towards other appearances.We can sort the criteria in following:
1) Clear lingual formulation of what we want to know.
2) Ability of identifying the experience conditions in which is possible to identify the appearance that according to our opinion we know.
3) Ability to explain the known appearance.
4) Ability to mark in which practical motions can the known appearance be revoked and shown.
Knowledge is a consciousness about certain appearance that is satisfying these four criteria.
Knowledge includes in itself ability of lingual description, explanation and practical approach to the known appearance.
Sources of knowledge
1) Experience of sensations
Attitude in the theory of knowledge (gnoseology-GNOSIS-knowledge) according to which all human knowledge is coming out of experience, that is from sensations, and according to which all human knowledge is based on experience that in bottom line decides about their reliability.
That attitude is named Empeirism (EMPEIRIA-experience, skill).
Representatives are John Lock and David Hewm.
2) Reason
Attitude according to which reason is the most important or the only source of knowledge.
That attitude is named Rationalism ( RATIO-mind, INTELLECTUS-reason).
Representative is Rene Decart.
3) Intuition
Intuition is the power of observing the substance of appearance. It is the look at entity of appearance for one moment. The attitude according to which intuition is the highest and the most important source of knowledge is named Intuitionalism (INTUOR-im looking into...).
Representative is Henry Bergson.
Possibilities of knowledge
When the question about the power of spirit is asked, thinkers are often giving two extreme thesis:ALL POTENT spirit or IMPOTENT spirit.
As an example for the first thesis can be used the famous text from Hegel's ''Accessing speech'' (Berlin 1818).
Hegel says:''Courage of truth, faith in the power of spirit is the first condition of philosophic studies; human should respect himself and to consider himself dignified of what is the supreme. About magnificence and power of spirit he can not think broad enough. Closed substance of universe doesn't have power in itself that could reject the courage of knowledge, which means that closed structure of universe must open in front the knowledge and show its wealth and depth in front of human eyes and let him enjoy in it''.
As an example for the second thesis, thesis of impotent spirit we can show another direction that is named skepticism. (SKEPSIS-doubt).
Skepticism is a direction according to which is not possible to have absolutely reliable knowledge not about a single judgment of common, universal or speculative character, not even about degree of possibility of judgments.
The skepticism of health mind(dogmatism) comes out of preposition that our senses are absolutely accurately informing us about reality, and that what we see means it is.
Critic towards some sources of our knowledge is developed depending on illusions of the experience with senses, errors in thinking, mistaken intuitions.
There always exists open problem if the things really ARE what they seems to be.
Forms of knowledge:Testimony,Axiom,Opinion,Belief
The sum of reasons on basis of which some knowledge is accepted is named TESTIMONY for that knowledge. Testimony can be DIRECT or INDIRECT.If for accepting of some knowledge is not needed to lean on any other testimony, then on your senses and the meaning of word which describes it, then that testification is named direct.
More often are the cases that testimony is built of various complex reasons, and that complex testimony we call indirect.
We can also observe testimony considering reliability with which we accept some knowledge.
From that point of view testimony can be COMPLETE and INCOMPLETE.
Testimony on basis of which some knowledge is with certainty accepted we call complete.
Testimony is incomplete if even after its acceptance still exist open doubt.
Complete testimony can contain ENOUGH and NECESSARY reasons.
Reasons are ENOUGH if by accepting them with certainty we accept the knowledge that they testify, but their negation doesn't have to be the reason for negation of entire knowledge.
Reasons are NECESSARY if negation of those reasons brings to the negation of knowledge itself.
Testimony must contain final number of reasons and by testifying we must come to an end eventually.
There are knowledges that doesn't have to be testified or verified, and those knowledge doesn't have to be proven because they are beyond all doubts. Such knowledge are called AXIOMS.
Their characteristics are following: they are followed with feeling of impotence to deny them and with feeling that questioning about reasons for their acceptance would be ridiculous.
There doesn't exist absolute axiom, that is, there doesn't exist knowledge that has never and under no circumstances been brought in doubt, but there exist relative axioms in certain conditions and considering certain context.
OPINION (DOXA-opinion EPISTEME-knowledge)
People often accept some attitudes, and even struggle for their truthfulness, even though they never tried to find the real reasons for those attitudes, but they accept them on the basis of subjective motifs.
On the question ''Why?(on the basis of what)" is something considered truth, you can often hear the answer that is calling upon the authority( the authority of individual, or majority).
Opinion is created by uncritical accepting of other people's attitudes (without knowing reasons for acceptance).
Opinion is often created by accepting insufficient reasons like sufficient or incomplete testimony like complete.
Often the source of opinion is acceptance of surfaced explanations of some appearances that are in other cases well explained.
Because of all of this, opinion (since it is based on delusional reasons that can't even stand trough critical interrogation) even in those cases when its content is relatively truthful, remains delusional knowledge.
BELIEF
Belief is very similar to the opinion. It is acceptance of appearances from reasons that are neither enough nor complete. Its difference from opinion is in the content itself(what is believed in).
To be continued...
Resources
Introduction to LogicBeing Logical: A Guide to Good Thinking
A Rulebook for Arguments
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
