FEATURES OF LOGIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE EARLY OF THE XX AND XXI CENTURIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.34.16307Keywords:
logic, formal logic, informal logic, argumentation theory, reasoning, logical form, validity, argument, proof, inferenceAbstract
Introduction. The relevance of the study of the peculiarities of the development of the logic of the early XX and XXI centuries is due to the basic shifts within this science, which led to the majestic setof modern logic. The aim and tasks of the study areto compare the trends of logic in the early XX and XXI centuries to have the deep philosophical understanding of logic specifics as a field of scientific knowledge and academic discipline. Research methods sarehistorical and comparative methods, as well as generalization and
arrangement as techniquesof scientific knowledge. Research results. It was reviewed the definition of logic as science in the works of G. Frege, J. Hintikka, J. Łukasiewicz, B. Russell, G.H. von Wright, and others, which led to the flourishing of formal logic in the XX century; the critique of formal logic in the new rhetoric; the incipience of informal logic in response to educational demands. Discussion. The issue of the subject of logic, the interconnectionbetween formal and informal logic is being actively discussed both in the domestic logical and philosophical thought (Y. Shramko, O. Shcherbyna, and others), and recognized by experts in the field of logic and argumentation theory (F.H. van Eemeren, D. Gabbay, L. Groarke and others). Conclusions. The beginning of the last century was
characterized by significant shifts in logic, primarily in the scientific perspective due to the development of formal calculi and a close connection with mathematics. At the beginning of the present century, the development of logic was stimulated primarily by the
demands of education, which in the second half of the XX century led to a critique of formal logic and the development of informal logic. Currently, formal and informal logics combine their efforts in the development of argumentative issues both in the direction of constructing a general theory and in the study of argumentation in different types of discourses, as well as within computer science
References
Дротянко Л. Г. Специфіка методологічних засобів науки в
процесі її інформатизації / Л. Г. Дротянко // Вісник Національного
авіаційного університету. Серія: Філософія. Культурологія. – Вип.
(23). – К.: НАУ, 2016. – С.11-15.
Колотілова Н. А. Логіка і риторика: ретроспектива
взаємозв’язку / Н. А. Колотілова. – К.: Центр учбової літератури,
– 272 с.
Комаха Л. Г. Логічні засади аргументації у філософському
знанні / Л. Г. Комаха. – К.: Центр учбової літератури, 2015. –
с.
Поварнин С. И. Введение в логику / С. И. Поварнин. –
Петербург: Наука и школа, 1921. – 69 с.
Фреге Г. Логика / Г. Фреге // Фреге Г. Логика и логическая
семантика. – М.: Аспект Пресс, 2000. – С.287-291.
Хоменко І. Чи є нормативною наука логіка і як вона може
нею бути? / І. Хоменко, Я. Шрамко // Філософська думка. – № 5.
– К.: Інститут філософії ім. Г. Сковороди НАНУ, 2019. – С.52-63.
Шрамко Я. Принцип дуальності в логіці і філософії /
Я. Шрамко // Філософська думка. – № 3. – К.: Інститут філософії
ім. Г. Сковороди НАНУ, 2016. – С.47-63.
Щербина О. Ю. Логіка та юридична аргументація /
О. Ю. Щербина. – К.: Видавничо-поліграфічний центр
«Київський університет», 2013. – 303 с.
Eemeren F. H. van. The State of the Art in Argumentation
Theory/ F. H. van Eemeren // F. H. van Eemeren (ed). Crusial
Concepts in Argumentation Theory. – Amsterdam: Amsterdam
University Press, 2001. – P.11-26.
Eemeren F. H. van, Garssen B., Krabbe E. C. W., Snoeck
Henkemans A. F., Verheij B. and Wagemans J. H. M. Handbook of
Argumentation Theory/ F. H. van Eemeren, B. Garssen, E. C. W.
Krabbe, A. F. Snoeck Henkemans, B. Verheij, J. H. M. Wagemans.
– Springer Science + Business Media Dordrecht, 2014. – 988 p.
Gabbay D. M., Johnson, R. H., Ohlbach H. J., Woods J.
(Eds.) Handbook of the Logic of Argument and Inference: The Turn
Towards the Practical / D. M. Gabbay, R. H. Johnson, H. J.
Ohlbach, J. Woods. – Elsevier, 2002. – 506 p.
Gabbay D. M., Guenthner F. (Eds.) Handbook of
Philosophical Logic / D. M. Gabbay, F. Guenthner. – Dordrecht/
Boston/Lancaster: Reidel Publishing Company. – Vol. I-IV. – 1983-
Gabbay D. M., Guenthner F. (Eds.) Handbook of
Philosophical Logic / D. M. Gabbay, F. Guenthner. – 2nd ed. – Kluwer
– Springer. – Vol. 1-18. – 2001-2018.
Groarke L. Informal Logic / L. Groarke // Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2021. [online]. Available at
<http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/> [Accessed 21
August 2021].
Hintikka J. Logic in Philosophy – Philosophy of Logic /
J. Hintikka // Hintikka J. Logic, Language-Games and Information:
Kantian Themes in the Philosophy of Logic. – Oxford University
Press, 1973. – P. 1-25.
Johnson R. H. and Blair J. A. Informal Logic: An Overview /
R. H. Johnson, J. A. Blair. – Informal Logic. – Vol. 20, №2. – 2000.
– P. 93-107.
Kahane H. and Cavender N. 2006. Logic and
Contemporary Rhetoric. The Use of Reason in Everyday Life /
H. Kahane, N. Cavender. – Tenth edition. Thomson Wadsworth,
– 393 p.
Łukasiewicz J. Aristotle’s Syllogistic From the Standpoint of
Modern Formal Logic / J. Łukasiewicz. – 2nd edition. – Oxford
University Press, 1957. – 222 p.
Łukasiewicz J. On Determinism / J. Łukasiewicz //
Łukasiewicz J. Selected Works. – North Holland Publishing
Company – Amsterdam, PWN Polish Scientific Publishers –
Warszawa, 1970. – P. 110-128.
Perelman Ch. And Olbrechts-TytecaL. The New Rhetoric: A
Treaticeon Argumentation / Ch. Perelman, L. Olbrechts-Tyteca. –
Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969. – 566 p.
Russell B. The Art of Drawing Inferences / B. Russell //
Russell B. The Art of Philosophizing and Other Essays. – NY:
Philosophical Library, 2014. – P. 23-40.
Wright G. H. von. Logic and Philosophy in the 20th Century
/ G. H. von Wright // Logic and Philosophy of Science in Uppsala:
Papers from the 9th International Congress of Logic, Methodology
and Philosophy of Science by Prawitz D. (ed.), Westerstehl D. (ed.).
– Elsevier Science B.V., 1994. – P. 9-25.
