Theoretical question:
TOPIC: “The subject of logic. The specifics of logic and its place among others
sciences that study thinking.

PLAN

Plan ............................... ................... ........... .............................. ........ 1

Introduction ............................... ................... .......................................... . 2

1. The subject of logic as a science. ………………………....................... 3

2. The specifics of logic as a science …………………....…………...... 9

3. The place of logic among other sciences that study thinking...... 11

Conclusion.................... ............................. . .............................. ........ 13

List of references .............................................................. 14

Exercises ………………………………………………………....15

INTRODUCTION
In the system of humanities logic belongs to a special place, its importance cannot be overestimated. Logic helps to prove true narrowings 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 makes it possible to distinguish correct definitions and conclusions from incorrect ones and thereby reveal errors in reasoning and public speeches of speakers. At present, interest in logic is caused by many circumstances, and first of all by a significant expansion of the scope of logical knowledge, the specific field 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, the lawyer will be able to accurately and reasonably build his arguments, identify inconsistencies in the testimony of victims, witnesses, suspects, in written sources. Logic will help him convincingly refute the erroneous arguments of opponents, correctly draw up a work plan, official documents, build investigative versions, etc.
Obviously, the study of logic by a lawyer cannot replace special legal knowledge. However, it helps to ensure that every future lawyer becomes a good specialist in his field. No wonder the famous Russian lawyer A.F. Koni believed that an educated lawyer should be a person in whom general education goes ahead of special education. And in the system of general education, one of the leading places belongs to formal-logical training. That is why, according to the outstanding domestic teacher K.D. Ushinsky, logic should be 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?????? - "the science of reasoning", "the art of reasoning" - from????? - which means "thought", "reason", "word", "speech", "reasoning", "regularity", and is currently used in three main meanings. Firstly, to designate any objective regularity in the interconnection of phenomena, for example, "the logic of facts", "the logic of things", "the logic of history" and so on. Secondly, to denote patterns in the development of thought, for example, "the logic of reasoning", "the logic of thinking" and so on. Thirdly, the science of the laws of correct thinking is called logic. Consider logic in its final meaning.
Thinking is studied by many sciences: psychology, cybernetics, physiology and others. A feature of logic is that its subject is the forms and methods of correct thinking.. So, Logic is the science of the ways and forms of correct thinking. The main type of thinking is conceptual (or abstract-logical). It is this that is investigated by logic, 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 regular connections of reality, to 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. The logical form is also understood in many ways. Our thoughts are made up of some meaningful parts. The way they are connected represents the form of thought.
So, 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 relationship between objects and their properties. Changes in the properties of objects and relations between them are reflected in the form of inferences.
* Rational (from lat. ratio - mind) - related to the mind, reasonableness of the mind, accessible to reasonable understanding.
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 the elements of thought are connected - signs in a concept, concepts in a judgment, and judgments in a conclusion. The content of thoughts determined by these connections does not exist by itself, 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 a crime against the personal property of citizens." Let us replace all their meaningful components with symbols. Let's say that what we think about - with the Latin letter S, and what we think about S - with the Latin letter P. As a result, we get the same elements of thought in both cases: "Some S are P." This is the logical form of the given 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 an inseparable unity. There is no pure, formless content, no pure, meaningless logical forms. For example, the above logical form of the propositions "Some S are P" does have some content. From it we learn that every object of thought denoted by the letter S (subject) has a sign denoted by the letter P (predicate). Moreover, the word "some" shows that the attribute P belongs to only a part of the elements that make up the subject of thought. This is the "formal content".
However, for the purposes of a special analysis, we can digress from the specific content of 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.
At the same time, it should be borne in mind that formal logic, while investigating the forms of thinking, does not ignore its content. Forms, as has already been canceled, are filled with specific content, are associated with a completely defined, specific, subject area. Outside of this concrete content, the 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. With these aspects of thinking, the distinction between its truth and correctness is connected. Truth refers to the content of thoughts, and correctness 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, fair. If the thought in its content does not correspond to reality, then it is false. From here truth of thought- 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 of thinking is its correctness. Right thinking- this is its fundamental property, which also manifests itself in relation to reality. It means the ability of thinking to reproduce in the structure of thought the objective structure of being, to correspond to the actual relations of objects and phenomena. And vice versa, the incorrectness of thinking means its ability to distort the structural connections and relationships of being.
Formal logic is abstracted from the concrete content of thoughts, not content in general. Therefore, it takes into account the truth or falsity of the propositions under study. However, it transfers the center of gravity to the correctness of thinking. Moreover, the logical structures themselves are considered regardless of their logical content. Since the task of logic is to analyze exactly correct thinking, it is also called logical thinking after 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 inconsistency 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 rigorous 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 to itself.
Validity there is a property of correct thinking to reflect objective causal relationships and relationships of 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 has been established earlier.
These essential features 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. The correctness of thinking, reflecting, first of all, the objective laws of the world, arises and exists spontaneously, long before the emergence of any rules whatsoever. The logical rules themselves are only milestones on the way 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 already consciously.
Thus, the logical correctness of reasoning is due to the laws of abstract thinking. Violation of the requirements arising from them leads to logical errors. Law of thought- 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 affiliation. Logical laws act independently of the will of people, they are not created at their will. They are a reflection of the connections of things in the objective world. At the same time, a person is not simply included in the scope of a certain logical law, not only passively submits to its regulatory influence, but also develops a conscious attitude to objectively occurring thought processes. The knowledge of the laws of logic, the definition 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, on the basis of studying the formal structures of abstract thinking, preserve and take into account the logical correctness of reasoning, due to logical laws.
What aspects of abstract thinking are studied by formal logic? Firstly, it considers abstract thinking as a tool for understanding the world, as a means of obtaining formally true knowledge.
Secondly, it is interested in the practical effectiveness and correctness of indirect (inferential) knowledge obtained from previously established and verified truths without resorting 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 only on the forms in which one or another thought process takes place. These aspects of the interdependence of Logic and thinking determine the features of formal logic as a science.
So, formal logic- this is the science of generally valid forms and means of thought necessary for the rational knowledge of being and its specific types. Commonly valid forms of thought include concepts, judgments, and conclusions. The generally significant means of thought are the rules (principles), logical operations, techniques and procedures, the formal-logical laws underlying them, that is, everything that serves the purpose of implementing correct abstract thinking.
Therefore, the subject of formal logic is:
1) forms of the thought process - concept, judgment, conclusion, hypothesis, proof, etc.;
2) the laws that abstract thinking obeys in the process of cognizing the objective world and thinking itself;
3) methods for obtaining new output knowledge - similarities, differences, concomitant changes, residues, etc.;
4) ways to prove the truth or falsity of the knowledge gained - direct or indirect confirmation, refutation, etc.
Thus, logic in the broadest sense of its subject explores the structure of abstract thinking, reveals the patterns underlying it. However, abstract thinking, generalized, indirectly and actively reflecting reality, is inextricably linked with language. Language 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, in the study of linguistic expressions and the relationships between them, logic sees one of its main tasks.

2. Specificity of logic as a science
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 refined, 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 links exist between logic and those sciences that are engaged in the study of human mental activity, both on an individual and social level.
A clear delimitation of the areas of study of the sciences of spiritual activity is directly related to the definition of the subject and methods of studying logic.
The view of logic as a technology of thinking also has a number of attractive features, if only because in practice we most of all need to skillfully use the rules of reasoning, recommendations on how to effectively find arguments (premisses for conclusions), build and test hypotheses, - in a word, all that is characterized as the art of thinking or guessing.
The nature of the laws of logic as a science is that they reflect the main, constantly occurring connections and relationships that exist in the real world. That is why logic can be applied to study them. But the 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 contribute to the search and proof of truth.
The applied role of logic in specific sciences is not limited 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 laid the foundation for the logic of science in which the concepts, laws and methods of logic are successfully used to study not only purely logical, but also methodological problems that arise in scientific knowledge.
In modern conditions of the development of social processes in Russia, logic, as a science, does not lose its relevance. This is due to two main factors. One of them - features of the current stage of development of society itself. This stage is characterized by an ever greater increase in the role of science in the development of all aspects of social life, its penetration into all pores of the social organism. Accordingly, the significance of logic, which explores the means and patterns, is also enhanced. scientific knowledge. And in the conditions of modernization of the Russian economy, which requires understanding of new, complex, diverse economic and social processes occurring in the life of society, the role of science, and hence logic, increases many times over.
Another circumstance - new, high-quality breakthrough of scientific and technological progress. In the 21st century, science and technology open up horizons of knowledge unknown to society before the village, and fundamental research allows one to penetrate the secrets of the universe. At the same time, the importance of abstract thinking, and in this connection the growing importance of logic, which studies its structure, forms and laws, cannot be overestimated. In modern conditions of the deployment of a new stage of the scientific and technological revolution, associated with deep structural and informational changes in production and management, the introduction of the achievements of cybernetics and nanoindustry, the need for logic, especially symbolic, becomes even more tangible and necessary.
3. The place of logic among other sciences that study thinking.
Logic is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon of the spiritual life of mankind. Currently, there is a great variety of different industries scientific knowledge. Depending on the object of study, they are divided into natural sciences - natural sciences and social sciences - social sciences. In comparison with them, the originality of logic lies in the fact that its object is thinking.
What is the place of logic among other sciences that study thinking?
Philosophy is the study of thought in general. It solves a fundamental philosophical question related to the relationship of a person 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 motives of human mental activity, reveals the peculiarities of thinking in 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 the general patterns of control and communication in a living organism, a technical device and in a person's thinking, associated primarily with his managerial activity.
Linguistics shows the inseparable connection between thinking and language, their unity and difference, their interaction with each other. It reveals ways of expressing thoughts with the help of linguistic means.
The originality 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, the role and significance in cognition and practical activity, and at the same time from the point of view of its constituent elements, as well as the 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 the truth.
There is an opinion that the ability to reason logically is inherent in people by nature. It is erroneous.
But if a logical culture is not given to a person by nature, then how is it formed?
The logical culture of thinking is mastered in the course of communication, study at school and university, in the process of reading literature. Meeting repeatedly with one or another way 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 course of his professional activity.
The specified way of formation of logical culture can be called spontaneous. It is not the best, since people who have not studied logic, as a rule, do not own certain logical techniques, and, in addition, they have a different logical culture, which does not contribute to mutual understanding.
The value of logic for lawyers.
The specifics of the work of a lawyer lies in the constant use of special logical techniques and methods: definitions and classifications, arguments and rebuttals, etc. The degree of mastery of these techniques, methods and other logical means is an indicator of the level of the logical culture of a lawyer.
Knowledge of logic is an integral part of legal education. It allows you to correctly build forensic and investigative versions, draw up clear plans for investigating crimes, avoid mistakes in the preparation of official documents, protocols, indictments, decisions and decrees.
Famous lawyers have always used the knowledge of logic. In court, they usually did not limit themselves to simple disagreement, for example, with the arguments of the prosecution, if they saw in them a logical error. They explained what mistake was made, said that this mistake is specially considered in logic and has a special name. This argument affected 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 value of logic cannot be overestimated. Logic helps to prove true narrowings and refute false ones; it teaches 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, one can think correctly without studying logic, but one cannot underestimate the practical significance of this science.
The task of logic is to teach a person to consciously apply the laws and forms of thinking and on the basis of this it is more logical to think, to correctly recognize the world around him. Knowledge of logic increases the culture of thinking, develops the ability to think "competently", develops a critical attitude towards one's own and other people's thoughts.
Logic is a necessary tool that frees from personal, unnecessary memorization, helping to find in the mass of information that valuable thing that a person needs. It is needed "by any specialist, whether he is a mathematician, a physician, a biologist." (Anokhin N.K.).
To think logically means to think accurately and consistently, not to allow contradictions in one's reasoning, to be able to reveal logical errors. These qualities of thinking are of great importance in any field of scientific and practical activity, including 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 the rule of law and order.
List of used literature:

1. Geitmanova A.D. Logic textbook. Moscow 1995
2. Demidov I.V. Logic - tutorial Moscow 2000
3. Ruzavin G.I. Logic and reasoning. Moscow 1997
4. A short dictionary of logic. Under the editorship of Gorsky. Moscow Enlightenment 1991
5. Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A. Logics. Edition 5th 2004

Exercises:
1. Set the content and scope of the following concepts: natural phenomenon, natural disaster, earthquake.
etc.................

Logic is a philosophical discipline, and philosophers, studying the process of cognition, have established that each science has its own object and subject of research. An object is a reality or part of it, to which cognition is directed. All sciences study the real world, focusing on some specific objects. The subject of science is what this science studies in the object, what it mentally highlights in reality. The objects of individual sciences may coincide: a person, for example, is an object for many sciences - philosophy, psychology, physiology, anthropology, pedagogy, etc. But science never coincides in subjects, because each one chooses its own perspective of consideration in the object, explores a separate side of the object.

As you can see, the essence of science and its difference from others lies in subject science, therefore, entry into a scientific discipline begins with the definition of its subject.

During the existence of logic as a science, its subject matter has undergone very significant changes. The specificity of logic lies in the fact that it studies not the objective world of nature and not the subjective world of experiences, but thinking, through which a person learns both. The task of this science is to study the forms and laws of thinking itself. The natural historical course of human cognition is characterized by the fact that first the cognition of the external objective world develops, and only after humanity has reached a certain degree of perfection as a result of this cognition, problems arise related to the very process of cognition. The need to resolve these problems gave rise to the theory of knowledge and logic.

Logics one of the oldest sciences, originated in framework philosophy more than 2300 years ago in the writings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, who first systematized the forms and rules of thinking. He left us the first major works on logic, which were later united under the general title of Organon. The logic founded by Aristotle is called traditional formal logic. Formal means connected with the form (this is how we think), studying as something separate, separate from the content (this is what we think about). Russian scientists made a huge contribution to the development of formal logic. Original logical concepts in Russia were developed in the 18th century and are associated with the names of M.V. Lomonosov and A.N. Radishchev. The heyday of logical research in our country dates back to the end of the 19th century. These are, first of all, such scientists as M. Karinsky, L. Rutkovsky, S. Povarnin. Logic studies thinking. Cognition of the world as its reflection in consciousness is carried out in two forms: sensual and abstract cognition.

Sense cognition proceeds in such forms as sensation, perception, representation and is a direct reflection of the external, individual at the level of phenomena. At the level of abstract thinking, which proceeds in the form of concepts, judgments, and conclusions in the process of reflection, thinking penetrates the essence of the phenomena and objects being studied, is generalized and indirect, and is inextricably linked with language. Logic does not study sensory forms of cognition, it studies forms of abstract thinking. Logic in the broadest sense of its subject also explores the structure of abstract thinking, reveals the patterns underlying it. Abstract thinking, generalized, indirectly and actively reflecting reality, is inextricably linked with language. Language 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. Logic uses an artificial language, which is created with the help of formalization, which means that in logic operations with thoughts are replaced by actions with signs. The main signs of formal logic are words, and the complex ones are sentences of natural language. Therefore, in the study of linguistic expressions and the relationships between them, logic sees one of its main tasks.

Thinking is studied by many sciences. The subject of the study of logic are the forms of thinking, the laws of inferential knowledge, the laws of the connection of thoughts. Logic studies the forms of correct reasoning. Traditional formal logic explores the laws of communication between formed thoughts, methods of operating with them.

From the middle of the 19th century, mathematical (symbolic) logic began to develop on the basis of formal, traditional logic. Its ideas were expressed by the German scientist G. Leibniz (1646–1716). These are ideas about the possibility and productivity of reducing reasoning to calculations. Its further development is connected with the names of J. Boole, A. M. De Morgan, Ch. Symbolic logic uses for the analysis of the forms and laws of thinking means and methods that are traditionally considered to belong to mathematics. The Russian logician P. Poretsky saw the essence of mathematical logic in the fact that it “is logic in its subject, and mathematics in its method”.

The student of logic often finds it difficult to distinguish between concepts: the content of thought and the form of thought, the form of thought and the laws of thought. The content of thoughts constitutes the connections of objects and phenomena of reality reflected in thought, i.e. correspondence of the content of thought to the subject. Logic does not study the content of thoughts, it studies forms, i.e. ways of connecting parts of mental content, as parts of mental content are located one relative to the other. The transition from one form of thought to another, while maintaining the correct logical connection between parts of the mental content, is ensured by observing the laws of logic. Formal logical laws- these are connections between thoughts, in which the truth of one necessarily determines the truth of other thoughts. Logical laws reflect the general, internal, necessary, essential connections between thoughts and their elements. This reflection occurs in the process of practical activity of people. The logic of thinking is a certain way of reflecting reality. It is the observance of logical laws that makes thinking correct, i.e. capable of achieving true knowledge under certain conditions. Thus, logic studies that common thing that connects thoughts in their movement towards the knowledge of truth.

The history of logic provides a wide variety of views on the subject and tasks of logic, in particular, we can mention the dispute between psychologism and antipsychologism in logic. Psychological logic reduced the subject of the science of logic to the study of the psychology of thinking and thus abolished logic as an independent science with its own specific tasks. N. Groth, T. Lipps and others take the position of psychologism. On the contrary, Husserl sharply dissociates logic from psychology and develops the methodology of anti-psychologism as the basis for constructing logical theories. The "continnism" of the logic of Sigwart, Wundt, Erdmann and Ziegen closely connects logic with psychology without dissolving logic in it; however, the psychology that is widely used here is idealistic.

Today, the development of formal logic goes in two main directions:

1. development of new systems of non-classical logic (the logic of imperatives, evaluations, questions, inductive logic, the theory of logical consequence, etc.), the study of the properties of these systems and the relationships between them, the creation of their general theory;

2. expansion of the scope of formal logic. The most important final result, obtained in this direction of scientific research, is what formal logic has become, according to M.M. Novoselov, not only as an instrument of precise thought, but also as the "thought" of the first precise instrument - an electronic device, directly in the role of a partner included by a person in the sphere of solving intellectual problems.

Logic has become an integral part of human culture. Its achievements are used in a wide variety of areas of human activity. It is widely used in psychology, linguistics, management theory, pedagogy, jurisprudence, management, and ethics. Its formal sections are the theoretical basis of cybernetics, computational mathematics and technology, information theory. Without the principles and laws of logic, modern methodology, knowledge and communication are inconceivable.

Each specialist singles out his own aspect in logic, finds useful for himself some part of the variety of knowledge accumulated in it. There are problems of interest to a specialist of any profile. These are, for example, problems related to communication between people. Communication is an essential feature of human life. The human essence is manifested only in communication, in the unity of man with man, in unity, based only on the reality of the difference between I and YOU. Interpersonal dialogic relations are the actual reality of social relations.

special attention deserves logic in the communicative training of production managers, lawyers, journalists, politicians and everyone for whom verbal communication is almost the only channel for performing social functions. The development of the logical foundations of the communication process is the most important task of modern logic, it is directly related to the question of the most effective means of communication between people, the formation of thoughts in order to correctly understand them and convince them of their truth.

Another one critical area application of logic - the creation of new systems of artificial intelligence. The science of artificial intelligence has approached such a milestone when it is necessary to solve the problems of manipulating knowledge in computer systems not only with the “knowledge + inference” paradigm, but also in the “knowledge + inference + understanding” complex. More and more attention of researchers is attracted by the problems of reasoning by analogy, reflection, building models of metaphorical judgments.

Lecture 1

SUBJECT AND TASKS OF LOGIC

Logic, one of the oldest sciences, arose in the problematic field of philosophy more than 2300 years ago, and in the works ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle for the first time showed how thinking should be done in order for the truth to be achieved, what rules thinking must obey in this case. The main task that students face when studying a course of logic is to learn to consciously apply the laws and forms of thinking, to learn the basic principles of correct logical thinking - certainty, consistency, evidence; acquire skills and abilities that require accuracy of thinking, validity and persuasiveness of conclusions.

Definition of logic.

In order to define what logic is, we must first find out what is the purpose of human knowledge. The goal of knowledge is to achieve truth through thinking, the goal of knowledge is truth. Logic is the science that shows how thinking must be done in order for truth to be reached; what rules thought must obey in order for truth to be reached. Through thinking, truth is sometimes attained and sometimes not. That thinking by which truth is attained must be called right thinking. So the logic can be defined as the science of the laws of right thinking, or the science of the laws that govern right thinking.

Two circumstances have historically contributed to the identification of logic as a special branch of knowledge:

1) even in ancient times, people knew that the reliability of inference knowledge depends not only on the truth of the initial premises, but also on the way they are combined;

2) in order to convince, one must not only speak well, but also master various methods of constructing inferences and evidence.

Therefore, logic was used theoretically and practically in everyday intellectual and speech activity and entered the program of European universities as part of the so-called trivium - the first stage of higher education, which, in addition to logic, included grammar and rhetoric.

The emergence of the term "logic".

The word "logic" to refer to the science of thinking, about its forms and laws, was introduced at the very beginning of the 3rd century. BC e. the founder of the Stoic trend in philosophy is Zeno from the city of Kition, in Cyprus (c. 336-264 BC). As you know, Aristogg. BC BC), the true creator of logic as a science, used the word "analytics" to designate it. Most likely, the word "logic" comes from the ancient Greek "logos", which even then was an extremely ambiguous expression, which is fundamental to philosophical views many ancient philosophers. The ambiguity of the logos was also reflected in the meaning of the word "logic". “Logos” is also a concept, word, thought, mind, idea, principle, law, order, etc.

Specific patterns of correct thinking;

Science that studies the patterns of structure and development of correct thinking;

Patterns of development of objectively existing things and phenomena (logic of things);

A certain sequence of human actions.

We will consider logic as the science of the forms and laws of correct thinking.

The meaning of logic in modern world

It has always been assumed that knowledge of logic is necessary for educated person. Now, in conditions of a radical change in the nature of human labor, the value of such knowledge is increasing. Evidence of this is the growing importance of computer literacy, one of the theoretical foundations of which is logics.

Knowledge and practical knowledge of the science of logic is necessary for a lawyer in order to be able to analyze the complex and intricate problems that arise in investigative and judicial practice, to reason correctly and convincingly, to express his thoughts clearly and reasonably. The study of logic is also intended to contribute to a more successful mastery of the theory and practice of legal science, such branches of it as, for example, civil or Roman law. Logic classes train analytical skills, teach you to think correctly.

From the definition of the science of "logic" it is clear that it investigates the laws of thought. But since the study of the laws of thought as a certain class of mental processes is also the subject of psychology, the subject of logic will become clearer if we consider the difference between logic and psychology in the study of the laws of thought.

Psychology and logic.

We can look at thinking from two points of view. We can look at it, first of all, as a well-known process, the laws of which we study. This will be a psychological point of view. Psychology studies how the process of thinking takes place. On the other hand, we can look at thinking as a means of reaching truth. Logic investigates what laws thought must obey in order for it to lead to truth.

So, the difference between psychology and logic in relation to the process of thinking can be expressed as follows. Psychology considers all kinds of mental activity: the reasoning of a genius, the delirium of a patient, the thought process of a child, an animal - are of equal interest to psychology, because it considers only how the process of thinking is carried out; logic considers the conditions under which Thought can be correct. In this respect, logic approaches grammar. Just as grammar specifies the rules that speech must obey in order to be correct, thus logic shows us the laws to which our thinking must obey in order to be correct.

In order to understand the assertion that there are certain rules to which thinking must obey, let us consider what the task of logic is.

Tasks of logic.

There are propositions or facts, the truth of which is seen directly, and there are propositions or facts, the truth of which is seen through other propositions or facts. If I say: “I am hungry”, “I hear a sound”, “I feel heaviness”, “I see that this object is large”, “I see that this object is moving”, etc., then I will state the facts , which must be considered directly knowable. We can also call facts of this kind obvious, because they do not need any proof: their truth is obvious without proof. Indeed, do I really need proof that there is an object in front of me that has green color? Really, if someone began to prove that this object is not green, but black, would they believe him? This fact is immediately obvious. Among the immediately obvious provisions are, first of all, those provisions that are the result of sensory perception.

All those facts that take place in our absence (for example, past and future phenomena) can only be known indirectly. I see that it is raining - this is a fact of direct knowledge. That it rained at night is a fact of indirect knowledge, because I know about it through another fact, namely the fact that the soil is wet. Such knowledge is proved, made convincing, obvious with the help of direct knowledge. This last process is called proof.

Thus, there are provisions that do not need proof, and there are provisions that need proof, the evidence of which is seen indirectly.

If there are propositions that need proof, then what is the proof? The proof lies in the fact that we are trying to unobvious provisions reduce to propositions or facts that are immediately obvious or generally obvious. Such a reduction of non-obvious propositions to obvious propositions can best be seen in mathematical proofs. In this case, the proof of theorems is obtained through axioms - obvious knowledge.

By noticing this relation between propositions that are obvious and not directly obvious, we can understand the tasks of logic. When we prove something, that is, when we reduce non-obvious propositions to immediately obvious ones, then in this process of reduction we may make a mistake: our conclusion may be erroneous. But there are certain rules that show how to distinguish correct conclusions from erroneous conclusions. These rules are specified by logic. The task of logic, therefore, is to show what rules a conclusion must follow in order to be true. If we know these rules, then we can determine whether they are observed in one or another process of inference.

The practical use of logic.

To clarify the meaning of logic, it is usually customary to start from its definition. We have seen that logic is defined as the science of the laws of correct thinking. From this definition of logic, it seems to follow that it is worthwhile to study the laws of right thinking and apply them in the process of thinking in order to be able to think quite right. It even seems to many that logic can indicate the means for discovering truth in various fields of knowledge.

But in reality this is not true. Logic does not set as its goal the discovery of truths, but sets as its goal the proof of already discovered truths. The logic specifies the rules by which errors can be detected. As a result, thanks to logic, mistakes can be avoided. Therefore, the statement of the English philosopher becomes clear , that the use of logic is mostly negative. Its task is to warn against possible errors. As a consequence, the practical importance of logic is extremely great.

What is the usefulness, the practical value of logic? Of course, logic can be understood as a certain intellectual toolkit, which is useful for mental activity. But it can also be understood as the end result of the study of forms of thought, which, as with the accumulated experience of mankind, is useful to get acquainted with.

However, logic is neither just a tool nor just a result. It is richer in content than both, it requires complete mastery of oneself and only then gives freedom of action, brings practical benefits, and demonstrates its methodological value. Mastering this science is difficult, intellectually laborious. Many, however, treat it as a kind of product, result, toolkit that you just have to pick up and you can already use it effectively and get tangible results. But this is far from true. Science demands more, but only after that can it give its owners freedom of action, that is, practical usefulness and a sense of the value of the knowledge gained.

LOGIC METHODOLOGY

Logic occupies a special place in the system of sciences. The peculiarity of the situation is determined by the fact that logic, like philosophy as a whole, performs a methodological role in relation to other sciences with its doctrine of general scientific (universal) forms and methods of thinking. In domestic literature, the concept "methodology" understood in two ways.

First, as a set of methods, used by one science or another. In this sense, it is legitimate to talk about the methodology of physics, chemistry, biology and other sciences, since each science uses one or another set of methods, without having a special doctrine about them in its content. The methods of these sciences are based on the simplest logical methods, which are investigated by logic. They can also be formed as combinations of them. Adapted to the specific subject of their sciences, these methods acquire originality and the appearance of independence from logical ones.

Secondly, as a doctrine of methods. In this sense, only philosophy and logic have methodology, because philosophy explores the universal method of practical and theoretical human activity, and logic explores the basic universal human and general scientific intellectual methods. Since the method is a system of rules, a system of normative provisions, then the methodological in this sense is not only related to methods, but also defining, indicating, normative, metric, i.e., similar to methods. It is this role for all sciences that the logical doctrine of the forms and methods of thinking performs.

The history of logic and the main direction of its development

The creator of logic as a science should be considered Aristotle(384-322). The logic of Aristotle was dominant not only in antiquity, but also in the Middle Ages, in the era of the so-called scholastic philosophy. Worth mentioning is the work of the followers of the philosopher Descartes (1596-1650), which was called: La logique ou lart de penser (1662). This logic, which is called the Port logic, belongs to the so-called formal direction. In England bacon(1561-1626) is considered the founder of a special direction in logic, which is called inductive, the best exponents of which in modern logic are (1806-1873) and L. ben(1818-1903).

In order to understand what is the difference between the formal and inductive direction in logic, we note what is called material and formal truth. We consider a proposition to be materially true when it corresponds to reality or things. We consider this or that conclusion formally true in the case when it is deduced with certainty from certain propositions, i.e., when the way of connecting thoughts is correct, the very conclusion may not correspond to reality at all. To explain the difference between formal and material truth, let's take examples. We are given two positions:

All volcanoes are mountains

All geysers are volcanoes

From these two propositions it necessarily follows that "all geysers are mountains." This conclusion is formally true, because it necessarily follows from the two given propositions, but materially it is false, because it does not correspond to reality; geysers are not mountains. Thus, an inference that is formally true can be materially false.

But let's take the following example:

All rich people are vain

Some people are not rich

Therefore, some people are not conceited.

This conclusion is materially true, because indeed "some people are not conceited," but it is formally false, because it does not follow from these propositions. Indeed, if it were said that only the rich are vain, then we would say of every non-rich person that he is not vain. But in our first proposition it is affirmed: "all the rich are vain"; this does not rule out that other people can be vain. In such a case, one can be poor and at the same time be vain; from the fact that someone is not rich, it does not follow that he cannot be vain. It is clear from this that the said conclusion does not necessarily follow from these provisions.

Those rules which indicate when conclusions are formally true, we may call formal criteria of truth; those rules which determine material truth we may call material criteria of truth.

Formal logic primarily studies those branches of logic in which the formal criterion of truth can be applied. Inductive logic, in contrast to formal logic, mainly develops those departments in which the material criterion is applied.

Problems in the study of modern logic

Logical operations - such as definition, classification, proof, refutation, etc. - are used by each person in his mental activity. But they are applied unconsciously and often with errors, without a clear idea of ​​the depth and complexity of those mental actions with which each, even the most elementary, act of thinking is associated.

The problems of modern logic are complex and diverse. And so much is left outside training course. Its task is to give a general and accessible idea of ​​the laws of our thinking and of the science that studies them, to show logical analysis in action, as applied to meaningfully interesting problems encountered in Everyday life and in your future profession.

The logical theory is peculiar. She says about the ordinary - about human thinking - what may at first glance seem unnecessarily complicated. In addition, its main content is formulated in a special artificial language created specifically for its own purposes. Hence the difficulty of the first acquaintance with logic: one must look at the familiar and established with new eyes and see the depth behind what was taken for granted.

Just as the ability to speak existed before the science of grammar, so the art of thinking correctly existed long before the science of logic. The overwhelming majority of people even now think and reason without turning to special science for help and not counting on this help. Some even tend to regard their own thinking as a natural process, requiring no more analysis and control than, say, breathing or walking.

Of course, this is a delusion. An acquaintance with the principles of logic will show the groundlessness of such excessive optimism in relation to our spontaneously developed habits of correct thinking.

Review questions

1. How is logic defined?

2. What is the difference between psychology and logic?

3. What is the purpose of the proof?

4. What is the task of logic?

5. Why can't "common sense" replace logic?

6. What are the main directions in logic?

7. What does logic study?

Logic as the science of thinking. Subject and object of logic.

1. The word "logic" comes from the Greek logos, which means "thought", "word", "reason", "regularity". In modern language, this word is used, as a rule, in three meanings:

1) to denote patterns and relationships between events or actions of people in the objective world; in this sense one often speaks of the "logic of facts", "logic of things", "logic of events", "logic of international relations", "logic of political struggle", etc.;

2) to indicate the rigor, consistency, patterns of the thinking process; in this case, the following expressions are used: “logic of thinking”, “logic of reasoning”, “iron logic of reasoning”, “there is no logic in the conclusion”, etc.

3) to designate a special science that studies logical forms, operations with them and the laws of thought.

object logic as a science is human thinking. Subject logics are logical forms, operations with them and laws of thought.

2. The concept of a logical law. Laws and forms of thinking.

Logical law (law of thinking)- a necessary, essential connection of thoughts in the process of reasoning.

The law of identity. Every statement is identical to itself: A = A

The law of non-contradiction. A statement cannot be both true and false at the same time. If the statement A is true, then its negation not A must be false. Therefore, the logical product of a proposition and its negation must be false: A&A=0

Law of the excluded middle. A statement can be either true or false, there is no middle ground. This means that the result of the logical addition of the statement and its negation always takes the value true: A v A = 1

Law of sufficient reason- the law of logic, which is formulated as follows: in order to be considered completely reliable, any provision must be proven, that is, sufficient grounds must be known, by virtue of which it is considered true.

There are three main forms of thinking: concept, judgment and inference.

A concept is a form of thinking that reflects the general and, moreover, essential properties of objects and phenomena.

Judgment - this is a form of thinking that contains the assertion or denial of any position regarding objects, phenomena or their properties.

inference - such a form of thinking, in the process of which a person, comparing and analyzing various judgments, derives a new judgment from them.

The formation of the science of logic, the stages of its development.

Stage 1 - Aristotle. He tried to find an answer to the question: "How do we reason." He analyzed human thinking, its forms - the concept, judgments, conclusions. This is how formal logic arose - the science of the laws and forms of thinking.	ARISTOTLE (lat. Aristotle(384-322 BC), ancient Greek scientist, philosopher
Stage 2 - the emergence of mathematical or symbolic logic. Its foundations were laid by the German scientist Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. He made an attempt to replace simple reasoning with actions with signs.	Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) German philosopher, mathematician, physicist, linguist.
Stage 3 - the Englishman George Boole finally developed this idea, he was the founder of mathematical logic. In his works, logic acquired its own alphabet, spelling and grammar. The initial section of mathematical logic was called the algebra of logic or Boolean algebra.	George Boole (1815-1864). English mathematician and logician.
George von Neumann laid the basis for the operation of a computer with a mathematical apparatus that uses the laws of mathematical logic.

An example of expanding the scope of a concept with a simultaneous decrease in content

Moscow State University → State University→ University → Higher education institution → Educational (educational) institution → Educational institution → Institution → Organization → Subject of public law → Subject of law

The law is applicable only when the volume of one concept enters the volume of another, for example: "animal" - "dog". The law does not work for mismatched concepts, for example: "book" - "doll".

Reducing the scope of a concept with the addition of new features (that is, expanding the content) does not always occur, but only when the feature is characteristic of a part of the scope of the original concept.

Types of concepts.

Concepts are usually divided into the following types: 1) singular and general, 2) collective and non-collective, 3) concrete and abstract, 4) positive and negative, 5) irrelative and correlative.

1. Concepts are divided into singular and general, depending on whether one element or many elements are thought of in them. The concept in which one element is thought is called a single one (for example, “Moscow”, “L.N. Tolstoy”, “Russian Federation”). A concept in which a set of elements is conceived is called a general one (for example, "capital", "writer", "federation").

General concept, referring to an indefinite number of elements, is called non-registering. So, in the concepts of “man”, “investigator”, “decree”, a lot of elements conceivable in them cannot be taken into account: all people, investigators, decrees of the past, present and future are conceived in them. Non-registering concepts have an infinite scope.

2. Concepts are divided into collective and non-collective.

Concepts in which the signs of a certain set of elements that make up a single whole are thought are called collective. For example, "team", "regiment", "constellation". These concepts reflect a multitude of elements (team members, soldiers and regimental commanders, stars), but this multitude is conceived as a single whole. The content of a collective concept cannot be attributed to each individual element included in its scope, it refers to the entire set of elements. For example, the essential features of a team (a group of persons united common work, common interests) are not applicable to each individual member of the collective.

The concept in which the signs relating to each of its elements are thought is called non-collective. Such, for example, are the concepts of "star", "commander of the regiment", "state".

3. Concepts are divided into concrete and abstract, depending on what they reflect: an object (a class of objects) or its attribute (relationship between objects).

A concept in which an object or a set of objects is conceived as something independently existing is called concrete; a concept in which an attribute of an object or a relationship between objects is conceived is called abstract. Thus, the concepts of "book", "witness", "state" are concrete; the concepts of "whiteness", "courage", "responsibility" - abstract.

4. Concepts are divided into positive and negative, depending on whether their content consists of properties inherent in the object, or properties that are absent from it.

5. Concepts are divided into irrelative and correlative, depending on whether they conceive of objects that exist separately or in relation to other objects.

Concepts that reflect objects that exist separately and are thought outside their relationship to other objects are called irrelative. Such are the concepts of “student”, “state”, “crime scene”, etc.

To determine what kind a particular concept belongs to means to give it a logical description. So, giving a logical description of the concept of "Russian Federation", it is necessary to indicate that this concept is single, collective, concrete, positive, irrelevant. When characterizing the concept of "insanity", it should be indicated that it is general (non-registering), non-collective, abstract, negative, irrelevant.

6. Relations between concepts. +++++++++++

comparable concepts. According to the content, there can be two main types of relations between concepts - comparability and incomparability. In this case, the concepts themselves are respectively called comparable and incomparable.

Comparable concepts are divided into compatible And incompatible.

Compatibility relationships can be of three types. This includes equivalence, overlap And subordination.

Equivalence. The relation of equivalence is otherwise called the identity of concepts. It occurs between concepts containing the same subject. The volumes of these concepts coincide completely with different content. In these concepts, either one object or a class of objects containing more than one element is conceived. More simply, in relation to equivalence, there are concepts in which one and the same object is thought. As an example illustrating the relationship of equivalence, we can cite the concepts of "equilateral rectangle" and "square".

Crossing (crossing). The concepts that are in relation to the intersection are those whose volumes partially coincide. The volume of one thus partially enters the volume of the other and vice versa. The content of such concepts will be different. A schematic representation of the intersection relationship is in the form of two partially aligned circles (Fig. 2). The point of intersection on the diagram is hatched for convenience. An example is the concepts of "peasant" and "tractor driver"; "mathematician" and "tutor".

Subordination (subordination). The relationship of subordination is characterized by the fact that the scope of one concept is completely included in the scope of another, but does not exhaust it, but is only a part.

Incompatibility relations are usually divided into three types, among which there are subordination, opposition and contradiction.

Subordination. The relationship of subordination arises when several concepts are considered that exclude each other, but at the same time have subordination to another, common to them, wider (generic) concept.

Opposite (contrast). Concepts that are in relation to the opposite can be called such species of the same genus, the contents of each of which reflect certain features that are not only mutually exclusive, but also replace each other.

Contradiction (contradiction). The relation of contradiction arises between two concepts, one of which contains certain features, and the other denies (excludes) these features without replacing them with others.

Comparable- these are concepts that somehow have in their content common essential features (by which they are compared - hence the name of their relationship). For example, the concepts of "law" and "morality" contain a common feature - "social phenomenon".

incomparable concepts. Incomparable- concepts that do not have any significant common features in one way or another: for example, "law" and "universal gravitation", "right" and "diagonal", "right" and "love".

True, even such a division is to a certain extent conditional, relative, because the degree of incomparability can also be different. For example, what is there in common between such seemingly different concepts as “spaceship” and “fountain pen”, except for some purely external similarity in the form of the structure? And meanwhile, both are the creations of human genius. What is common between the concepts of "spy" and "letter b"? Like nothing. But here is the unexpected association they evoked in A. Pushkin: “Spies are like the letter Ъ. They are needed only in some cases, but even here you can do without them, and they are used to popping in everywhere. Hence, the common feature is "necessary sometimes."

There are incomparable concepts in any science. They also exist in legal science and practice: “alibi” and “pension fund”, “guilt” and “version”, “legal adviser” and “independence of the judge”, etc., etc. Incomparability characterizes even, it would seem, , similar in content concepts: "enterprise" and "administration of the enterprise", "labor dispute" - "consideration of a labor dispute" and "body for considering a labor dispute", "collective agreement" and "collective negotiations on a collective agreement". It is important to take this circumstance into account in the process of operating with such concepts, so as not to fall into a comical situation, despite the desire.

Classification of judgments.

The predicate of the judgment, which will be the bearer of novelty, may have a very different character. From this point of view, in all the variety of judgments, there are three most common groups: attributive, relational and existential.

Attribute judgments(from Lat. altributum - property, sign), or judgments about the properties of something, reveal the presence or absence of certain properties (or signs) in the subject of thought. For example: "All the republics of the former USSR declared their independence"; "The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is fragile." Since the concept that expresses the predicate has content and scope, attributive judgments can be considered in two ways: content and volume.

Relational judgments(from lat. relatio - relation), or judgments about the relationship of something to something, reveal the presence or absence of an object of thought of one or another relationship to another object (or several objects). Therefore, they are usually expressed by a special formula: x R y, where x and y are objects of thought, and R (from relatio) is the relationship between them. For example: "CIS is not equal to the USSR", "Moscow is bigger than St. Petersburg".

Examples. The proposition "All metals are electrically conductive" can be turned into the proposition "All metals are like electrically conductive bodies." In turn, the judgment “Ryazan is smaller than Moscow” can be turned into the judgment “Ryazan belongs to the cities that are smaller than Moscow”. Or: "Knowledge is what is like money." In modern logic there is a tendency to reduce relational judgments to attributive ones.

Existential judgments(from Latin existentia - existence), or judgments about the existence of something, these are those in which the presence or absence of the very subject of thought is revealed. The predicate here is expressed by the words “exists” (“does not exist”), “is” (“no”), “was” (“was not”), “will be” (“will not be”), etc. For example: “Smoke without there is no fire”, “the CIS exists”, “there is no Soviet Union”. In the process of legal proceedings, first of all, the question is decided whether the event took place: “There is a crime” (“There is no evidence”).

The quality of the bond

The quality of judgment is one of its most important logical characteristics. By it is meant not the actual content of the judgment, but its most general logical form - affirmative, negative or negating. This reveals the deepest essence of any judgment in general - its ability to reveal the presence or absence of certain connections and relations between conceivable things. And this quality is determined by the nature of the bundle - “is” or “is not”. Depending on this, simple judgments are divided according to the nature of the link (or its quality) into affirmative, negative and negative.

In affirmative judgments reveals the existence of any connection between the subject and the predicate. This is expressed by means of the affirmative connective “is” or the words corresponding to it, a dash, the agreement of words. The general formula for an affirmative judgment is "S is P". For example: "Whales are mammals."

In negative Judgments, on the contrary, reveal the absence of one or another connection between the subject and the predicate. And this is achieved with the help of the negative link "is not" or the words corresponding to it, as well as simply by the particle "not". The general formula is "S is not P". For example: "Whales are not fish." At the same time, it is important to emphasize that the particle “not” in negative judgments certainly stands before the copula or is implied. If it is after the link and is part of the predicate (or subject) itself, then such a judgment will still be affirmative. For example: “It is not false freedom that lives in my poems.”

negative judgments- these are judgments in which the nature of the bundle is double. For example: “It is not true that a person will never leave solar system».

By volume of the subject

In addition to the initial, fundamental division of simple, categorical judgments according to quality, there is also their division according to quantity.

The amount of judgment is its other most important logical characteristic. Quantity here means by no means any specific number of objects conceivable in it (for example, the number of days of the week, months or seasons, planets of the solar system, etc.), but the nature of the subject, i.e. its logical scope. Depending on this, general, particular and singular judgments are distinguished.

General judgments have their own varieties. First of all, they can be selective and non-selective.

Particular judgments are those in which something is said about a part of a group of objects. In Russian, they are expressed by such words as “some”, “not all”, “most”, “part”, “separate”, etc. In modern logic, they are called the “existence quantifier” and are denoted by the symbol “$” (from English exist - to exist). The formula $ x P(x) reads: "There is x such that property P(x) holds." In traditional logic, the following formula of private judgments is adopted: "Some S are (are not) P".

Examples: "Some wars are fair", "Some wars are unfair" or "Some witnesses are truthful", "Some witnesses are not truthful". The quantifier word can also be omitted here. Therefore, in order to determine whether there is a particular or general judgment, one must mentally substitute the appropriate word. For example, the proverb “To err is human” does not mean that this applies to every person. Here the concept of "people" is taken in a collective sense.

By modality

The main informative function of judgment as a form of thinking is reflection in the form of affirmation or denial of the connections between objects and their attributes. This applies to both simple and complex judgments, in which the presence or absence of a connection is complicated by connectives.

The modality of judgments is additional information expressed in the judgment in an explicit or implicit form about the nature of the validity of the judgment or the type of relationship between the subject and the predicate, reflecting the objective relationship between objects and their attributes.

Compound sentences and their types.

Complex propositions are formed from several simple propositions. Such, for example, is the statement of Cicero: “After all, even if acquaintance with law represented an enormous difficulty, even then the consciousness of its great usefulness should have encouraged people to overcome this difficulty.”

Just like simple propositions, complex propositions can be true or false. But unlike simple judgments, the truth or falsity of which is determined by their correspondence or non-correspondence to reality, the truth or falsity of a complex judgment depends primarily on the truth or falsity of its constituent judgments.

The logical structure of complex judgments also differs from the structure of simple judgments. The main structure-forming elements here are no longer concepts, but simple judgments that make up a complex judgment. At the same time, the connection between them is carried out not with the help of ligaments “is”, “is not”, etc., but through the logical unions “and”, “or”, “or”, “if [...], then” and others. Legal practice is especially rich in such judgments.

In accordance with the functions of logical connectives, complex judgments are divided into the following types.

1 Connective judgments (conjunctive) are such judgments that include as constituent parts other judgments are conjuncts, united by a bunch of "and". For example, "The exercise of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen must not violate the rights and freedoms of other persons."

2 Disjunctive (disjunctive) judgments - include as components of the judgment - disjuncts united by the link "or". For example, "The plaintiff has the right to increase or decrease the size of the claims."

There is a weak disjunction, when the union “or” has a connecting-separating meaning, that is, the components included in a complex proposition do not exclude each other. For example, "A contract of sale may be concluded orally or in writing." Strong disjunction occurs, as a rule, when the logical unions “or”, “or” are used in an exclusive-separating sense, that is, its components exclude each other. For example, “Slander, combined with the accusation of a person of committing a grave or especially grave crime, is punishable by restriction of liberty for a term of up to three years, or by arrest for a term of four to six months, or by imprisonment for a term of up to three years.”

Conditional (implicative) propositions are formed from two simple propositions through the logical union "if [...], then". For example, "If after the expiration of the period of temporary work with the employee the contract was not terminated, then he is considered accepted for permanent work." The argument that begins in implicative judgments with the word "if" is called the basis, and the component that begins with the word "then" is called the consequence.

Conditional propositions primarily reflect objective causal, spatio-temporal, functional and other relationships between objects and phenomena of reality. However, in the practice of applying legislation, the rights and obligations of people associated with certain conditions can also be expressed in the form of an implication. For example, "Soldiers of military units Russian Federation located outside the Russian Federation, for crimes committed on the territory of a foreign state, are criminally liable under this Code, unless otherwise provided by an international treaty of the Russian Federation ”(Clause 2, Article 12 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

At the same time, it must be borne in mind that the grammatical form “if [...], then” is not an exclusive feature of a conditional proposition, it can express a simple sequence. For example, “If the person who directly committed the crime is recognized as the perpetrator, then the instigator is the person who persuaded another person to commit

Types of questions.

Questions can be classified in various ways. Consider the main types of issues that are most often addressed in the legal field.

1. According to the degree of expression in the text, questions can be explicit and hidden. An explicit question is expressed in language in its entirety, along with its presuppositions and the requirement to ascertain the unknown. The hidden question is expressed only by its premises, and the requirement to eliminate the unknown is restored after understanding the premises of the question. For example, if we read the text: “More and more ordinary citizens become owners of shares, and sooner or later the day comes when there is a desire to sell them”, we will not find clearly formulated questions here. However, when comprehending what you read, you may want to ask: “What is a share?”, “Why should they be sold?”, “How to sell shares correctly?” etc. The text thus contains hidden questions.

2. According to their structure, questions are divided into simple and complex. A simple question structurally involves only one judgment. It cannot be broken down into elementary questions. A complex question is formed from simple ones with the help of logical unions “and”, “or”, “if, then”, etc. For example, “Which of those present identified the criminal, and how did he react to this?”. When answering a complex question, it is preferable to break it down into simpler questions. Question like: “If the weather is fine, will we go on an excursion?” - does not apply to complex questions, since it cannot be divided into two independent simple questions. This is an example of a simple question. The meaning of conjunctions forming complex questions is thus not identical with the meaning of the corresponding logical conjunctions by which complex true or false propositions are formed from simple true or false propositions. Questions are not true or false. They may be right or wrong.

3. According to the method of requesting the unknown, clarifying and supplementing questions are distinguished. Clarifying questions (or "whether" - questions) are aimed at revealing the truth of the judgments expressed in them. In all these questions, there is a particle “whether”, included in the phrases “is it true”, “is it really”, “is it necessary”, etc. For example, “Is it true that Semenov successfully defended his thesis?”, “Is there really more people in Moscow than in Paris?”, “Is it true that if he passes all the exams with excellent marks, he will receive an increased scholarship?” and others. Complementary questions (or “to” - questions) are designed to identify new properties of the object under study, to obtain new information. A grammatical sign is an interrogative word like “Who?”, “What?”, “Why?”, “When ?", "Where?" and so on. For example, “How to conclude an agreement for the provision of brokerage services?”, “When was this traffic accident committed?”, “What does the word “sponsor” mean?” and etc

4. According to the number of possible answers, questions are open and closed. An open question is a question that has an indefinite set of answers. A closed question is a question that has a finite, most often quite limited, number of answers. These questions are widely used in judicial and investigative practice, in sociological research. For example, the question “How does this teacher lecture?” is an open question, as many answers can be given to it. It can be restructured in order to “close”: “How does this teacher lecture (good, satisfactory, bad)?”.

5. In relation to the cognitive goal, questions can be divided into key and suggestive. A question is a key question if the correct answer to it serves directly to achieve the goal. The question is leading if the correct answer somehow prepares or brings the person closer to understanding the key question, which, as a rule, turns out to be dependent on the illumination of leading questions. Obviously, there is no clear boundary between key and leading questions.

6. According to the correctness of the formulation of questions, they are divided into correct and incorrect. Correct (from lat. correctus - polite, tactful, courteous) question is a question, the premise of which is true and consistent knowledge. An incorrect question is based on the premise of a false or contradictory judgment, or a judgment whose meaning is not defined. There are two types of logically incorrect questions: trivially incorrect and non-trivially incorrect (from Latin trivialis - hackneyed, vulgar, devoid of freshness and originality). A question is trivially incorrect, or meaningless, if it is expressed in sentences containing obscure (indefinite) words or phrases. An example is the following question: "Does critical metaphysication by abstractions and discrediting the tendency of cerebral subjectivism lead to ignoring the system of paradoxical illusions?"

Types of responses.

Among the answers, there are: 1) true and false; 2) direct and indirect; 3) short and detailed; 4) complete and incomplete; 5) exact (certain) and inaccurate (indefinite).

1. True and false answers. By semantic status, i.e. in relation to reality, answers can be true or false. The answer is regarded as true if the judgment expressed in it is correct, or adequately reflects reality. The answer is regarded as false if the judgment expressed in it is incorrect, or does not adequately reflect the state of affairs in reality.

2. Answers direct and indirect. These are two types of answers, differing in the scope of their search.

A direct answer is one that is taken directly from the search for answers, in the construction of which additional information and reasoning are not used. For example, a direct answer to the question “In what year did the Russo-Japanese War end?” there will be a judgment: "The Russo-Japanese War ended in 1904." A direct answer to the Li-question "Is a whale a fish?" there will be a judgment: "No, the whale is not a fish."

An indirect answer is a response that is obtained from a wider area than the area of ​​​​response search, and from which only the necessary information can be obtained by inference. So, for the question "In what year did the Russo-Japanese war end?" the following answer will be indirect: "The Russo-Japanese War ended one year before the First Russian Revolution." To the question "Is a whale a fish?" the answer will be indirect: "The whale belongs to mammals."

3. Short and detailed answers. In grammatical form, answers can be short and detailed.

Short - these are monosyllabic affirmative or negative answers: "yes" or "no".

Expanded - these are answers, in each of which all elements of the question are repeated. For example, to the question "Was JFK a Catholic?" affirmative answers can be received: short - "Yes"; expanded - "Yes, J. Kennedy was a Catholic." Negative answers will be: short - "No"; extended - "No, JFK was not a Catholic."

Short answers are usually given to simple questions; at difficult questions it is advisable to use detailed answers, since monosyllabic answers in this case often turn out to be ambiguous.

4. Complete and incomplete answers. According to the amount of information provided in the answer, the answers may be complete or incomplete. The problem of completeness most often arises when answering complex questions.

A complete answer includes information on all elements or parts of the question. For example, to the difficult question "Is it true that Ivanov, Petrov and Sidorov are accomplices in the crime?" the following answer will be complete: "Ivanov and Sidorov are accomplices in the crime, and Petrov is the executor." To the difficult question “By whom, when and in connection with what was the poem “On the Death of a Poet” written?” the complete answer would be:

“The poem “On the Death of a Poet” was written by M.Yu. Lermontov in 1837 in connection with the tragic death of A.S. Pushkin.

An incomplete answer includes information about individual elements or sub-parts of the question. So, to the above question "Is it true that Ivanov, Petrov and Sidorov are accomplices in the crime?" - the answer will be incomplete: "No, it's not true, Petrov is the performer."

5. Accurate (definite) and inaccurate (uncertain) answers! The logical relationship between the question and the answer means that the quality of the answer is largely determined by the quality of the question. It is no coincidence that in polemics and in the process of interrogation the rule applies: what is the question, such is the answer. This means that it is difficult to get a clear answer to a vague and ambiguous question; If you want to get a precise and definite answer, then formulate a precise and definite question.

Types of dilemmas

Conditional disjunctive inferences are inferences in which one of the premises is a disjunctive statement, and the rest are conditional statements. Another name for conditionally divisive inferences is lemmatic, which comes from the Greek word lemma - a sentence, an assumption. This name is based on the fact that these inferences consider various assumptions and their consequences. Depending on the number of conditional premises, conditionally divisive conclusions are called dilemmas (two conditional premises), trilemmas (three), polylemmas (four or more). In the practice of reasoning, dilemmas are most often used.

The following main types of dilemmas can be distinguished:

- a simple design dilemma,

– complex design dilemma,

- simple destructive dilemma,

is a complex destructive dilemma.

An example of a simple constructive dilemma (Socrates' reasoning):

“If death is a transition into non-existence, then it is good. If death is a transition to another world, then it is good. Death is a transition to non-existence or to another world. Therefore, death is a blessing.

A simple constructive (affirmative) dilemma:

If A, then C.

If B, then C.

An example of a complex design dilemma:

A young Athenian turned to Socrates for advice: should he marry? Socrates replied: “If you get a good wife, then you will be a happy exception, if a bad one, then you will be like me, a philosopher. But you will get a good or a bad wife. Therefore, either you be a happy exception, or a philosopher.

Difficult design dilemma:

If A, then B.

If C, then D.

An example of a simple destructive dilemma:

“In today's world, if you want to be happy, you need to have a lot of money. However, it has always been the case that if you want to be happy, you need to have a clear conscience. But we know that life is arranged in such a way that it is impossible to have both money and conscience at the same time; or no money, or no conscience. Therefore, give up hope for happiness.”

A simple destructive (denying) dilemma:

If A, then B.

If A, then C.

False B or False C.

False A.

An example of a complex destructive dilemma:

“If he is smart, he will see his mistake. If he is sincere, he will confess it. But he either does not see his mistake, or does not admit it. Therefore, he is either not smart or not sincere.

Difficult destructive dilemma:

If A, then B.

If C, then D.

Not-B or Not-D.

Not-A or Not-C.

An example of a complete inductive inference.

All guilty verdicts are issued in a special procedural order.

All acquittals are issued in a special procedural order.

Guilty verdicts and acquittals are decisions of the court.

All court decisions are issued in a special procedural order.

This example reflects the class of objects - court decisions. All (both) of its elements were specified. The right side of each of the premises is valid in relation to the left. Therefore, the general conclusion, which is directly related to each case separately, is objective and true.

Incomplete induction called a conclusion, which, on the basis of the presence of certain recurring features, ranks this or that object in the class of objects homogeneous to it, which also have such a feature.

Incomplete induction is often used in daily human life and scientific activity, as it allows to draw a conclusion based on the analysis of a certain part of a given class of objects, saves time and human effort. At the same time, we must not forget that as a result of incomplete induction, a probabilistic conclusion is obtained, which, depending on the type of incomplete induction, will fluctuate from less probable to more probable (11) .

The above can be illustrated by the following example.

The word "milk" changes by case. The word "library" changes by case. The word "doctor" changes by case. The word "ink" changes by case.

The words "milk", "library", "doctor", "ink" are nouns.

Probably all nouns change in cases.

Depending on that