Logics. Textbook / Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A. - M.: Higher. school, 1982. 34 Chapter III. Logical operations with concepts § 1. Generalization and limitation .... In the textbook prepared in accordance with the state educational Starchenko Anatoly Alexandrovich - candidate philosophical sciences, Professor of the Department of Logic.... Read more online book Starchenko Anatoly Alexandrovich - Logic: textbook for law schools free of charge without registration. Logic: a textbook for law schools.doc Starchenko A.A., Kirillov V.I. (see).
Logics. Textbook for law schools. Author. V. I. Kirillov A. A. Starchenko. The textbook has been prepared in accordance with the logic course program approved by the USSR Ministry of Higher Education.... Title: Logic: a textbook for law schools. Author: Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A. Publisher: - M.:TK-Velby, Prospekt.. Download books for free Logic: a textbook for law schools. Vyacheslav Ivanovich Kirillov Anatoly Aleksandrovich Starchenko.. Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A. Logic: a textbook for law schools. Starchenko Anatoly Alexandrovich. Starchenko Anatoly Alexandrovich - Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Logic.... V. I. Kirillov, P. G. Zykov, A. A. Starchenko, Yu. D. Churakov. Logics. Textbook for part-time students legal institutions and faculties.. The book "logic" kirilov starchenko a. starchenko content description. The role of thinking in cognition textbook of law schools. § 4. Language of logic. Logic Law textbooks. Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A. Logic: A textbook for law schools.. In a textbook prepared in accordance with the state educational standard for law schools, taking into account the peculiarities of teaching the logic course to students of higher legal educational institutions. Materials from the field of legal sciences are used.... Textbook for law schools "- Kirillov and Starchenko Textbook "Applied Logic" by Nikolai Nikolaevich Nepeyvoda Learn more.... Author: Kirillov Vyacheslav Ivanovich, Starchenko Anatoliy Aleksandrovich Publisher: Prospekt, 2016 Annotation to the book "Logic. A textbook for bachelors".
If you do not see the DOWNLOAD button, disable the ad cutter in your browser and refresh the page... torrent VI Kirillov, AA Starchenko - Logic - Textbook - 6th ed. Other books by Anatoly Alexandrovich Starchenko. Logic: textbook for law schools. Textbook for law schools” - Kirillov and Starchenko; “Logic Textbook “Applied Logic” by Nikolai Nikolaevich Nepeyvoda Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A.... Textbook for law schools Year: 1987 Author: V.I. Kirillov A.A. Starchenko It reflected actual problems logic and experience in teaching this discipline.... A textbook of logic by Kirillov Starchenko. Materials from the field of legal sciences are used, the significance of logical laws, techniques and operations in the work of a lawyer is shown.
n1.doc
UDC 16(075.8) BBK 87.4 K43IN AND. Kirillov Ch. I, § 1,2,3,5, 6, ch. II, III, IV, § 1,2, ch. VI, VII, § 1-5;
A A Starchenko ch. I, § 4, ch. IV, § 3-5, ch. V, ch. VII, § 6, ch. VIII-XI
Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A.Logic: A textbook for law schools.- reworked and additional - M.: Jurist, 2001. - 256 p.
ISBN 5-7975-0059-0 (in translation)
In a textbook prepared in accordance with state images)! standard for legal universities, taking into account the peculiarities of teaching the course of logic to students of higher legal educational institutions. Materials from the field of legal sciences are used, the significance of logical laws, techniques and operations in the work of a lawyer is shown. A subject index and a list of logical symbols are given.
This edition is the fifth, revised and supplemented. Previous editions: M.: graduate School, 1982 (awarded with a bronze medal of VDNKh); Moscow: Higher school, 1987; M.: Manuscript, 1992; M.: Jurist, 1995.
The textbook can be used not only by law students, But as well as students of other humanities specialties.
UDC 16(075.8) BBC 87.4 ISBN 5-7975-0059-0 © Yurist, 1998
© Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A., 1998
Chapter 1 SUBJECT AND 3 PURPOSES OF LOGIC
Logic is the science of thinking. But unlike other sciences that study human thinking, such as the physiology of higher nervous activity or psychology, logic studies thinking as a means of cognition; its subject is the laws and forms, methods and operations of thinking, with the help of which a person cognizes the world around him.
Questions related to the cognition of reality are among the most important questions of philosophy. Logic, which studies cognitive thinking and is used as a means of cognition, arose and developed as a philosophical science and is currently complex system knowledge, which includes two relatively independent sciences: formal logic and dialectical logic.
Takovo general concept about logic as a science. But in order to reveal its subject, it is necessary to clarify the questions, the answers to which constitute the task of the first chapter.
§1. The role of thinking in cognition
Cognition as a process of reflection of the objective world by human consciousness is a unity of sensory and rational 2 knowledge.
Sense cognition proceeds in three main forms: sensation, perception, representation.
From the Greek word logos - "thought", "word", "reason", "regularity". The term "logic" is also used to denote the laws of the objective world (for example, "the logic of facts", "the logic of things", "the logic of political struggle", etc.); to denote the rigor, consistency, patterns of the thinking process ("the logic of thinking", "the logic of reasoning"). The regular nature of thinking is a kind of reflection of objective laws. The logic of thinking is a reflection of the logic of things.
2 From Latin word ratio with the help of reason, thinking.
"reason", rational knowledge - knowledge with
Feeling - it is a reflection of individual sensually perceived properties of objects" - their color, shape, smell, taste.
A holistic image of an object, resulting from its direct impact on the senses, is called perception. For example, visual perception a tree growing under a window or a book lying on a table, auditory perception of the sound of rain, a musical melody, etc.
Representation is also a form of sensory cognition. Performance - it is a sensual image of an object that has been perceived before, preserved in the mind. If perception arises only as a result of the direct impact of an object on the senses, then there is an idea when such an impact is absent. For example, the idea of a person, object, event preserved in memory.
Representations can be not only images of objects that really exist; often they are formed on the basis of descriptions of objects that do not exist in reality (for example, the winged horse Pegasus, half-man-half-horse centaur of ancient Greek mythology, witch, devil, angel, created by religious fantasy). Such representations are formed on the basis of perceptions of real objects, they are their combination.
Sensory knowledge gives us knowledge about individual objects, about their external properties. But it cannot provide knowledge about the causal relationship between such phenomena as the change of seasons and the rotation of the Earth around the Sun, about the time of the onset of a solar or lunar eclipse, or about the motives for a crime. However, knowing the world, a person seeks to establish the causes of phenomena, to penetrate into the essence of things, to reveal the laws of nature and society. And this is impossible without thinking, reflecting reality in certain logical forms. Consider the main features of thinking.
1. Thinking reflects reality in generalized images. In contrast to sensory cognition, thinking abstracts 2 from the individual, singles out the general, repetitive, and essential in objects. So, highlighting the properties common to all people - the ability
From the Latin term abstractio - distraction. Abstraction is the process of abstracting from some properties of objects, allowing you to highlight its other properties. Abstraction is the result of abstraction.
work, think, exchange thoughts with the help of language - thinking generalizes these properties and creates an abstract image of a person. In a similar way, the concepts of a legal entity, state sovereignty, legal capacity, etc. are created. Thanks to the generalization abstract thinking penetrates deeper into reality, discovers its inherent laws.
2. Thinking is a process of indirect reflection of reality. With the help of the sense organs, one can know only that which directly affects or has acted on the sense organs. We see a birch grove, hear birdsong, breathe in the scent of flowers. Thanks to thinking, we receive new knowledge not directly, but on the basis of existing knowledge, i.e. indirectly. By reading the thermometer, you can judge the weather without going outside. Without observing the very fact of the crime, it is possible to establish the criminal on the basis of direct and indirect evidence.
Knowledge obtained from existing knowledge, without recourse in each case to experience, to practice, is called output, and the process of obtaining it - breeding. The acquisition of new knowledge by derivation is widely used in human cognitive activity.
3. Thinking is inextricably linked with language. Whatever thought arises in a person's head, it can arise and exist only on the basis of linguistic material, in words and sentences. With the help of language, people express and consolidate the results of their mental work, exchanging thoughts, achieving mutual understanding.
4. Thinking is a process of active reflection of reality. Activity characterizes the whole process of cognition as a whole, but above all - thinking. Applying generalization, abstraction and other mental techniques, a person transforms knowledge about the objects of reality, expressing them not only by means of a natural language, but also in the symbols of a formalized, playing language. important role in modern science.
So, the generalized and mediated nature of the reflection of reality, the inextricable connection with language, the active nature of reflection - these are the main features of thinking.
Distracting from the concrete in things and phenomena, thinking is able to generalize a multitude of homogeneous objects, highlight the most important properties, and reveal essential connections.
Due to these features, thinking is the highest form of reflection of reality compared to sensory cognition.
It would be wrong, however, to consider thinking in isolation from sensory cognition. Real cognitive process they are in an inseparable unity, they make up the sides, the moments of a single process of cognition. Sensory cognition contains elements of generalization, which are characteristic not only of representations, but to a certain extent of perceptions and sensations and constitute a prerequisite for the transition to logical cognition. However great the importance of thinking, it is based on the data obtained with the help of the senses. With the help of thinking, a person cognizes such phenomena, inaccessible to sensory cognition, as movement elementary particles, the laws of nature and society, but the source of all our knowledge of reality is ultimately sensations, perceptions, ideas.
§ 2. The concept of the form and law of thinking Form of thinking
Basic forms of thinking - concept, judgment and inference. Each of these forms will be discussed in detail in the following chapters. Here we dwell on them briefly in order to reveal the concept of a logical form.
Individual objects or their aggregates are reflected by human thinking in concepts that are different in content. For example, "legal law" and "robbery" are concepts that reflect different subjects of thought. A legal law is a normative act emanating from the highest body of state power and having the highest legal force. Robbery in criminal law is considered as open theft of another's property. But these various phenomena are conceived in the same way - as a certain totality of their common, essential properties, or signs.
Highlighting characteristic features in a certain respect | one subject or common, recurring signs of a group of pre->? metov, we form the concept of the object A as a certain set of its essential features a, b, c and etc., in a certain way related to each other.
Thus, different objects are reflected in the thinking of a person in the same way - as a certain connection of their essential features, i.e. in the form of a concept.
In the shape of judgments relationships between objects and their properties are reflected. These links are affirmed or denied. For example, in the judgment "The accused has the right to defense" the connection between the accused and the right to defense is affirmed. In the judgment "This crime is not intentional", the connection between the committed crime and intent is denied.
The above judgments are different in their content, but the way of connecting the parts (elements) of this content is the same, this connection is expressed in the form of an affirmation or in the form of a negation. Denoting the concepts included in the judgment with the symbols S (subject) accepted in logic - this is how the concept of the subject of the judgment is designated - and P (predicate) - the concept of the attribute of the subject, we get a scheme common to any judgment of this type: S - P, where S and P - the concepts included in the judgment, and the sign "-" - the designation of the connection between them.
Under S and P, you can think of any objects and their properties, under the sign "-" - any connection (both affirmative and negative). Thus, judgment is a way of connecting concepts, expressed in the form of an affirmation or negation.
Considering inference, by means of which a new judgment (conclusion) is deduced from one or more judgments (they are called premises), it can be established that in inferences of one kind the conclusion is obtained in the same way. For example, from the judgments: "A witness must not give false evidence" and "Fedorov is a witness" - a new judgment necessarily follows: "Fedorov must not give false testimony." The conclusion is obtained because the judgments from which the conclusion is drawn are connected by the concept “witness” common to them.
Likewise, i.e. thanks to the connection of judgments, it is possible to obtain a conclusion from judgments that have any content. The common thing that exists in inferences of various content is way of connecting judgments.
Thus, common, independent of the specific content of thoughts, for all basic forms of thinking is the way of connecting the elements of thought - signs in a concept, concepts in a judgment and judgments in a conclusion. The content of thoughts determined by these connections exists in certain logical forms: concepts, judgments, conclusions.
The logical form, or the form of thinking, is a way of connecting the elements of thought, its structure, thanks to which the content exists and reflects reality.
In the real process of thinking, the content and form of thought exist in an inseparable unity. There is no "pure", devoid of form content, there are no "pure", meaningless logical forms. However, for the purposes of a special analysis, we have the right to abstract 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 science of logic.
Law of thought
Human thinking is subject to logical laws, or laws of thinking.
To understand this issue, it is necessary to distinguish the truth of thought and the logical correctness of reasoning. A thought is true if it corresponds to reality. A thought that is not true is false. Thus, the statement “Vologda is located in the European part of Russia” is true, it corresponds to reality. The same statement regarding Krasnoyarsk is false, it does not reflect the actual geographical position of this city.
The truth of thoughts in content is a necessary condition for achieving correct results in the process of reasoning. Another necessary condition is the logical correctness of reasoning. If this condition is not met, then a false result can be obtained from true thoughts.
So, from the true thoughts (judgments) “The works of L.N. Tolstoy cannot be read in one week” and “The story “After the ball” is the work of L.N. Tolstoy”, it would seem that the story “After the Ball” cannot be read in one week. But such a conclusion is false: the story "After the Ball", which occupies 10 pages of printed text, can be read in half an hour. A false conclusion from true judgments was obtained as a result of the identification of non-identical concepts: in the first judgment, the concept of “works of L.N. Tolstoy" is used in collective sense - we are talking about all his works taken together, which really cannot be read in one week; in the second judgment, one of these works is meant - the concept of “the work of L.N. Tolstoy" is taken in
dividing sense 1 . Therefore, the concept that should connect the two judgments is actually absent. The reasoning is logically wrong.
The logical correctness of reasoning is due to the laws of thinking. Violation of the requirements arising from them leads to logical errors. In the above example, the identification of non-identical concepts is associated with a violation of the requirement identity law, according to which every thought in the process of reasoning must be identical to itself.
The law of thinking, or logical law, is the necessary, essential connection of thoughts in the process of reasoning.
Unlike laws as normative legal acts established by the state, the laws of thought are not established by people; they are formed independently of the will and desire of a person. Their objective basis is relative stability, qualitative certainty, interdependence of objects of reality. At the same time, reflecting certain aspects of reality, logical laws are not the laws of things themselves. This is a kind of reflection, mediated by the centuries-old practice of human knowledge.
The laws studied by formal logic (they are also called formal-logical ones) should be distinguished from the dialectical laws of thought. Formal-logical laws, which in modern logic are considered as identically true statements, or logical tautologies, determine the correctness of reasoning. Through their operation, the derivation of new knowledge from true and proven judgments necessarily leads to truth. The laws of dialectics - the unity and struggle of opposites, the mutual transition of quantitative and qualitative changes, and others - are not only the laws of the objective world, but also the laws of thinking, they are the subject of study of dialectical logic. The conscious application of these laws in the process of cognition makes it possible to reproduce in thinking the dialectics of the material world: the interconnection of phenomena, their change and development, their inherent contradictions, etc.
Cognizing the complex dialectical processes of the objective world, thinking at the same time obeys formal logical laws, without which it is impossible to reflect the logic of things.
For the use of concepts in the divisive and collective sense, see Chapter II, §3.
§ 3. Basic logical laws
Among the many logical laws, logic distinguishes four basic, expressing the fundamental properties of logical thinking - its certainty, consistency, consistency and validity. These are the laws identity, non-contradiction, excluded third and sufficient reason. They act in any reasoning, no matter what logical form it takes and no matter what logical operation it performs. Along with the basic ones, logic studies the laws of double negation, contra-position, de Morgan and many others, which also operate in thinking, causing the correct connection of thoughts in the process of reasoning.
Consider the basic logical laws.
The law of identity. Any thought in the process of reasoning must have a definite, stable content. This fundamental property of thinking - its certainty - expresses the law of identity:
every thought in the process of reasoning must be identical to itself (A have a, or a=a, where a is any thought).
The law of identity can be expressed by the formula p->p(If R, That R), where p is any statement, -> - implication sign.
It follows from the law of identity: one cannot identify different thoughts, one cannot take identical thoughts for non-identical ones. Violation of this requirement in the process of reasoning is often associated with a different expression of the same thought in the language.
For example, two judgments: “N. committed theft" and "N. secretly stole someone else's property "- they express the same thought (if, of course, we are talking about the same person). The predicates of these judgments are equivalent concepts: theft is the secret theft of someone else's property. Therefore, it would be erroneous to consider these thoughts as non-identical.
On the other hand, the use of ambiguous words can lead to erroneous identification of different thoughts. For example, in criminal law the word "fine" denotes a measure of punishment provided for by the Criminal Code, in civil law this word denotes a measure of administrative influence. Obviously, such a word should not be used in one sense.
The identification of different thoughts is often associated with differences in profession, education, etc. This happens in investigative practice, when the accused or the witness, not knowing the exact meaning of certain concepts, understands their other than an investigator. It's not uncommon
leads to confusion, ambiguity, makes it difficult to clarify the essence of the case.
The identification of different concepts is a logical fallacy - change of concept which can be either unconscious or intentional.
Compliance with the requirements of the law of identity is important in the work of a lawyer, which requires the use of concepts in their exact meaning.
In any case, it is important to find out the exact meaning of the concepts used by the accused or witnesses, and to use these concepts in a strictly defined sense. Otherwise, the subject of thought will be missed and instead of clarifying the matter, it will be confused.
The law of non-contradiction. Logical thinking is characterized by consistency. Contradictions destroy thought, complicate the process of cognition. The requirement of consistency of thinking expresses the formal-logical law of non-contradiction: two judgments incompatible with each other cannot be true at the same time; at least one of them must be false 1 .
This law is formulated as follows: it is not true that a and not-a(two thoughts cannot be true, one of which denies the other). It is expressed by the formula -| (p l~\p) (it is not true that p and not-p are both true). Under p is understood any statement, under ~1 p - negation of the statement R, the sign I before the whole formula is the negation of two statements connected by a conjunction sign.
The law of non-contradiction applies to all incompatible judgments 2 .
To understand it correctly, the following must be kept in mind. In asserting something about any object, one cannot, without contradicting oneself, deny (1) the same thing (2) about the same object, (3) taken at the same time and (4) in the same respect .
It is clear that there will be no contradiction between judgments if one of them asserts belonging to the subject one sign, and in the other, belonging to the same subject is denied other sign (1) and if it comes about different subjects (2).
According to tradition, this law is called the law of contradiction. However, the name - the law of non-contradiction - more accurately expresses its real meaning.
2 On incompatible judgments, see Ch. IV, § 4.
(3) There will be no contradiction even if we affirm something and deny the same thing about one person, but considered at different times. Let us assume that the accused N. at the beginning of the investigation gave false evidence, but at the end of the investigation he was forced under the weight of the evidence incriminating him to confess and give true testimony. In this case, the judgments: “The testimonies of the accused N. are false” and “The testimonies of the accused N. are true” do not contradict each other.
(4) Finally, the same object of our thought can be considered in different relationships. So, about student Shchukin, one can say that he knows German well, since his knowledge satisfies the requirements for entering the institute. However, this knowledge is not enough to work as a translator. In this case, we have the right to say: "Shchukin does not know German well." In two judgments, knowledge by Shchukin German language considered from the point of view of different requirements, therefore, these judgments also do not contradict each other.
The law of non-contradiction expresses one of the fundamental properties of logical thinking - consistency, consistency of thinking. Its conscious use helps to detect and eliminate contradictions in one's own and other people's reasoning, develops a critical attitude towards all kinds of inaccuracies, inconsistencies in thoughts and actions.
N.G. Chernyshevsky emphasized that inconsistency in thoughts leads to inconsistency in actions. Whoever does not understand the principles in all logical completeness and sequence, he wrote, has not only confusion in his head, but also nonsense in his affairs.
The ability to reveal and eliminate logical contradictions, often found in the testimony of witnesses, the accused, the victim, plays an important role in judicial and investigative practice.
One of the main requirements for a version in a forensic study is that, when analyzing the totality of factual data on the basis of which it is built, these data do not contradict each other and the version put forward as a whole. The presence of such contradictions should attract the most serious attention of the investigator. However, there are cases when the investigator, having put forward a version that he considers plausible, does not take into account the facts that contradict this version, ignores them, and continues to develop his version in spite of the contradictory facts.
During the trial, the prosecutor and the defender, the plaintiff and the defendant put forward positions that contradict each other, defending their arguments and challenging the arguments of the opposite side.
Therefore, it is necessary to carefully analyze all the circumstances of the case so that the final decision of the court is based on reliable and consistent facts.
Contradictions in judicial acts are inadmissible. Among the circumstances under which the verdict is recognized as inappropriate to the actual circumstances of the case, criminal procedural law includes significant contradictions contained in the conclusions of the court set out in the verdict.
Law of the excluded middle. The law of non-contradiction applies to all incompatible judgments. It establishes that one of them must be false. The question of the second proposition remains open: it may be true, but it may also be false.
The law of the excluded middle applies only to contradictory (contradictor) judgments. It is formulated as follows: two contradictory propositions cannot be false at the same time, one of them must be true: A is either b, or not-b. Either the statement of a fact is true, or its negation.
contradictory (contradictor) are judgments, in one of which something is affirmed (or denied) about everyone subject of a certain set, and in another - is denied (asserted) about some part this set. These judgments cannot be both true and false: if one of them is true, then the other is false, and vice versa. For example, if the judgment "To every citizen Russian Federation the right to receive qualified legal assistance is guaranteed” is true, then the proposition “Some citizens of the Russian Federation are not guaranteed the right to receive qualified legal assistance” is false. There are also two contradictory statements about one object, in one of which something is affirmed, and in the other the same thing is denied. For example: "P. brought to administrative responsibility" and "P. not held administratively liable." One of these judgments is necessarily true, the other is necessarily false.
This law can be written using the disjunction: R v i p, where p is any statement, "1p is the negation of p.
Like the law of non-contradiction, the law of the excluded middle expresses the consistency, consistency of thinking, does not allow contradictions in thoughts. At the same time, acting only in relation to contradictory judgments, he establishes that two contradictory judgments cannot be not only simultaneously
True (as indicated by the law of non-contradiction), but also false at the same time: if one of them is false, then the other must be true, the third is not given.
Of course, the law of the excluded middle cannot indicate which of these judgments is true. This issue is resolved by other means. The significance of the law lies in the fact that it indicates the direction in the search for truth: only two solutions to the problem are possible, and one of them (and only one) is necessarily true.
The law of the excluded middle requires clear, definite answers, pointing to the impossibility of answering the same question in the same sense both “yes” and “no”, to the impossibility of looking for something in between affirming something and denying the same.
This law is of great importance in legal practice, where a categorical solution of the issue is required. The lawyer must decide the case in the form of "either-or". This fact either installed or not installed. The accused is either guilty or not guilty. Jus (right) knows only: "either-or".
Law of sufficient reason. Our thoughts about any fact, phenomenon, event can be true or false. Expressing a true thought, we must substantiate its truth, i.e. prove its validity. So, when bringing charges against the defendant, the accuser must provide the necessary evidence, substantiate the truth of his assertion. Otherwise, the accusation will be unfounded.
The requirement of proof, the validity of thought expresses the law of sufficient reason: any thought is recognized as true if it has a sufficient basis. If there b, that is, its base a.
A person's personal experience can be a sufficient basis for thoughts. The truth of some judgments is confirmed by their direct comparison with the facts of reality. So, for a person who witnessed a crime, the justification for the truth of the judgment “N. committed a crime” will be the very fact of the crime of which he was an eyewitness. But personal experience is limited. Therefore, a person in his activities has to rely on the experience of other people, for example, on the testimony of eyewitnesses of an event. Such grounds are usually resorted to in investigative and judicial practice when investigating crimes.
Thanks to the development of scientific knowledge, man is increasingly using the experience of all mankind as the basis of his thoughts,
enshrined in the laws and axioms of science, in the principles and regulations that exist in any field of human activity.
The truth of laws, axioms has been confirmed by the practice of mankind and therefore does not need new confirmation. To confirm any particular case, there is no need to substantiate it with the help of personal experience. If, for example, we know the law of Archimedes (each body immersed in a liquid loses as much in its weight as the liquid displaced by it weighs), then there is no point in immersing an object in a liquid in order to find out how much it loses in weight. The law of Archimedes will be a sufficient basis for confirming any particular case.
Thanks to science, which in its laws and principles consolidates the socio-historical practice of mankind, in order to substantiate our thoughts, we do not each time resort to checking them, but justify them logically, by deriving from already established provisions.
Thus, any other, already tested and established thought, from which the truth of this thought necessarily follows, can be a sufficient basis for any thought.
If the truth of proposition a follows the truth of proposition b, then a will be the basis for b,ab- a consequence of this foundation.
The connection between the foundation and the effect is a reflection in thinking of objective, including cause-and-effect relationships, which are expressed in the fact that one phenomenon (cause) gives rise to another phenomenon (effect). However, this reflection is not direct. In some cases, the logical basis may coincide with the cause of the phenomenon (if, for example, the idea that the number of traffic accidents has increased is justified by pointing to the cause of this phenomenon - ice on the roads). But most often there is no such coincidence. The judgment "It has rained recently" can be substantiated by the judgment "The roofs of the houses are wet"; the trace of the protectors of automobile awls is a sufficient basis for the judgment "A car passed at this place." Meanwhile, wet roofs and a trail left by a car are not the cause, but the consequence of these phenomena. Therefore, the logical connection between the basis and the effect must be distinguished from the causal relationship.
Validity is the most important property logical thinking. In all cases when we affirm something, convince others of something, we must prove our judgments, give sufficient reasons confirming the truth of our thoughts.
Lei. This is the fundamental difference between scientific thinking and non-scientific thinking, which is characterized by lack of evidence, the ability to accept various positions and dogmas on faith. This is especially characteristic of religious thinking, which is based not on proof, but on faith.
The law of sufficient reason is incompatible with various prejudices and superstitions. For example, there are ridiculous signs:
break a mirror - unfortunately, sprinkle salt - to a quarrel, etc., although there is no causal relationship between a broken mirror and misfortune, spilled salt and a quarrel. Logic is the enemy of superstition and prejudice. It requires the validity of judgments and is therefore incompatible with statements that are built according to the scheme "after this - therefore, because of this." This logical fallacy occurs when causation is confused with a simple sequence in time, when the antecedent is taken as the cause of the next.
The law of sufficient reason is of great theoretical and practical importance. Fixing attention on the judgments that justify the truth of the put forward provisions, this law helps to separate the true from the false and come to the right conclusion.
The significance of the law of sufficient reason in legal practice is, in particular, as follows. Any conclusion of the court or investigation must be substantiated. In the materials concerning any case, containing, for example, the allegation of the guilt of the accused, there must be data that is a sufficient basis for the accusation. Otherwise, the accusation cannot be recognized as correct. The issuance of a reasoned sentence or court decision in all, without exception, cases is the most important principle of procedural law.
The textbook has been reprinted more than five times and today remains one of the most the best materials for self-study and preparation for exams as part of the study of logic by students of legal specialties. The last nuance found sufficient justification in the book - the key points are illustrated with examples from legal practice.
Description
The textbook has been reprinted more than five times and today remains one of the best materials for self-study and preparation for exams as part of the study of logic by law students. The last nuance found sufficient justification in the book - the key points are illustrated with examples from legal practice. The topics are covered briefly and to the point, as it should be in a logic textbook. At the same time, the material is presented in a simple and accessible way.
The textbook, prepared in accordance with the state educational standard for law schools, takes into account the peculiarities of teaching the logic course to students of higher law schools. Materials from the field of legal sciences are used, the significance of logical laws, techniques and operations in the work of a lawyer is shown. Literature, a subject index and a list of logical symbols are given.
about the author
Kirillov Vyacheslav Ivanovich- Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Head of the Department of Philosophy of the Moscow State law academy. Graduate of Moscow State University. Honorary Worker higher vocational education RF. Specialist in the field of logic, methodology, theory of knowledge.
Starchenko Anatoly Alexandrovich- Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Logic of the Moscow state university named after M.V. Lomonosov. Laureate of the Lomonosov Prize. Region scientific interests Keywords: argumentation theory, logical and methodological problems of law, epistemic logic.
