首页 >> 9 EPISTEMOLOGY >> THE ESSENCE OF FORMAL LOGIC: SIMPLE AND USEFUL RULES THAT ARE NOT OBJECTIVELY TRUE
THE ESSENCE OF FORMAL LOGIC: SIMPLE AND USEFUL RULES THAT ARE NOT OBJECTIVELY TRUE
来源:WOP in Education, Social Sciences and Psycholopy, Volume:107 (March 30-31, 2024), pp.116-123. | 作者:Yong Duan | 发布时间: 2024-06-24 | 2247 次浏览 | 分享到:
Abstract: Logic is the rule of rational thinking. When thinking is expressed in language, logic becomes the rule of language. Logic is not the law of objective things, each discipline studies different laws, while logic is applicable to all disciplines because all disciplines use rational thought and language. Logical judgment is not necessarily the truth. In the subjective world, the simple atomic concepts can never change. In the objective world, concrete things are complicated, so A can be different from A. The rules of formal logic, such as the law of identity, the law of exclusion of middle and the law of non-contradiction, are the rules of the subjective world, and are the methods to deal with the logical structures in the subjective world, rather than the methods to deal with the real things in the objective world. The understanding of any objective thing requires a process from simple to complex. In the beginning stage of cognition, we must simplify and abstract complex objects, and use formal logic when simplifying and abstracting. For example, suppose that the Chaobai River this year is the same river as the Chaobai River in the past ten years, and then use the hydrological data of the past ten years to predict the situation of the river this year. This hypothesis is simple and useful but not objectively true. Making objective things obey the rules of formal logic is entirely artificial. Because only by following these rules can we derive useful conclusions. The purpose of simplification is to make the sentences do not contain contradictions, easy to thinking and calculation. The actual objective things contain contradictions and do not conform to formal logic. So dialectical logic negates the rules of formal logic.
Key words: Logic philosophy; Formal logic; Dialectical logic; Useful; Objectivity

4. Dialectical Logic

4.1 Dialectical Logic Comes from Rethink

There are commonalities between objective concrete things. In language, commonalities can be expressed in terms of concepts. For example, the white of a white horse's fur and the white of the limestone particles are considered the same thing, and we stipulate that the white as a concept must conform to the law of identity.

The objective and real things are very complex, and when making logical rules, people could only pay attention to some attributes of the objective things and ignore others. After the rules of formal logic were formulated, problems were found in use. In order to solve these problems, dialectical logic emerged. There is no absolutely pure white in the world, at first we feel that the white of the white horse is the same as the white of the limestone, and later the difference between them may be slowly found. Another example is that all water can extinguish fire, but some water can be drunk and some water cannot be drunk. From the property of fire extinguishing, pure water and rainwater are the same, from the drinkable property are not the same. According to formal logic, water as a concept should be the same everywhere, but dialectical logic holds that the concept contains differences. People's understanding of objective things has a continuous developing process.

A piece of paper has two sides, I set the top A and the bottom minus A. If he top plane can be extended indefinitely, every part of it is A. But the top and bottom sides of the Mobius strip are connected, so top can be equal to bottom, so A can be equal to minus A. And the inside of a Klein bottle can equal the outside. At the poles of the Earth, south can equal north. You can step into the same river twice, at the same time you can't step into the same river twice.

The initial understanding of things conforms to the law of identity of formal logic, and the in-depth understanding of things produces difference, which conforms to dialectical logic. From this point of view, dialectical logic is more in line with objective reality. But dialectical logic can not be used for logical reasoning, it does not meet the needs of people. Therefore, the value of formal logic is greater, and this value makes formal logic have great vitality.