西方的非形式逻辑运动与我国逻辑学的走向（informal logic movement in the west and the trend of logic in china） 11页

西方的非形式逻辑运动与我国逻辑学的走向（InformallogicmovementintheWestandthetrendoflogicinChina）MathematicallogichasbeenwidelyspreadinChina,aboutthemiddleandlate80s.[a]asaformalsystemandtherigoranddelicacyofmathematicallogic,itreallyopenstheeyesofthelogicscholarsathome.Foratime,theuseofmathematicallogicinsteadofordinarylogicseemstohavebecomeageneraltrend.However,thefactsarenotassimpleandsmoothasimagined.Thisarticlehasnointentiontocauselossesandacomprehensiveandsystematicdiscussionofthe"substitution",buttothewestern,especiallythenonformallogicofNorthAmerica(InformalLogic)inthemovement,talkaboutsomeoftheviewsonChina'slogicdevelopmentdirection.I.informallogicinNorthAmericaandEuropeGenerallyspeaking,thedevelopmentoflogiccanbedividedintotwoparts:oneisthetraditionallogicwhichwascreatedbyAristotle,itsdominantpositionlastedfortwothousandyears;theotheroneisfoundedbyFregeandtheso-called"modernlogicoftheoverallsystembyRussell".Modernlogichasbeenanevercloserlinkbetweenlogicandmathematics,andhasevencreatedtheillusionthatneitherofthesetwoistrue.Fromthenaturallanguagelogicseemscompletelydivided,itbecamethestudyobjectofartificiallanguage;logicofeverydaythinkingnolongerinterested,butonlycareabouthowtoconstructthesystem,accordingtothespecificrulesforsymbolicoperation.Althoughwiththedeepeningoftheresearchontheformalsystem\nandthebirthofthemetalogic,philosophicallogicandlogicbranchtoreflecttheformofthesystemitself,buttheproblemofcontinuitybetweenmodernlogicandtraditionallogic,roleofmathematicallogicinthewholelogicofscience,howcantheapplicationproblemsandmathematicallogicineverydaythinking.Failedtoobtainsatisfactorysolution.Althoughthenatureoflogicanddefinetheproblem,wecannotexpecttocompleteconsensuslogicians,butfromtheperspectiveofthedevelopmenthistoryoflogic,logicasatooltohelppeopleidentifygoodandbadargumentcannotbeunderestimated.However,themodernformallogic"hasbecomesotechnical,purepurifyingandspecializedthatitisalientotheoriginalnotionthat'logicisusedforwhatitis"[a].Thisdeviationitselfmaybejustifiable,becauseinasenseitisthisdeviationthatmakeslogicanewdirectionofdevelopment.However,asToulmin(S.Toulmin)pointedouttheproblems,"isnotthelogicofscienceitself,butthatwhenpeopleputthemselvesoccasionallyfreefromthesubjectofsophisticatedtechnology,andtriestoprobeintothescienceandwhatisthesignificanceforwhatitis--likethosefoundintheactualhowtobeused,theyarewithusindailylifetheactualassessmentisgoodorbad,whatistheconnectionstrengthandthestandardofthemethodanduseactually......"[a].Inlogicandcontemporaryrhetoric,KeKe(H.Kahane)tellsanintriguingstory:"Afewyearsagoinaclass,Iwastaughtthat(forme)predicate\nlogicdelicateandcharmingquantitativerules,astudentaskedindisgust.HespentthewholesemesterofthesethingsandPresidentJohnsononceagainmakethedecisionwhatistherelationshipbetweentheVietnamWar,ImumbledsomethingaboutJohnsoninconsequentially,andsaidthatthisisnotanintroductiontologiccourses.Heaskedwhatcoursesweredealingwiththeseproblems,andIhadtosay,asfarasIknow,notyet.""TheAKeenjoytheconclusionthattoday'sstudentswanttolearnisaroutineandinference,andtheirdailyheardmoisteneyeabouttherelatedcourses,theymustbethecombinationoftheoryandpractice,whichiswhymanyofthemthinkthat,tothelogicalfallacyofrhetoricanintroductorycourseisnottotheirtaste."[a]Generallybelieve,Manyfactorsleadtotheriseofinformallogiccanbesummarizedastwopoints:oneisduetotheneedtopractice,ithasbeenpointedoutinfront;ontheotherhandisduetothepureformalfeaturesofmodernlogicmakesitmoresuitabletomeettheactualneedsofeverydaythinking.Thelimitationsofformalsystemnotonlynonformallogictodiscussthetopicofphilosophicallogicthatmanymathematicallogictextbooksalsotendtosetspecialchapters,buttheirfocusiscompletelydifferent.ThediscussionofmodernlogicusuallyrevolvesaroundGodel'sincompletelaw.Insteadofformallogic,weshoulddiscussthedifferencebetweenformallanguageandnaturallanguageandthe\nstatusofsymboliclogicineverydaythinking.Infact,mostwesternscholarsincludinglogic,mathematicallogicians,acknowledgedthatformallogicisnotpurelydetailedcharacterizationofallthecharacteristicsofthenaturallanguageargument.Thiscanbeclearlyseenfromthetwomostimportantconceptsoftheformalsystem,thesubstantialimplicationsandthevalidity.Althoughmanyscholarshavetriedtoprovethatthelogicdoesnotexisttheso-called"paradoxofmaterialimplication",or"paradoxofmaterialimplication"isnotabitstrange,butanyengagedinlogicteachingworkofscholars,ifarealisticattitudewouldprobablynotwanttodenythestudentsspeakoutthisisnothoweasy.Asweallknow,theconceptofsubstantialentailmentcanleadtoanimportantconsequence,thatis,falsepropositioncontainsanyproposition,andtruepropositioncontainsanyproposition.Thus,whenpisfalse,"pq"and"P~Q"thesameistrue.Itshouldbesaidthatthisresultformaterialimplicationasaformofsystembasiclogicrelationship,notwhatisstrange,becauseinaccordancewiththeagreement,"pq"meaningisdefinedby"notreallyPandQfalse"todetermine,butifyouinsistthat""isreflectedineverydaythinking"if......Wellthen......"Therelationshipbetweensuchconditions,andthatbythissymbolconnectedpropositionalformulaisequivalenttothedailythinkingofthehypotheticaljudgment,theproblemcameout.\nStrawXun(P.F.Strawson)pointedoutearlyin1952that"iftherain,thegamewillbecanceled"and"iftherain,thegamewillnotbecanceled"isincompatiblewitheachother,atthesametimeaffirmedthatthetwowillleadtocontradictions.[b]infact,evenwhenweconsideronlythefactthatanimplicationistruebeforeandafter,wemayfinditdifficulttounderstandtheimplicationfromthepointofviewofnaturallanguage.WhenPandQaretrue,"pq"isreallynoproblem.Butsaid,"ifsnowiswhite,then2+2=4"istrue,butitalwaysseemsfarfetched.Infact,therearealreadysomesymboliclogicbooksthatarenolongersimplysuggestedtohave"if"inteachingthesymbolizationofpropositions......Wellthen......"Sentencesymbolformis"pq",especiallywhentheoriginalstatementusingthesubjunctivemood.[b].Obviously,whenanydummysentenceissymbolizedbyimplication,thewholesentencewillalwaysbetruebecausetheantecedentiswithoutexception.Thiswillundoubtedlydistortthemeaningoftheoriginalsentence.Atthistime,thelogiciansproposalistosettheentirestatementwithapropositionsymbol.Validityisacoreconceptfordeductivereasoning.Whenwesaythatthepremisesofareasoningaretrue,theconclusioncannotbefalse,andwesaythatreasoningisaneffectivedeductivereasoning.Thus,forinferencereasoning,thisisthecase:eitherrightorwrong.\nButformanypracticalproof,thesituationisnotsoquitedistinctfromeachother.Forexample,todemonstrate"smokingisbad",wewillciteevidence:"smokingisharmfultoyourbody","smokingcaneasilyaffectothersandcauseresentment","smokingcausesunnecessaryexpenditure"andsoon.Itishardtosaywhethertheargumentisvalidorinvalid".Obviously,thisisneitheraneffectivedeductivereasoning,norevenatraditionalsenseofinductiveoranalogicalreasoning.Fromtheformallogicpointofview,whetheritiseffective,notonlycannotgetasatisfactoryanswer,inasense,thequestionitselfisnotgood.Butthereisnoreasontodoubtthattheconclusionofthisargumentistosomeextentsupportedbyitspremises.Inviewofthefactthattherearealargenumberofexamplesofvaliditythatcannotbededucedbydeductionindailylife,somephilosophersevenputforwardtheviewthatvalidityisalsoaquestionofdegree.[b]Neitherthequestionof"substantialimplications"northe"validity"conceptisdirectedattheformalsystemitself.Thekeyproblemisthatthecharacteristicsofthiskindofconceptdoesnotcompletelycharacterizeeverydaythinking,thustheseconceptsformsystembasednotnecessarilyapplicabletoeverydayreasoningandargumentationisnotsurprising.NonformallogicisoneofthemainrepresentativeinNorthAmericagaoweier(T.Govier)Professor,bluntlypointedoutthatinthe"problem"analysisandevaluationofthebook,\nalthoughstrictlymodernformallogicandcertainty"butthisstrictallowalldoubt,andcertaintyisachievedattheexpenseoftheempty","onitsnaturefortheformallogicwithouttheabilitytohandledailythinkinginvolvedinthiskindofproblem","atbest,itcanonlybeappliedtothenaturallanguageinsomeoftheseargumentsaredemonstrated,afterbeingcompletelydeprivedofthecontentandinterpretation,andsubstantivetruthrelatedtoalltheinterestingdemonstrationofproblems."[b]Informallogicisnotaproductofthewhimsofafewscholars,butthedeepeningoftheriftbetweeneverydaythinkingandformalresearchmethods.Infact,whenthefirstInternationalSymposiumonformallogicwasheldattheUniversityofWindsorinCanadain1978,alargenumberofbooksoninformallogichavesprungupinNorthAmericaandtheEuropeancontinent.Accordingtothe"nonformallogic"magazineeditorJohnson(R.H.Johnson)andBlair(J.A.Blair)statistics,waspublishedonthenonformallogichas67articles,textbooksare29.Inthemonograph,therepresentativeonesare:Toulmin(S.Toulmin)"TheUsesofArgument"(CambridgeUniversityPress,1958):Perlman(Ch.Perelman)andTaiteka(Olbrechts-Tyteca)andco-authorof"TheNewRhetoric:ATrea-tiseonArgumentation"(UniversityofNotreDamePress,1969)andHanbunin(C.L.Hamblin)."Fallacies"(MethuenandCo.Ltd,1970).\nAmongthem,hisworksespeciallyinfluencedtheresearchdirectionoftheinformallogicprofoundly.Itcanbesaidthatthroughoutthe60s,mostofthetextbooksonargumentationtheorycamewithtracesoftheirideas,or,mostofthem,aroundthediscussionsofmr..Hanbunin'sbook,fromthepracticalpointofview,hasmadeathoroughandthoroughtheoreticalstudyoffallacy,thusilluminatingastronginterestinthelongneglectedinformallogic.Afterthefirstseminar,fromthePhilosophyDepartmentofUniversityofWindsorpublishedfirstperiod"informallogiccommunication",theexchangeofideasforscholarsengagedinnonformallogicteachingandresearchandDiscussionontheissuesofcommonconcern.Inthepreface,pointedoutthatalthoughthenonformallogic"formanypeopleisnotthesamemeaning",but"fornow,wecanusethisconcepttorefertoawiderangeofinterestsandproblemsinhe,thebasicpointisthatitisnotsuitablefromthe"Journalofsymboliclogictobestudy.Onthepositiveside,webelievethatinformallogiccoversarangeoftheoreticalandpracticalissueswhenpeoplestudytheactualproofofactivitiesinanormativeway,Theseproblemswillcropup,.......Therefore,we(nonformallogic)understandingisveryextensive,anddoesnotadheretotheliteral,itincludesallthosetheories(suchasfallacytheoryandargumentationtheory),theactual(suchashowtostructureisthemosteffectivewaytoshowtheordinaryargument)andteaching(such\nashowtodesignthecriticalthinkingcoursesshouldbeselecttheclassofmaterials)problems."[C]Theinformallogicmainlydealswiththefollowingtopics:1.whataretheaimsoflogicalcriticisminlogiccriticism?Isitpossibletointegratethetheoryoflogiccriticism?Whatisthecriterionoflogicalcriticism?2.,whatistheessenceofargumentationtheory?Howdoesitrelatetoreasoning?Isitnecessarytoestablishthetypologyofargument?Whatstandardsshouldtheproofsatisfy?Whatprinciplesplayadecisiverole?3.whatistheessenceoffallacytheory?Howshouldthefallacybeclassified?Howhastheformationofasinglefallacybeenestablished?Shouldwediscardtheconceptoffallacy?4.,therelationbetweenfallacyandcriticalthinking.Whatarethestrengthsandweaknessesofthetwo?Shoulditbepossibleorpossibletomergeintoone?Isitjustamatterofpedagogy?5.,thefeasibilityofthedistinctionbetweeninductionandinterpretation.Isdailyargumentationessentiallyanactorageneralization?Standardvalidationanddemonstration(Soundness)standardismoresuitabletoevaluateargument?Whatkindofstandardsarebetteriftheyarenotsuitable?Whichofthefollowingstatementsismoreappropriate:aworkableargument?Asuccessfulargument?Ademonstration?Apersuasiveargument?\n6.,shouldtherebetheprincipleofmutualtrustofapplicationandacceptanceintheethicalargumentofargumentationandlogicalcriticism?Whatistheprincipleoftolerance?Howtoproveandexpressit?Arethereanywrongtoleranceprinciples?Doesitinvolveconflictingethicalprinciples?7.whataretheassumptionsandtheimplicitpremises?Whataretheimplicitpremises?Howaredifferenttypesofimplicitpremisesidentifiedintheproof?Whatkindofimplicitpremisemakesthemostsignificantassessmentoftheargument?Howshouldimplicitpremisebesupplemented?8.howdoesthecontextofcontextualargumentaffectitsmeaningandinterpretation?Whataretheelementsofcontext?Isitnecessarytoestablishatheoryofcontextorpracticalimplicationsforlogicalcriticism?9.,fromthecontextof"extraction"argumentmethod,evaluationofhowtheprinciplesapplytothiskindofargument?Mustatheoryofsomeargumentorinferencebethebasicpremise?Towhatextentarethesequestionsintheteachingsense,andtowhatextentdotheybelongtothescopeoftheoreticaldiscussion?Isthereavarietyoffeasiblewaystoextractproof?10.whatisthenature,branchandscopeofinformallogic?Whatisinformallogic?Whatarethebasiccomponentsofit?Includingthoseareas?Whatcriteriaarethecriticismsofnewsmediaandadvertisingincludedinthecontextofinformallogic?Isdecisiontheorypartofnonformallogic?\n11.whatistherelationbetweennonformallogicandotherdisciplines,informallogicandformallogic,semanticsandpragmatics?Whatrelationdoesithavewithotherfieldsofphilosophy,suchasepistemologyandphilosophyoflanguage?Whatarethedifferencesandrelationsbetweenitandrhetoric,argumentation,communicationandinferentialpsychology[D]