论逻辑能力的定义

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Cogency Pub Date : 2022-01-26 DOI:10.32995/cogency.v13i2.373
A. Schumann
{"title":"论逻辑能力的定义","authors":"A. Schumann","doi":"10.32995/cogency.v13i2.373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to logical psychologism that was popular in the nineteenth century, logic was regarded as a natural ability of human psychology. Consequently, logical competence as a realization of logic knowledge was treated as one of the innate features of human thinking. Nevertheless, within cognitive science, it was experimentally proved that our thinking is not free from cognitive biases, and to the same extent, our reasoning is not free from logical fallacies. Hence, we are forced to consciously clear the thinking of possible distortions to follow logical norms and to realize logical competence thereby. In the paper, it is shown that some cognitive biases are observed even at the level of cellular reactions to the environment and then at the level of animal behavior. Therefore not logic, but cognitive biases are a natural (biological) mechanism of human thinking. So, the problem of defining logical competence arises. In this paper, there are some arguments that logical competence has once appeared as an especial social practice and it has then been developed for a long time before the first treatises on logic.","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":"104 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards the Definition of Logical Competence\",\"authors\":\"A. Schumann\",\"doi\":\"10.32995/cogency.v13i2.373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"According to logical psychologism that was popular in the nineteenth century, logic was regarded as a natural ability of human psychology. Consequently, logical competence as a realization of logic knowledge was treated as one of the innate features of human thinking. Nevertheless, within cognitive science, it was experimentally proved that our thinking is not free from cognitive biases, and to the same extent, our reasoning is not free from logical fallacies. Hence, we are forced to consciously clear the thinking of possible distortions to follow logical norms and to realize logical competence thereby. In the paper, it is shown that some cognitive biases are observed even at the level of cellular reactions to the environment and then at the level of animal behavior. Therefore not logic, but cognitive biases are a natural (biological) mechanism of human thinking. So, the problem of defining logical competence arises. In this paper, there are some arguments that logical competence has once appeared as an especial social practice and it has then been developed for a long time before the first treatises on logic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37515,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cogency\",\"volume\":\"104 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cogency\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32995/cogency.v13i2.373\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cogency","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32995/cogency.v13i2.373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

根据19世纪流行的逻辑心理学,逻辑被认为是人类心理的一种自然能力。因此,逻辑能力作为逻辑知识的实现被视为人类思维的固有特征之一。然而,在认知科学中,实验证明,我们的思维并非没有认知偏差,同样,我们的推理也并非没有逻辑谬误。因此,我们被迫有意识地清除可能的扭曲思维,遵循逻辑规范,从而实现逻辑能力。本文表明,在细胞对环境的反应水平上,甚至在动物行为水平上,也可以观察到一些认知偏差。因此,不是逻辑,而是认知偏见是人类思维的自然(生物)机制。因此,定义逻辑能力的问题就出现了。本文认为,逻辑能力曾经作为一种特殊的社会实践出现过,在第一批逻辑学论著出现之前,它已经发展了很长时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Towards the Definition of Logical Competence
According to logical psychologism that was popular in the nineteenth century, logic was regarded as a natural ability of human psychology. Consequently, logical competence as a realization of logic knowledge was treated as one of the innate features of human thinking. Nevertheless, within cognitive science, it was experimentally proved that our thinking is not free from cognitive biases, and to the same extent, our reasoning is not free from logical fallacies. Hence, we are forced to consciously clear the thinking of possible distortions to follow logical norms and to realize logical competence thereby. In the paper, it is shown that some cognitive biases are observed even at the level of cellular reactions to the environment and then at the level of animal behavior. Therefore not logic, but cognitive biases are a natural (biological) mechanism of human thinking. So, the problem of defining logical competence arises. In this paper, there are some arguments that logical competence has once appeared as an especial social practice and it has then been developed for a long time before the first treatises on logic.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cogency
Cogency Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cogency is an international journal devoted to research and scholarship in reasoning and argumentation. The journal seeks to be a source of reference which elucidates our understanding of these fields of study with a particular interest in their educational dimension. It aims to contribute to education by advancing our theoretical and practical understanding of reasoning and argumentation. Authors are encourage to use and integrate perspectives originating in psychology, philosophy, linguistics, formal and informal logic, rhetoric, critical thinking, amongst others disciplines and angles. Cogency publishes articles and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信