Klein. Dialectic logic: Basics
Thinking man is a reflection of the surrounding world. The patterns of this world determine the laws in accordance with which the process of thinking is carried out.
Logical laws, or thinking laws, thus are objective, as a result of which are common norms for all people.
Logical law is a significant connection between thoughts due to the natural links between the objects and the phenomena of the objective world.
The process of thinking proceeds according to logical laws, regardless of whether we know about their existence or not. Due to its objectivity, logical laws, as well as physical, cannot be broken, cancel or reincarn. However, due to their ignorance, a person can act contrary to an objective law, which will never lead to success. For example, if, ignoring the law of the world full, you will try to hang up the chandelier, without securing it to the ceiling, it will definitely fall and breaks. In the same way, the reasoning, built not in accordance with logical laws, will not be evident, and therefore will not lead to an agreement in the dialogue.
The argument, built in consent with logical law, always leads to the truth if its original prerequisites are true. These prerequisites determine the scheme for constructing the argument, the sequence of mental actions, the execution of which will lead to the desired result. A visual example of logical reasoning is the solution of a mathematical problem. Any such task consists of the condition and the question to which you want to find the answer. The search for an answer implies the fulfillment of mental operations on the source data. The effect of logical laws in this process is manifested in a sequence of mental operations, which is not arbitrary, but has forced to think.
There are many logical laws. Consider the most fundamental of them.
The law of identity requires that one or another thought, in whatever forms it is expressed, retained the same meaning. The law provides certainty and consistency of thinking.
According to the laws of consistent and the previously excluded third, we cannot recognize two statements about the subject at the same time, if something is approved about the subject, and in the other, it is denied. In this situation, at least one of the utterances is objectively false. If a person argues contrary to logical laws, his thinking becomes controversial, illogical.
The law of sufficient foundation requires every idea to have sufficient grounds for its truth.
Based on these most general laws, numerous laws of private outline arguments are based, which in logic are called the logic rules.
When the logic is indicated as a subject of logic, then it is assumed that thinking is a well-known subject, additional explanations on which there is no need to conduct. However, this may seem only at first glance.
Take a simple form of offer "A is in". If in it and to replace the names of objects, we get a number of specific statements on the content: "Pine is a tree", "the student is a student", etc. What is the form of these proposals "is there in"? If she is not a thought, what is the thought in the proposals that we got by filling this form of content taken from the outside? Is it yourself external content - pine, students, trees, students? The listed objects are not thoughts. The content of these names can be imagined imagery, i.e. Sensually.
Further. Does the form behave in itself some content? Answering negatively, we are a contradictory position that every form is substantial, and the content is decorated. This means that the logical form itself has a characteristic internal, immanent content. The content of the form "A is in" can be passed as follows: Any item A belongs to some objects of objects. This provision has only mental content, there are no sensual images for him. This, by definition of Hegel, "pure" thought.
When we talk about indifference of logic to content, we mean the external content entering consciousness through the senses and filling logic forms. Logic does not matter what is meant by A and V. It explores the relationship between A and B, expressed by the bundle "is". This ratio is the immanent content of the above form.
Any mental content has its basis for this or that scheme of universal categories. It is easy to make sure that the content of the content expressed in the statements "snow white", "Sweet Sugar", "Ice Cold" is lying the simplest scheme "The thing - property", and in the statements "the door creak", "Dog bays", "Rain It goes "- another simplest bunch of categories" Item - action ". The content of the given statements is the usual sensual material, invisible threads associated with "clean" thoughts. These "clean" thoughts constitute a categorical basis, or a categorical apparatus of thinking, which is formed together with formal structures, or rather, together with the formation of a person. The activities of this apparatus represents special thinking, thinking about thoughts, thinking, which is a specific way of philosophical knowledge.
Universal categories are also called forms of thoughts, but they are not formal structures, but meaningful forms, i.e. forms of universal knowledge. These forms are present in the consciousness of each person, although most people use them unconsciously. Their separation from a variety of consciousness and awareness was committed in the process of the development of philosophy. Hegel very accurately determined the history of this science as the history of the opening and study of thoughts about the absolute, which is its subject. The form of awareness of categories as mental forms is philosophical knowledge. Later, their content and relationships become the subject of the philosophical theory of dialectics, or dialectical logic. Communicated in the environment of philosophers and logic statements that the dialectical logic allegedly studies the same forms of thinking as the formal, only the second considers them as stable, fixed, and the first - as movable, developing, have no justification. Formal structures of thinking were formed long before any logic arose, and since then remains unchanged.
Unlike the formal, dialectical logic is a meaningful science examining the content of universal categories, their system relationship, the transition of one category to another by enriching the content. In this way, dialectical logic depicts the translational movement of cognition along the path of comprehension of objective truth.
The role of categories in knowledge is to streamline and organize an infinitely diverse sensual material, in its synthesis and generalization. If this had not happened, a person could not identify two perceptions of the same subject scattered in time. Folding out the categories, being absorbed by them, the external material from sensual turns into a mental, decorated in language structures. Therefore, everything that is expressed in the language is explicit or implicit form contains some category. This noted the Aristotle, saying that from the words expressed without any communication, each denotes either essence, or quality, or quantity, or ratio, or place, or time, or position, or possession, or action, or suffering.
The material delivered by the senses is a content that has spatial and temporal characteristics. This content belongs to the final, transient things existing in space and time. Thoughts, including categories, are deprived of spatio-temporal characteristics, because they recorded absolute, eternal, constant content peculiar to subjects of any nature and the component of their existence. This content becomes the subject of studying dialectical logic, or the actual philosophy as science. According to this, dialectical logic is a science of both reality and the laws of thinking. Its subject is not thinking and not reality by itself, but their unity, i.e. The object in which they are identical. The content that makes up the universal basis of all reality is available not to sensual perception, but an understanding through thinking. The reflection of this essential content is the process of gradual penetration into the depth nature of things.
"Filling" logical form by external content should be understood as the processing of sensual material "clean" thought, which products are thoughts on specific subjects, phenomena, actions, etc. In any content of consciousness - feelings, sensations, perception, desire, ideas, etc. - the thought penetrates if this content is expressed in the language. Such all-pervading thinking is the foundation of consciousness.
Thinking as a tool of intellectual activity needs to be distinguished from the activities of this tool and its products. This process, roughly speaking, is the "processing" of the material supplied by the senses, transforming it into thought, as well as in the production of new ideas. For example, the content of the thought "I am fun" is a feeling, thoughts "The ambulance car approached the entrance" - the perception of the subject situation, the thoughts "the salary is only part of the value produced" - the ratio of economic concepts, and the statements "Since the essence exists, the existence There is a phenomenon "- the relationship of philosophical categories" Essence "," existence "," phenomenon ".
Exploring thinking from the formal side, the formal logic is forced to abstract from its "meaningful" structure. Realize that it represents this structure, the following examples will help.
Consider sayings: "I need an ax to split the wooden chocks on the firewood" and "I need a sewing machine to sew a napkin from the fabric." The identity of the formal structure of thoughts expressed in these proposals is obvious. Through the replacement of language expressions by the lettering symbols, it can be represented in the following form: "X is needed y, to produce p." Letter notation can be replaced here not by any expressions, but only names of objects. What exactly items are allowed to substitute instead of alphabetic variables, the logic does not install. In those forms that study formal logic, only connections (relationships) between the elements in the logical structure are meaningfully interpreted. The elements themselves are considered as empty cells filled with from outside the material.
The similarity of the above statements is not reduced only to the formal community, to the community of their grammatical structures. The thematic community is obvious. Suggestions of such a design are used in describing one or another appropriate activity. Therefore, in their deep-based basis, there is some general content made by the categorical structure, which in our examples is reduced to the relationship of the following concepts:
subject of activity (s);
object of activity (wooden chocks, fabric);
activity (ax, sewing machine);
the activity itself (prick, sew);
product Activity (Firewood, Napkin), which simultaneously expresses its goal, and the need.
The listed concepts constitute the categorical apparatus of theoretical knowledge of human activity.
Each science, when describing its objects, operates with specific concepts peculiar only to it. In mechanics, for example, this is "power", "speed", "mass", "acceleration", etc., in logic - "Name", "Statement", "Remembrance". The most common concepts of certain science are called categories, and their combination is a categorical apparatus of this science.
The basis of thinking is the universal categories that are absorbed by their content (cover) objects of any nature, including the specific categories of specific sciences. These include, for example, the category being, quality, quantity, thing, property, attitude, essence, phenomenon, shape, content, action, etc.
Thus, universal philosophical categories (dialectics categories) are mental definitions of the subject whose synthesis expresses its essence and constitutes the concept of it.
The benchmarks of reasonable thinking, ensuring the development of knowledge, its movement to the truth gives dialectical logic. Dialectic logic is dialectic in action, in its application to thinking, knowledge, practice. Dialectical logic is studying ways of thinking, ensuring the coincidence of the content of knowledge with the object, i.e. Achievement of objective truth.
The origins of dialectical logic go back to the intellectual search for the great thinkers of antiquity: Hercelite, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Lao Tzu, and others. The largest systematizer and, in fact, the founder of dialectical logic is G. Hegel (1770-1831). However, a unique variant of dialectical logic, developed by Hegel in the fundamental work "Science of Logic" and a number of other works, unfortunately, is distinguished by the "dark depth" and inseparable for most of even professional philosophers. The colossal work on clarifying the rational meaning of dialectics and dialectical logic, the disclosure of their methodological potential was carried out followers of Hegel - K. Marx (1818-1883) and F. Engels (1820-1895). However, even these thinkers who were in the "field of granting" of the grand hegelev system could not fully overcome its "dark depth".
The merit of the deep rethinking and processing of the dialectical logic of Hegel, its development and presentation in modern, clear, structural forms belongs to the Russian thinker and revolutionar, the founder of the world's first socialist state V.I. Lenin (1870-1924).
The basic principles of dialectical logic include:
- 1. Comprehensiveness of the object consideration.
- 2. Historical approach to the object, consideration of it in development.
- 3. Allocation of the main (decisive) link determining the nature of the object.
- 4. Detection of essential bases of the object through the disclosure of its indigenous contradictions.
- 5. The concreteness of the truth.
- 6. Achieving the developed integrity of the object based on dialectic synthesis.
- 1. Comprehensiveness of the object of the object. "To really know the subject, it is necessary to cover, study all of his parties, all links and" mediation ". We will never achieve this completely, but the requirement of comprehension will warn us from mistakes ... " The meaning of this formula is that without comprehensive accounting for the essential aspects of the object and its connections with other objects, it is impossible to compile an objective, true idea of \u200b\u200bthis facility, it is impossible to scientifically explain its condition, ways of action and development trends. For example, when solving problems of technical re-equipment of production, acquiring new equipment, it is important to comprehensively assess the possible options for the required technique (technology). At the same time, not only the actual specifications of this equipment (performance, reliability, product quality) should be taken into account, but also economic (cost, payback period, the ratio of effect / costs, etc.).
- 2. Historical approach to the object. The principle of historicism involves the consideration of the object "... in its development," self-division "... change ...". "... the most important thing to approach ... the question from the point of view of scientific, it is not to forget the main historical connection, look at every question from the point of view of how a well-known phenomenon in history arose which major stages in their development this phenomenon was held, and From the point of view of this development, it is now becoming a given thing. "
The need for a historical approach to the object is due to the fact that the causes, roots of many phenomena, structures, the processes of this are rooted in the past. Therefore, without knowing the history of the object, it is impossible with sufficient depth and completeness to explain its current state, ways of action and development trends.
- 3. Allocation of the main (decisive) link in difficult phenomenon. "We must be able to find a special chain link at every particular moment, for which you need to grasp to hold all the chain." The principle of excretion of the decisive link follows from the natural for complex objects of the unequalities of their elements and connections, of varying degrees of their influence on the final result. The decisive links are those objects of the object, where the priority application effort can give the greatest effect. The role of this principle is the more comprehensive than the harder, the solid problem is extremely and the more acute the deficit of resources.
- 4. Detection of the essential base of the object through an autopsy and analysis of its indigenous contradictions. "In his own sense, the dialectic is the study of contradiction in the very essence of objects." The idea of \u200b\u200ba breakthrough to the depth bases and bonds of the object through the opening of its indigenous contradictions is based on the one that these contradictions are drawn into the orbit of their intense interaction all parties, links, object processes, determine its condition and development trends. Therefore, their autopsy and analysis create a peculiar research "window" into the deep world of the object, allow you to understand its essential basis and specificity.
- 5. Concrete truth. "Dialectical logic teaches that there is no abstract truth, the truth is always concrete ...". The concreteness of the truth means that the depth and accuracy of knowledge is possible only when the abstract compound with a specific, theory with practice, when using theoretical conclusions, taking into account the specific specifics of the subject. According to this principle, knowledge can be considered true only if it takes into account specific conditions for the existence of an object.
- 6. Achieving the developed integrity of the object based on dialectic synthesis. The mechanism of dialectic synthesis is described by the logical formula: "Thesis
The relevance of this formula is due to the fact that it allows you to overcome the "dodgers" of the infinite one-sidedness, in which science and practice are often stuck, find outputs from confrontational impasses of theoretical thought, predicting the contours of qualitatively new, more developed and holistic forms of the future. In any field of human activity, it is necessary to deal with an unproductive confrontation of one-sided approaches, persistently insist on their truth, self-relief and at the same time rejecting the values \u200b\u200bof the opposite side. The uncompromising struggle of the ending-friendly extremes makes the development of an object in a dead end, blocks movement forward to new forms and meanings.
Examples of one-sided extremes, limited by the approval by their imaginary "self-sufficiency" and the denial of values \u200b\u200bof the opposite side, are antithesis: "Materialism is idealism", "liberalism - communism", "Capitalism - Socialism", "Market - Planned Mechanism", etc. Such bastions stagnant The confrontations generated by the fruitless confrontation of the infinite, interconnected approaches are distributed in all spheres of science and practice and are the strongest development brake.
The formula of dialectic synthesis indicates a method for unlocking stagnant impasses by interconnecting synthesis of extremes opposing each other. The dialectical character of synthesis means that it does not occur by the formula of the eclectic mixing of the parties, but using the potential of their confrontation for processing the data of the parties to a qualitatively new, more advanced integrity. In dialectical synthesis, the potential of opposition to the parties is subordinated to achieving their adequate constructions, cut-off the unproductive extremes, connecting the viable parts of these opposites into a new integrity.
In recent years, several monographs on the dialectics and logic of "Capital" of Marx have been published. This indicates that Soviet philosophers follow the instructions of Lenin, who attached great importance to the study of the logical content of the great work of scientific communism.
In contrast, reviewed labor is devoted to the study of the logical structure of "capital", the problem of logical categories and their role in knowledge (on the example of the analysis of the goods and money). Tracking the course of Marxov analysis of economic categories and their transitions to each other, the author seeks to open the logical basis, the "logical tissue" of this analysis, to identify the place and role of various logical categories. And it should be noted that the author can clearly allocate the logical content of "capital". The guidance idea in the development of these problems in the reviewed work is the indication of V.I. Lenin on the nature of the logic as science, that it coincides with the dialectic and the theory of knowledge.
To reveal the depth and strength of Marxist dialectical logic - this is the main goal set by the author. L.A. Mankovsky follows its study the presentation of public relations and logical principles that determine the connection of logical categories into the system. Under logical categories of course in the monograph "Universal concepts in which the versatility of reality is expressed, taken in its general form (space, time, quality, measure, form, content, reason, etc.), in the opening of a logical pattern between which consists One of the most important tasks of dialectical logic. " Universal categories in "Capital" are organically related to the categories of specific science, political economy. This connection is manifested, on the one hand, in the fact that each economic category is analyzed by a number of logical categories; On the other hand, in relations of economic categories, the intersection of logical categories, a specific logic framework, is also detected.
The concept of the system of categories involves some orderliness, sequence. The logical procedure for the system of economic categories is determined by Marx based on the principle of historicism, coincidence of logical and historical. Logical, i.e., theoretically, the consistent form of reflection of the historical process in the category system, relies on an objective historical sequence, but traced in "pure form", that is, not on a simple removal of the present from the past, and on such that is repelled from the self-extinguishing system in this And allows you to understand its genesis. "Beginning", the first category of theory should, therefore, reflect such an overall side, the system of the system, which is a condition and prerequisite for the existence of all other sides of the whole, their genetic basis, the "cell", "germs". Such a side of capitalist production is the goods, trade exchange. The embryo acts as the possibility of deploying the entire system, its abstract base.
Logic, like any other science, is developing in accordance with the changes and the needs that arise during scientific knowledge. "... the theory of orders of thinking," wrote F. Engels, "there is no one once established" Eternal Truths "forever, as does a philistine idea with the word" logic ". The formal logic itself remains starting with Aristotle and to the present days, the arena of fierce disputes. "
As you know, formal logic is a science of withdrawn knowledge, i.e., about knowledge obtained from previously established and proven truths, without circulation in this particular case to experience, to practice, but only as a result of the application of laws and rules of logic to the existing thoughts. Formal logic is the science of the laws of consistent, consistent thinking. It does not study the processes of knowledge, changes and development of concepts. However, at the end of the XVIII and early XIX century. In front of science in the whole latitude, the tasks of research of the processes of movement, the development of so phenomena of the material world and human thinking. In this regard, there was a need to create a new, dialectical logic.
Before the emergence of Marxism, such logic was not created, despite the attempts of the largest thinkers of the past. True, Hegel not only closer to all of all approached the solution of this problem, but also developed a dialectical logic that differs from formal. However, Gegelian dialectical logic could not become the true logic of modern scientific knowledge, an effective method for disclosing the entity of phenomena, for it was built on an idealistic basis. Only the classics of Marxism-Leninism from the standpoint of the dialectical-materialistic worldview created by them created a truly scientific dialectical logic that relevant the needs of modern scientific knowledge and the most effective method of studying all areas of reality.
The main content of dialectical logic is not that it gives the theory of formal logical output, the theory of logically correct thinking (this is included in the content of formal logic). The tasks of dialectical logic is significantly wider and more difficult. The focus of dialectical logic is the problem of the most common laws of thinking, the problem of achieving true knowledge.
Dialectic logic studies the patterns of dialectical thinking, and thinking is the reflection of the objective world in the man's head. The dialectic of the objective world Engels called the objective dialectic, and the dialectics of the reflection of the objective world by a person, a dialectic of knowledge, thinking - subjective dialectic. The subject of dialectical logic is the patterns of development of subjective dialectics.
But the basic patterns of subjective and objective dialectics coincide, for the subjective dialectic, being a reflection of dialectic objective, is entirely determined by it. "The so-called objective dialectic," wrote Engels, "reigns in all of nature, and the so-called subjective dialectic, dialectical thinking, is only a reflection of the movement dominant in all the nature of opposites ...".
The general laws of the objective world and the general laws of human thinking are essentially identical, but differ in their expression.
The laws and forms of thinking, as we have seen above, were formed by people involuntarily; They are a reflection of certain properties, parties, characteristics of material reality. This applies not only to the laws studied by dialectical logic, but also to the laws and forms of thinking studied by the logic formal. Otherwise, with their help, it would be impossible to reveal the inner essence of objective items.
Dialectical logic is not reduced to the fact that it contains general methodological principles with fundamental importance in modern scientific knowledge. It also has its own specific logic apparatus, characterized from the logical apparatus of formal logic, as well as the most important logical principles. The logical apparatus of dialectical logic is the system of categories of materialistic dialectics, which are both nodal items of knowledge, steps of the cognitive process, and forms of dialectical thinking. Armed with this apparatus, scientists have the opportunity to carry out the most complicated specific analysis, thin and deep logic operations that allow penetrating the intimate secrets of reality. If the old logic was mainly engaged in the classification and description of logical forms of output knowledge, then dialectical logic produces its logical apparatus, the principles and laws of the cognitive process.
Dialectical logic reveals the general patterns of development of our knowledge, which we are used to bring in compliance with theory with practice, are used as a base for scientific foresight, etc. ".
Basic principles of dialectical logic
The set of requirements, or the rules of thinking, developed on the basis of universal laws of reality and knowledge orienting people in their theoretical activity, is the principles of dialectical logic.
Relevant requirements for a thinking subject expressing one or another universal side or the relationship of objective reality are the laws of formal logic. Unlike the laws of formal logic, which covers only some universal parties and connections, the principles of dialectical logic express all the universal parties and communications, and in particular the variability of the subjects of the outside world, their development, inconsistency, integrity of opposites, etc.
The principle of objectivity of consideration
One of the most important principles of dialectical logic is the objectivity of consideration. This principle is a logical requirement formulated on the basis of materialistic solution of the main issue of philosophy. In fact, if the matter is primary, represents an objective reality that exists independently of consciousness and subordinate to its own laws, and consciousness and knowledge are secondary, depend on the outside world and are determined by it, then in the study of any subject it is necessary to proceed from it, from the inner The logic of the relationship and the interdependence of its parties.
The principle of the requirement to consider the object of knowledge in all its connections and relationships
Another major principle of dialectical logic is the requirement to consider the object of knowledge in all its relations and relationships. This principle expresses in relation to the knowledge of the universal interdependence of the phenomena of reality. To know the essence of one thing or another, it is necessary to consider the entire totality of the parties and the relationship between them and the entire "set of multi-solid relationships of this thing to others."
The principle of consideration of the subject in its development, change
Dialectical logic proceeds from such an important principle as the principle of consideration of the subject in its development, change. If all in the world is in motion, change, development, if the movement is a form of existence of matter if any material education exists due to a certain movement corresponding to it if the movement determines its essence, to know this or that material education (thing, phenomenon ), It is necessary to consider it in his own movement, in his own life.
The principle of splitting the united and knowledge of the contradictory parts of it
With the above principle, the principle of dialectical logic is closely connected, the principle of splitting the united and knowledge of the contradictory parts of it. This principle is the main in dialectical logic. He expresses the essence of dialectics. Each thing, each phenomenon contains mutually exclusive, contradictory trends and parties in organic communications, unity and components of the contradiction. The contradiction is the source of self-apparent and development of things and phenomena of reality, the impulse of their vitality. And if so, it is so, to know the nature of things, to present it as a living whole, as the unity of the interacting parties, it is necessary to identify the contradictions in it, opposite trends, trace their struggle and caused by this struggle the movement of things from some stages of development to others. "The condition for the knowledge of all the processes of the world in their" self-division ", in their spontanein development, in their living life," wrote V. I. Lenin, - there is knowledge of them as unity of opposites. "
The principle of dialectical denial
The most important principle of dialectical logic is the dialectical denial, the essence of which is reduced to the following: in the process of cognition, the denial of one position should be carried out to others so that the identification of the differences between the established and denied provisions was accompanied by the detection of their connection, identity, finding in denied approved. In other words, the denial should not be "bare", it should hold a positive, being a moment of communication, development. "In relation to the simple and initial," first "positive statements, the provisions of ETC." Dialectic moment ", i.e., scientific consideration, demands, wrote V. I. Lenin, - indications of differences, connection, transition. Without; This simple positive statement is incomplete, lifeless. dead In relation to, the 2nd, "negative position, the" dialectical moment "requires the indication of" unity ", i.e. the connections of the negative with positive, finding this positive in negative. From approval to denial - from denial to" unity "with the approved - Without this, dialectics will become bare denial, game or skepticism. "
It is easy to see that this principle is only a logical expression of the methodological requirements of the denigration law, which is a universal development law.
Principle of conformity
A specific expression of the principle of "dialectical denial" in relation to the development of scientific theories is formulated in 1913 by N. Borom the principle of conformity, according to which theories explaining one or another area of \u200b\u200bphenomena, with the emergence of new, more general theories are not eliminated as something false, In a new theory as its limit or private case and retain their value for the previous area.
As we see, this principle obliges when developing a new theory, pay attention not only for its difference from the old, but also on its connection with the old, to identify a certain content of the old theory in the content of the new theory.
An important consequence of the considered principle is the position of dialectical logic that in knowledge it is necessary to go not just from one to another, but from the simplest concepts, the definitions of more and more complex and rich in content. In fact, the dialectical denial of one position to others involves the preservation of all positive from the negative and inclusion in its as a moment, the composite part of the content in the approved position or theory. And if so, the development of thought should be nothing but a movement from less rich in its contents of concepts, the definitions of more and more rich. This principle of dialectical logic expresses in relation to the knowledge dominating in objective reality the trend of the progressive movement from the lowest to the highest, from simple to complex.
The principle of climbing from the abstract to a specific
The principle of climbing from the abstract to concrete was developed by K. Marx and was used by it in the study of capitalist socio-economic formation.
This principle is such a requirement of dialectical logic, the observance of which allows to penetrate the essence of the subject under study, to submit all its necessary parties and relationships in relationships and interdependence. According to this principle of knowledge, the study should begin with abstract, with concepts. Moreover, as a source, the starting link should not be taken by any side, but such that is decisive in the studied whole, which is determining all other parties. Having allocated the main, crucial side, we, according to this principle of research, should take it in the development, that is, to trace how it arose, what stages in their development took place and how in the course of this development affected all other parties to this material education, Conducting appropriate changes in them. Tracking all this, we take a step by step by step in consciousness the process of the formation of the studied material education, and at the same time the whole set of necessary parties and connections inherent in it, that is, its essence.
The spontaneous use of some of the requirements of this method of research as guidelines for cognitive activity was, for example, characterized by the process of developing D. I. Mendeleev periodic system of chemical elements. Studying chemical elements, he drew attention to the fact that all of them is characteristic of a certain atomic weight, and its specific atomic weight is characteristic of each element. From this, the scientist concluded that the properties of chemical elements depend on atomic weights, and decided to take atomic weight as a source, starting a link in their study. Having adopted atomic weight for the general principle or the general basis of the grouping of all chemical elements and taking into account all the wealth of a special, inherent part of these elements, he combined them into one slim system, which not only systematized already known chemical elements and clarified their special properties, but and made it possible to predict the existence of new, not yet open chemical elements and reveal new, still unknown properties. D. I. Mendeleev himself wrote about this: "For few exceptions, I adopted the same groups of similar elements as my predecessors, but set the goal to explore the patterns in the relationship between groups. Thus, I came to the aforementioned general principle (the periodic dependence of the properties of chemical elements from their atomic weights. - Aut.), Which will be applicable to all elements and encompasses many of the analogues previously expressed, but also admits such consequences that have not been possible before. "
The principle of unity of historical and logical
With the principle of climbing from the abstract, another principle of dialectical logic is organically connected - the principle of unity of historical and logical. Under historical is understood as an objective reality, considered in motion and development. The logical means a certain necessary connection of concepts, judgments reflecting in the consciousness of a person in the form of ideal images an objective world. Historical, therefore, is the primary, logical - secondary, photograph, copy with historical.
Reflecting a valid historical process, the logical may correspond to historical, but may not fit him. The logical corresponds to the historical when the logic, the pattern of the history of the object under study, is played in the logic of concepts. Compliance with the logical historical can never be complete, absolute. "The story often goes with jumps and zigzags ...". And if we tried to reproduce all these details of the story in thoughts, then we would have to not only raise a lot of material of insignificant importance, but also often interrupt the course of thoughts. " And if so, then the compliance of the logical historical may concern only the necessary connections and relations, which are a consequence of the laws of the historical process. The logical does not correspond to the historical when the relationships of concepts, judgments, the course of thoughts do not reflect, do not reproduce the actual history, the process of formation and development of the object.
Climbing from the abstract to concrete is nothing but reproducing historical in logical.
In fact, finding those common parties or relations that define all other parties to the studied material entities, and tracing their development and change, we are conscious, in the logic of thinking, as it were, we repeat the history of the development of these material entities. And since material formations are developing from simple to complex, from the less rich to the richer, the movement of our knowledge from the abstract to concrete is nothing but a snapshot from the real movement of the phenomena of the objective world. This snapshot, of course, is approximate, freed from accidents, but in general, it mainly reflects the actual course of the historical development of the studied phenomena.
Taking, thus, for the original, which is the initial in reality, we will certainly come in the process of moving to more or less correct and complete reflection of the subjects under study.
The initial item of knowledge can only be such a historically first, which at the same time is the main, defining in the object under study, for only this is historically the first to help us reproduce in the process of climbing from an abstract to a specific actual ratio of the parties under investigation and understand the place, role and importance Each of them. Therefore, it is not by chance that the investigation of the capitalist socio-economic formation K. Marx begins with the goods, and not with land ownership, although the latter and existed historically earlier in commodity production. Further, he does not accidentally explore the profit earlier than land rent, industrial capital ahead of commercial capital, although the land rent historically preceded profits, as well as trade capital preceded industrial capital. Marx begins with the goods because it is the main, determining link of the capitalist economy, the development of which led to the formation of this society.
Principle of inclusion of practice in the definition of the subject
Along with the general laws of dialectics in the requirements of dialectical logic, the specific patterns of the process of knowledge are also expressed. The principles of dialectical logic formulated on the basis of specific patterns of cognition should be attributed to the requirement for the practice of defining the subject.
This principle of dialectical logic expresses the patterns of the relationship between practice and knowledge, in particular, the defining role of practice in developing knowledge, its methods, in assessing the truth of our thoughts about the subject and in the disclosure of its essence.
Principle of concreteness of truth
With the decisive role of practice in the process of cognition, this principle of dialectical logic is also associated with the specificity of truth. The principle expressing the patterns of the process of knowledge, in particular, the dialectic of absolute and relative truth is also the requirement of dialectical logic to proceed from the relativity of any knowledge (every concept, position, theory, etc.), but at the same time, to identify elements of absolute, preserving Its significance at all subsequent stages of knowledge. Formulating this principle of dialectical logic, V. I. Lenin pointed out PA "The relativity of all knowledge and absolute content in every step of knowledge forward".
These are some of the most common and basic principles of dialectical logic.
Dialectical logic
Dialectical logic
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. GL Editorial: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .
Dialectical logic
science on the most general laws of development of nature, society and human thinking. These laws are reflected in the form of special concepts - logic. categories. Therefore, L. d. You can determine both the science of dialectich. categories. Presenting a dialectic system. Categories, it explores them mutual, sequence and transitions to one to another.
The object and objectives of L. d. Logic dialectic comes from materialist. Solutions of the main issue of philosophy, considering as a reflection of objective reality. This understanding was opposed and opposed idealist. The concepts of L. d., Outgoing from the idea of \u200b\u200bthinking as an independent sphere, independent of the people around the world. The struggle between these two mutually exclusive interpretations of thinking and characterizes the entire history of philosophy and logic.
A special role in relation to L. d. Plays like science. The latter, in fact, is the same L. d. With the difference that in L. d. We have consistent abstract logic. Concepts, and in the history of philosophy - a consistent development of the same concepts, but only in the specific form of a philos that replaced each other. Systems. The history of philosophy tells L. d.
the sequence of development of its categories. Sequence of logic development. Categories in the composition of L. d. Dictates first of all the objective sequence of the development of theoretical. Knowledge, which, in turn, reflect the objective sequence of the development of real historical processes, purified from violating their accidents and not having creatures, zigzag values \u200b\u200b(see logical and historical). L. d. It is a solid, but not a complete system: it develops and enriched together with the development of the phenomena of the objective world and together with the progress of human. knowledge.
And with t about r and I L. Dialectic thinking has ancient origin. Already primitive thinking was imbued with development consciousness, dialectic.
Ancient, as well as antich. Created non-leaving patterns dialectich. Theories. Antich. Based on living senses. The perception of material cosmos, already starting from the first representatives of Greek. Philosophy firmly formulated the whole as becoming, as combining opposites, as eternally movable and independent. Determined all the philosophers of early Greek. Classics taught about universal and eternal movement, at the same thing in the form of a complete and excellent whole, in the form of something eternal and staying alone. It was a universal dialectic movement and peace. Philosophers of early Greek. The classics were taught, further, about the general variability of things as a result of the transformation of some major element (land, water, air, fire and ether) in every way. It was the universal dialectic of identity and differences. Next, all early Greek. He taught about being as a sensually perceived matter, seeing those or other laws in it. Pythagorean numbers, at least in the early era, are completely inseparable from tel. Logos Heraclita has world fire, measuringly flashing and measuringly fading. Thinking from Diogen Apoltonian has air. Atoms at Levkippa and Democritus are geometrich. Bodies, eternal and indestructible, not subject to any changes, but of them are made sensually perceived. All early Greek. The classic taught about identity, eternity and time: everything eternal proceeds in time, and all temporary contains the eternal basis, from where the eternal cycle of the substance. Everything is created by the gods; But the gods themselves are no more than the material elements, so in the end, the space by anyone and did not create anything, but arose and constantly arises in his eternal existence.
So, early Greek. Classic (6-5 centuries BC) thought out the main categories of L. d., Although, while in the power of natural materialism, it was far from the system of these categories and from the allocation of L. D. into special science. Heraklit and others. Greek Naturophilosophes gave the formula of the eternal formation as unity of opposites. Aristotle considered the first dialectic of Eleitsa Zenona (and 1.9.10, Diels 9). It was for the first time that the many, or mental and mentally opposed. Based on the philosophy of Heraclit and Eleaitov, in the conditions of increasing subjectivism, in Greece, it was natural, a purely negative dialectic in the sophists arose, which in the undeveloped change of things that contradict each other, as well as the concepts of human relativity. Knowledge and brought L. d. To complete nihilism, not excluding morality. However, life and everyday conclusions made already Zeno (A 9. 13). In this environment, Xenophon depicts its Socrates, seeking to give the doctrine of pure concepts, but without sophistic. relativism, looking for the most common, separating them into childbirth and species, necessarily making the moral conclusions and using the method of interviewing: "Yes, and the" dialectic "itself," he said, "it happened because people who conceit in meetings, separated objects By childbirth ... "(Memor. IV 5, 12).
In no case, it is impossible to reduce the role of the sophists and Socrates in the history of L. d. They, who, by going away from too ontologiche. L. d. Early classics, led to a stormy human. With her eternal contradictions, with her tirelessly looking for truth in the atmosphere of fierce disputes and pursuit for more and more subtle and accurate mental categories. This eristic (disputes) and the question-response, the conversational theory of dialectic began to pierce all the antih. Philosophy and all his characteristic L. d. This spirit is felt in the stress-thought tissue of Platonic dialogues, in distinction from Aristotle, in verbal-formalistic. The logic of the Stoikov and even for neoplatonists, to-ry with all his mystical. Moods immersed infinitely into the eristic, in the dialectic of the finest categories, in the interpretation of old and simple mythology, into the sophisticated systematics of all logic. categories. Without coofers and Socrates is unthinkable Antique L. d. And even where it has nothing to do with them in its content. Greek is always talker, a debate, a verbal equilibrist. This is also its L. d., Which arose on the basics of sofics and the Socratic method of dialectical conversation. Continuing the thought of his teacher and the interpretation of concepts, or ideas, as a special independent reality, Plato under dialectic understood not only the separation of concepts on clearly isolated childbirth (Soph. 253 D. S.) and not only the quest for truth with the help of questions and answers (CRAT. 390 c), but also "relative to the existing and true existing" (Phileb. 58 a). To achieve this, he considered it possible only with the help of neglecting contradictory private and (R. VII 537 c). Wonderful samples of this kind of antique idealistic L. d. Contained in the dialogues of Plato "Sofist" and "Parmenid".
In Sofiste (254 V-260 a), the dialectic of five major dialectic is given. Categories - movements, rest, differences, identities and existences, resulting in a placo to be interpreted here as an active self-opposing coordinated separation. Everyone turns out to be identical with himself and with all other, different with himself and with all others, as well as resting and moving in itself and relatively all. In "Parmenide" Plato, this L. d. It is brought to extremely detail, subtlety and systematics. Here, the dialectic is first given a single, as absolute and indistinguishable unit, and then the dialectic of a single-separate whole, both in relation to its own itself and in relation to all other things depends on it (RAM. 137 C - 166 C). Plato's arguments about different categories of L. d. Scattered in all its works, from which it is possible to specify at least on the dialectic of pure formation (Tim. 47 ε - 53 s) or a cosmic dialectic. The unity standing above the unity of individual things and their sums, as well as above the opposite of the subject and the object (R. R. Vi, 505 A - 511 A). No wonder Diogen Lanertsky (III, 56) considered the inventor of the dialectics of Plato.
Aristotle, who mounted Platonic ideas within the very matter and thus turned them into the forms of things and, in addition, who joined the doctrine of potency and energy here (as equal to other similar teachings), raised L. d. For the highest, although all this The region of philosophy is not named L. d., but "first philosophy". The term "logic" it retains for formal logic, and under the "dialectic" he understands the doctrine of probable judgments and conclusions or about visibility (Anal. Prior. 11, 24a 22 and others. Places).
The value of Aristotle in the history of L. d. Hugely. His teaching of four reasons - material, formal (or rather, the semantic, eidetic), driving and target - is interpreted so that all these four reasons exist in each thing completely indistinguishable and identically with the item itself. From Sovr. t. S. This undoubtedly has a doctrine of the unity of opposites, as if Aristotle himself nave to the fore (or rather, to say,) both in being and in knowledge. The teachings of Aristotle about the first video, which thinks himself, i.e. Itself for itself and subject and object, there is nothing like a fragment all the same L. d. True, the famous 10 categories of Aristotle are considered separately and quite descriptively. But in his "First Philosophy", all these categories are simply dialectical. Finally, it is not necessary to lower the fact that he himself calls dialectic, namely a system of conclusions in the field of probable assumptions. There, in any case, Aristotle gives dialectics of formation, since it is only possible in the field of formation. Lenin says: "The logic of Aristotle is a request, a quest, an approach to Hegel's logic, and from it, from the logic of Aristotle (who everywhere, at every step, also puts me to t and to e) Made dead scholasticism, throwing all searches, fluctuations, techniques of formulation "(cit., Vol. 38, p. 366).
Stoics "only wise - dialectic" (SVF II FR. 124; III FR. 717 ARNIM.), And they defined the dialectics as "science to correctly talk about judgments in matters and answers" and as "science about true, false and neutral" (II FR. 48). Judging by the fact that the Stoikov logic was divided into dialectics and rhetoric (ibid., Wed. I Fr. 75; II FR. 294), L. D. The Stoikov was not at all ontological. In this, epicuretes understood L. d. As "canonics", i.e. Ontologically and materialist (DIOG. L. X 30).
From Domarxist philosophy 19 V. The Russian revolution was a huge step forward. Democrats - Belinsky, Herzen, Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov, to their revolution. The theory and not only gave the opportunity to move from idealism to materialism, but also led them to the dialectic of the formation, helped them create the most advanced concepts in different areas of the history of culture. Lenin writes that Diagel's dialectic appeared for Herzen "Algebra Revolution" (see Op., Vol. 18, p. 10). As far as Herzen deeply understood L. d., For example. Regarding physical. Peace, it can be seen from the following words: "The life of nature is continuous development, the development of an abstract simple, not complete, spontaneous in full, complex, development of the embryo to the dismemberment of all that consists in its concept, and the usual harassment to lead this development to it is possible to fully comply with the form of the content - This is a dialectic of the physical world "(Coll. Op., vol. 3, 1954, p. 127). Deep judgments about L. d. Expressed Chernyshevsky (see, for example, full. Coll. Op., Vol. 5, 1950, p. 391; t. 3, 1947, p. 207-09; t. 2, 1949, p. 165; t. 4, 1948, p. 70). Under the conditions of the revolution time. Democrats could only approach materialist. dialectic.
L. D. In the bourgeois philosophy of the 2nd p about l. 1 9 - 2 0 V. Bourgeois philosophy refuses those achievements in the area of \u200b\u200bdialectich. Logici, to-rye were in former philosophy. L. D. Hegel is rejected as "", "logical error" and even "painful perversion of the spirit" (R. Gaim, Hegel and his time - R. Haym, Hegel und Seine Zeit 1857; A. Trendelenburg, logical research - A. Trendelenburg, Logische Untersuchungen, 1840; E. Gartman, about the dialectic method. Hartmann, Über Die Dialektische Methode, 1868). Attempts by Right Hegelians (Michelet, Rosencrancents) to protect L. D. turned out to be unsuccessful, both due to dogmatic to her relations and by virtue of metaphysic. The limitations of their own views. With others. Parties, the development of mathematics. The logic and her huge successes in the substantiation of mathematics lead to its absolutization as the only possible scientific logic.
Save to Sovr. Bourges. Philosophy elements L. d. They are primarily connected with criticism of the limitity of formal technology. Understanding the process of knowledge and reproduction of Hegel's teachings about the "concreteness of the concept." In the neocantianism to the place of the abstract concept, built on the basis of the law of the reverse ratio of the volume and content of the concept and therefore leading to increasingly empty abstractions, is a "concrete concept", understood by analogy with mathematics. Function, i.e. General law, to-ry covers everything off. Cases by applying a variable receiving any consecutive values. Having perceived this thought from the logic M. Drobish (a new statement of logic ... - M. Drobisch, Neue Darstelung Der Logik ..., 1836), Marburg school (Kogen, Cassirer, Popper) generally replaces the logic of "abstract concepts" "logic of mathematics . Concepts about function. " This leads to the lack of understanding of the fact that there is a way to reproduce reality by reason, and not she herself, to the denial of the concept of substance and "physical idealism." However, in Neokantian logic, a number of moments of idealist are preserved. L. d. - Understanding knowledge as the process of "creating" object (object as "infinite task"); The principle of "initial" (URSPRUNG), consisting of "preservation of the association in extraction and extraction in the association"; "Heterology of synthesis", i.e. subordination of it is not a formal law "α-a", but a meaningful "A-B" (see Kogen, the logic of pure knowledge - N. Cohen, Logik Der Reinen Erkenntnis, 1902; P. Natorp, logical foundations of exact sciences - p . Natorp, Die Logischen Grundlagen der Exakten Wissenschaften, 1910).
The essential principles of L. d. It is universal communication and intercrying-simplicity of phenomena, as well as their development carried out through. Hence, characteristic of L. d. The principle requiring the accounting of all (which can be allocated at this stage of knowledge) of the parties and the bonds of the subject with the other subjects; The principle requiring consideration of items in development. Development takes place only where every hour is the onset of everything new and new. But if in these upcoming new moments, it will not be present that it becomes new, and it is impossible to recognize it in all these new moments, it will be unknown what develops, and, therefore, the development itself will crush. The elimination of the difference in the moments of the formation leads to the death of the very formation, since it becomes only what moves from one to another. But the complete exclusion of the identity of different moments of the formation also annuls this last by replacing it with a discrete multiple fixed and no interference points. Thus, both the difference and the identity of certain moments of formation are necessary for any formation, without to-right it is made impossible. Taken in the definition The limits and in a specific content of development is history, L. d. There are primarily the logic of development, the logic is historical. About the dialectics of Lenin says that it is "... the doctrine of development in its most complete, deep and free from one-sidedness, the doctrine of the relativity of human knowledge, which gives us a reflection of the ever-growing matter" (op., Vol. 19, with . four). Historism is the essence of dialectics, and the dialectic is at the heart of its necessarily there is a historic. process.
The contradiction is the driving force of becoming, "the splitting of the united and the knowledge of the contradictory parts of it ... There is one of the main, if not the main, features or damns) of dialectics" (ibid, vol. 38 , p. 357). The development is the implementation of contradictions and opposites, which implies not only the identity and the difference between the abstract moments of formation, but also their mutual computiation, their association in this mutually exclusion. So, the real formation is not simply identity and the difference between opposites, but their unity and struggle L. d. He studies the development of categories, reflecting reality, K-Paradise "herself drives out" and no engine no engine, no engine, But there is nothing at all. Reflecting it categories have relative independence and internal movement logic. "The thinking mind (mind) sharpens the distinguished distinction of various, simple diversity of ideas to a significant difference, to the p r o t and in about l o l n o t i. Only raised to the top of contradictions, diversity becomes mobile (REGSAM) and Alive in relation to one to the other, - ... They acquire that negativity, which is in the nuclearness of self-duration and vitality "(ibid, p. 132). "Two main (or two possible? Or two in the history of the observed?) Development concepts (evolution) essence: development as a decrease and increase, as a repetition, and development as the unity of opposites (on mutually exclusive opposites and relationship between them). Under the first concept of movement Immortion remains in the shadow, his power, its source, its (or this source is transferred to about in N E - God, subject Etc.). With the second concept, the main attention rushes precisely on Knowledge of the source of "self". The first concept is dead, poor, dry. The second is life. But only the second gives the key to the "self-seeming" of everything that is only, only it gives the key to "jumps", to "the break of gradualness", to "transformation into The opposite ", to the destruction of the old and the emergence of the new" (ibid, p. 358). "Movement and" S I M O D B and F E N E "[this is νβ! Spontaneous (independent), spontaneous, in n y t r e n e-about e b x o d and m ], "Change", "Movement and Vitality", "The Principle of All Self-Division", "" (trieb) to "movement" and to "activities" - the opposite, "Dead Being" - who will believe that this is the essence of "hegelev region" , abstract and abstrusen (heavy, ridiculous?) Hegeliangs ?? This essence had to open, understand, Hinüberretten, to deprive, clear what Marx and Engels did "(there, with. 130).
The wonderful characteristic of L. d. The following arguments of Lenin are: "The glass is, undoubtedly, and a glass cylinder and a tool for drinking. But the glass has not only these two properties or quality or side, but an infinite number of other properties, qualities, sides, relationships, "Medium" with all the rest of the world. A glass is a heavy item that can be a chain tool. A glass can serve as a press papier, like a room for the caught butterfly, a glass can have, as an artistic thread or pattern, completely no matter what , It is suitable for drinking whether it is made of glass, whether its cylindrical or not quite, and so on and the like.
Further. If I need a glass now, like a drinking tool, then it doesn't matter to know if it is quite a cylindrical form and whether it is made of glass, but it is important that there are no cracks in the bottom to be inhabited by drinking This glass, etc. If I need a glass of not for drinking, but for such an use, for which every glass cylinder is suitable, then a glass of cracks is suitable for me or even at all without the bottom, etc.
The logic is formal, which is limited in schools (and should be limited - with amendments - for lower school classes), takes formal definitions, guided by the fact that most commonly or that most often rushes into the eyes, and is limited to this. If there are two or more different definitions and connect together completely by chance (and a glass cylinder and tool for drinking), we obtain an eclectic definition indicating different sides of the subject and only.
The logic dialectical requires that we go further. To really know the subject, it is necessary to embrace, study all of his parties, all links and "mediation". We will never achieve this completely, but the requirement of comprehension will warn us from mistakes and from death. This is, in-1. The 2nd, dialectical logic requires to take the subject, in its development, "self-division" (as Hegel sometimes says), change. In relation to the glass, this is not immediately clear, but the glass does not remain unchanged, but in particular the appointment of the glass, consuming it, with in I be with the outside world. B-3rd, all human practices should enter into a complete "definition" of the subject and as well as the practical determinant of the subject of the subject with what a person needs. In-4, dialectical logic teaches that "abstract truth is not, always concrete," as he loved to speak after Hegel, the late Plekhanov ... I, of course, did not exhausted the concept of dialectical logic. But so far pretty and this "(cit., Vol. 32, p. 71-73).
Dialectical logic
see in Art. Dialectics.
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia.GL Editorial: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov.1983 .
Dialectical logic
science on the most general laws of development of nature, society and human thinking. These laws are reflected in the form of special concepts - logic. categories. Therefore, L. d. You can determine both the science of dialectich. categories. Presenting a dialectic system. Categories, it explores their mutual communication, sequence and transitions of one category to another.
The object and objectives of L. d. Logic dialectic comes from materialist. Solutions of the main issue of philosophy, considering thinking as a reflection of objective reality. This understanding was opposed and opposed idealist. The concepts of L. d., Outgoing from the idea of \u200b\u200bthinking as an independent sphere, independent of the people around the world. The struggle between these two mutually exclusive interpretations of thinking and characterizes the entire history of philosophy and logic.
There is a logic about B K, K-paradium reigns in full reality, and the logic, K-paradise, is reflected in the thinking of the dominant in full opposites. In this sense, L. D. is subjective logic. In addition, L. d. You can determine both the science on the most general laws of links and the development of the phenomena of the objective world. L. D. "... There is a doctrine not about the external forms of thinking, but on the laws of development" of all material, natural and spiritual things ", i.e. the development of the entire particular content of the world and knowledge, i.e. result, amount , conclusion and with t about r and and knowledge of the world "(Lenin V. I., Op., Vol. 38, p. 80-81).
L. d. How science coincides with dialectics and the theory of knowledge: "... no need 3 words: it is the same" (ibid, p. 315).
L. d. Usually contrast formal logic (see also Art. Logic). This opposition is due to the fact that formal logic is studying forms of thinking, distracting from their content and on the development of thinking, while L. d. Explore logic. Forms due to content and in their historical. Development. Noting the difference between formal and dialectical, substantive logic, it is impossible to oppose them to exaggerate. They are closely related to each other in the real process of thinking, as well as in its study. L. d. Under the definition The angle of view also considers what is the subject of consideration of formal logic, namely, the doctrine of the concept, judgment, conclusion, scientific method; It includes its research on its research., Methodologic. Basics and problems.
The task of L. d. It is to, relying on the generalization of the history of science, philosophy, technology and creativity in general, to explore logic. Forms and laws of scientific knowledge, methods of construction and patterns of development of scientific theory, reveal its practical, in particular experimental, basics, identify ways to correlate knowledge with its object, etc. An important task of L. d. Is the analysis of the historically established methods of scientific. Knowledge and detection of Heurist. The possibilities of this or that method, the boundaries of its application and the possibility of the emergence of new methods (see methodology). Developing on the basis of generalizing societies. Practices and achievements of sciences, L. d., In turn, plays a huge role in relation to specific sciences, acting as their common theoretical. and methodologies. Bases (see Science).
A special role in relation to L. d. Plays the history of philosophy as a science. The latter, in fact, is the same L. D. with the difference that in L. d. We have a consistent development of abstract logic. Concepts, and in the history of philosophy - a consistent development of the same concepts, but only in the specific form of a philos that replaced each other. Systems. The history of philosophy tells L. d.
the sequence of development of its categories. Sequence of logic development. Categories in the composition of L. d. Dictates first of all the objective sequence of the development of theoretical. Knowledge, which, in turn, reflect the objective sequence of the development of real historical processes, purified from violating their accidents and not having creatures, zigzag values \u200b\u200b(see logical and historical). L. d. It is a solid, but not a complete system: it develops and enriched together with the development of the phenomena of the objective world and together with the progress of human. knowledge.
And with t about r and I L. Dialectic thinking has ancient origin. Already primitive thinking was imbued with development consciousness, dialectic.
Ancient, as well as antich. Philosophy created non-leaking dialectic samples. Theories. Antich. Dialectics based on live feelings. The perception of material cosmos, already starting from the first representatives of Greek. Philosophy firmly formulated all reality as becoming becoming as combining opposites, as eternally movable and independent. Determined all the philosophers of early Greek. Classics taught about universal and eternal movement, at the same time imagining the space in the form of a complete and excellent whole, in the form of something eternal and staying alone. It was a universal dialectic movement and peace. Philosophers of early Greek. The classics were taught, further, about the general variability of things as a result of the transformation of some major element (land, water, air, fire and ether) in any other. It was the universal dialectic of identity and differences. Next, all early Greek. The classic taught about being as a sensually perceived matter, seeing those or other laws in it. Pythagorean numbers, at least in the early era, are completely inseparable from tel. Logos Heraclita has world fire, measuringly flashing and measuringly fading. Thinking from Diogen Apoltonian has air. Atoms at Levkippa and Democritus are geometrich. Body, eternal and indestructible, not subject to any changes, but of them are made of sensually perceived matter. All early Greek. The classic taught about identity, eternity and time: everything eternal flows over time, and all temporary contains the eternal basis, from where the theory of the eternal cycle of the substance. Everything is created by the gods; But the gods themselves are no more than a generalization of material elements, so in the end the space by anyone and did not create anything, but arose and constantly arises in his eternal existence.
So, early Greek. Classic (6-5 centuries BC) thought out the main categories of L. d., Although, while in the power of natural materialism, it was far from the system of these categories and from the allocation of L. D. into special science. Heraklit and others. Greek Naturophilosophes gave the formula of the eternal formation as unity of opposites. Aristotle considered the first dialectic of Eleitsa Zenona (and 1.9.10, Diels 9). It was Eleata for the first time that the unity and many, or mental and sensual world were sharply opposed. Based on the philosophy of Heraclit and Eleaitov, in the conditions of increasing subjectivism, in Greece, it was natural, a purely negative dialectic in the sophists arose, which in the undeveloped change of things that contradict each other, as well as the concepts of human relativity. Knowledge and brought L. d. To complete nihilism, not excluding morality. However, life and everyday conclusions from dialectics have already made Zeno (A 9. 13). In this environment, Xenophon depicts its Socrates, seeking to give the doctrine of pure concepts, but without sophistic. Relativism, looking in them the most common elements, separating them into childbirth and species, necessarily making the moral conclusions and using the interview method: "Yes, and the word" dialectic "itself, - he said, - it happened because people conceived in meetings, Separate objects by childbirth ... "(Memor. IV 5, 12).
In no case, it is impossible to reduce the role of the sophists and Socrates in the history of L. d. They, who, by going away from too ontologiche. L. d. Early classics, led to a rapid movement of human. Thought with her eternal contradictions, with her tirelessly looking for truth in the atmosphere of fierce disputes and pursuit for more and more subtle and accurate thinking categories. This spirit of eristic (disputes) and the question-response, conversational theory of dialectic began to pierce all antih. Philosophy and all his characteristic L. d. This spirit is felt in the stress-thought tissue of Platonic dialogues, in distinction from Aristotle, in verbal-formalistic. The logic of the Stoikov and even for neoplatonists, to-ry with all his mystical. Moods immersed infinitely into the eristic, in the dialectic of the finest categories, in the interpretation of old and simple mythology, into the sophisticated systematics of all logic. categories. Without coofers and Socrates is unthinkable Antique L. d. And even where it has nothing to do with them in its content. Greek is always talker, a debate, a verbal equilibrist. This is also its L. d., Which arose on the basics of sofics and the Socratic method of dialectical conversation. Continuing the thought of his teacher and the interpretation world of concepts, or ideas, as a special independent reality, Plato under the dialectic understood not only the separation of concepts on clearly isolated childbirth (Soph. 253 D. Sl.) And not just the quest for truth with the help of questions and answers (CRAT . 390 s), but also "knowledge of relatively existing and true things" (Phileb. 58 a). To achieve this, he considered it possible only with the help of neglecting contradictory private and general (R. R. VII 537 c). Wonderful samples of this kind of antique idealistic L. d. Contained in the dialogues of Plato "Sofist" and "Parmenid".
In Sofiste (254 V-260 a), the dialectic of five major dialectic is given. Categories - movements, rest, differences, identities and being, as a result of which being is interpreted here by Plato as an active self-opposing coordinated separation. Every thing turns out to be identical with himself and with all others, different with me and with all others, as well as resting and moving in itself and relatively all. In "Parmenide" Plato, this L. d. It is brought to extremely detail, subtlety and systematics. Here, the dialectic is first given a single, as absolute and indistinguishable unit, and then the dialectic of a single-separate whole, both in relation to its own itself and in relation to all other things depends on it (RAM. 137 C - 166 C). Plato's arguments about different categories of L. d. Scattered in all its works, from which it is possible to specify at least on the dialectic of pure formation (Tim. 47 ε - 53 s) or a cosmic dialectic. The unity standing above the unity of individual things and their sums, as well as above the opposite of the subject and the object (R. R. Vi, 505 A - 511 A). No wonder Diogen Lanertsky (III, 56) considered the inventor of the dialectics of Plato.
Aristotle, who has fired by Platonov's ideas within the very matter and thus turned them into the forms of things and, in addition, who attacked here the doctrine of potency and energy (as equal to a number of other teachings), raised L. d. At the highest level, although He calls the whole area of \u200b\u200bphilosophy not L. d., but "first philosophy". The term "logic" it retains for formal logic, and under the "dialectic" he understands the doctrine of probable judgments and conclusions or about visibility (Anal. Prior. 11, 24a 22 and others. Places).
The value of Aristotle in the history of L. d. Hugely. His teaching of four reasons - material, formal (or rather, the semantic, eidetic), driving and target - is interpreted so that all these four reasons exist in each thing completely indistinguishable and identically with the item itself. From Sovr. t. S. This, undoubtedly, is the doctrine of the unity of opposites, as if Aristotle himself nominated the law of contradiction (or rather, to say, the law of consistent) both in being and in knowledge. The teachings of Aristotle about the first video, which thinks himself, i.e. Itself for itself and subject and object, there is nothing more than a fragment all the same L. d. True, the famous 10 Aristotle categories are considered separately and quite descriptively. But in his "First Philosophy", all these categories are simply dialectical. Finally, it is not necessary to lower the fact that he himself calls dialectic, namely a system of conclusions in the field of probable assumptions. There, in any case, Aristotle gives dialectics of formation, since the probability itself is only possible in the field of formation. Lenin says: "The logic of Aristotle has a request, a quest, an approach to the logic of Hegel, and from it, from the logic of Aristotle (who everywhere, at every step, the question is the question and M N N O D I ) Made dead scholasticism, throwing all searches, fluctuations, techniques of formulation issues "(cit., Vol. 38, p. 366).
Stoics "only wise - dialectic" (SVF II FR. 124; III FR. 717 ARNIM.), And they defined the dialectics as "science to correctly talk about judgments in matters and answers" and as "science about true, false and neutral" (II FR. 48). Judging by the fact that the Stoikov logic was divided into dialectics and rhetoric (ibid., Wed. I Fr. 75; II FR. 294), Understanding L. D. The Stoikov was not at all ontological. In contrast, the epicureans understood L. d. As "canonics", i.e. Ontologically and materialist (DIOG. L. X 30).
However, if you take into account not the terminology of the stoikov, but their actual. The doctrine of being, mostly, they find heraklite cosmology, i.e. The doctrine of the eternal formation and the mutual transformation of the elements, the doctrine of fire-logos, about the material hierarchy of space and ch. The difference from Heraclitus in the form of persistently conducted teleology. Thus, in the teachings on the existence of the Stoiki, also turn out to be not only materialists, but also supporters of L. d. Democritus - Epicura - Lucretia, too, can not be understood by mechanism. The appearance of each thing from atoms also has dialectic. The jump, since each thing carries with you completely new quality in comparison with those atoms, from which it occurs. Also known antich. The approach of atoms by letters (67 A 9, see also VKN.: "Ancient Greek. Atomists" A. Makovelsky, p. 584): a one-piece thing appears from atoms as well as tragedy and comedy from letters. Obviously, atomists are thought out here by L. d. Whole and parts.
In the last centuries, Antique philosophy, the dialectic of Plato received a particularly large development. The dam has a special dialectics treatise (Ennead. 1 3); And the further neoplatonism developed to the end of antich. The world, the more sophisticated, scrupulous and scholastic became here L. d. It is quite dialectical to the main Neo-weather hierarchy of being: a single, which is the absolute unit of everything that merges all the subjects and objects and therefore be indistinguishable; the numerical separation of this single; The high-quality fullness of these first, or the Nus-Mind, which is the identity of a universal subject and a universal object (borrowed from Aristotle) \u200b\u200bor the world of ideas; The transition of these ideas in the formation, which is the driving force of the cosmos, or the world soul; the work and the result of this mobile essence of the world soul, or space; And finally, gradually decreasing Cosmich in its semantic filling. spheres, ranging from the sky and ending the Earth. Dialectically in neoplatonism also itself is the doctrine of gradual and continuous outpouring and self-evaluation of the initial one, i.e. What is commonly called antich. and cf.-century. Philosophy of Emanationism (Plotin, Porfiry, Yamvlich, Problem and MN. Dr. Philosophers of the end of antiquity 3-6 centuries). Here is the mass of productive dialectic. Concepts, but all of them, in view of the specifics. The features of this era are often given in the form of mystic. reasoning and scrupulous scholastic. Systematics. It is dialectically important, for example, the concept of splitting the uniform, the relationship between the subject and the object in knowledge, the doctrine on the eternal mobility of the cosmos, about the pure formation, etc.
As a result of an anti-review. L. d. It must be said that almost all chimes were thought out here. Categories of this science based on conscious attitude towards the element of becoming. But neither antich. Idealism nor antich. Materialism could not cope with this task due to its contemplation, mergers of ideas and matter in some cases and rupture them in other cases, due to the primacy of religious mythology in some cases and educational relativism in other cases, due to the weak consciousness of categories as a reflection of reality and in view of Permanent inability to understand the work. Impact of thinking on reality. To a large extent, this also applies to the CP.-century. Philosophy, in which the place of the former mythology was taken by Dr. mythology, but L. d. And here still remained cured too blind ontologism.
The domination of monotheistic. religions in cf. The century was postponed by L. d. in the area of \u200b\u200btheology, using Aristotle and Neoplatonism to create scholastic developed extensive teachings.
In the sense of development L. d. It was a step forward, because Form Consciousness was gradually accustomed to feel their own strength, although there arising from the personalist of the understood absolute. Christian doctrine of trolling (for example, Cappadocytsev - Vasily the Great, Grigoria Naziazine, Grigory Nissky - and in general in many fathers and teachers of the Church, at least, for example, in Augustine) and Arabic-Jewish doctrine of the social absutute (eg, Ibn Rochad or Kabbalah) were built in advantage of the methods of L. d. Approved on the two first universal cathedrals (325 and 381), the Symbol of Faith taught about the divine substance, expressed in three persons, with the full identity of this substance and these individuals and with full Their differences, as well as with the self-identical development of the persons themselves: the initial LONO of the Eternal Movement (Father), the dismantled pattern of this movement (son or God-word) and eternal creature. The formation of this fixed pattern (Holy Spirit). In science, the connection of this concept with Platono-Aristotelian, Stoich has long been clarified. And Neoplatonic. L. d. The most deeply this L. d. Is expressed in the treatise of the "elements of theology" and in the so-called "Areopagitics", representing the Christian reception of the proglism. That and the other was of great importance in the whole cf.-century. L. d. (See A. I. Brilliantov, the influence of Eastern theology on the West in the creations of John Erigen's cattle, 1898).
This L. d., Based on Relig.-Mistich. Thinking, reached Nikolai Kuzansky, who built his L. d. Just on the crossing and aropagiti. These are the teachings of Nicholas Kuzansky on the identity of knowledge and ignorance, about the coincidence of the maximum and a minimum, about the eternal movement, about the ternary structure of eternity, about the identity of the triangle, circle and ball in the theory of deity, about the coincidence of opposites, anyone in any, about coincidence and deployment of absolute zero, etc. In addition, Nicholas Kuzansky antique-cf.-century. Neoplatonism closes with the ideas of the nascent mathematics. analysis, so that the concept of the most absolute is made by the idea of \u200b\u200bperpetual formation, and the Absolute itself begins to be understood as a peculiar and comprehensive integral or, depending on t. S., Differential; It features such, for example, concepts like being - the ability (POSSE-FIERI). This is the concept of eternity, which is the eternal formation of the eternal opportunity of all new and new, which is its genuine being. So, infinitezimal principle, i.e. The principle is infinitely small, determines the existent characteristic of the most absolute. Such, for example, and its concept Possest, i.e. POSSE EST, or the concept of again eternal potency generating all new and new, so that this potency is the last being. L. D. with infinitezimal color becomes a very clear concept. In this regard, it is necessary to mention Jordano Bruno, the heraklitovsky of the thinking Pantheist and the preposprosisian materialist, who also taught the unity of opposites, and on the identity of a minimum and a maximum (understanding this minimum, too close to the expectancy of the exercise about infinitely small), and the infinity of the universe (quite dialectically treating that its center is everywhere, at any point), etc. Such philosophers, like Nikolai Kuzansky and Jordan Bruno, still continued to learn about the Divine and the Divine Unity of the opposites, but these concepts have them already get infinitezimal color; And after a century or one and a half, the most present calculus of infinitely small, representing a new stage in the development of world L. d.
In a new time, in connection with ascending capitalist. The formation and depends on it individualist. philosophy, during the period of the rule of rationalist. Metaphysics mathematics. Analysis (Decart, Leibniz, Newton, Euler), operating with variables i.e. Infinite-becoming functions and values, was not always conscious, but actually steadily the brewing area of \u200b\u200bL. d. After all, the fact that in mathematics is called a variable value, is with philos. t. S. becoming a magnitude; And as a result of this formation, certain limit values \u200b\u200barise, which in the full sense of the word turn out to be the unity of opposites, as, for example, the derivative is the unity of the opposites of the argument and the function, not to mention the very formation of magnitude and about the transition to the limit.
It must be borne in mind that excluding neoplatonism, the term "L. d" Either did not use at all in those philos. SR systems centuries and new time, which was substantially dialectical, either used in the sense close to formal logic. Such, for example, treatises 9 in. John Damascina "Dialectics" in the Byzantineology and "On the Separation of Nature" of John the livestock Erigen in Western theology. The teachings of the Descartes on the heterogeneous space, spinoza about thinking and matter or the freedom and necessity or the leibice on the presence of each monad in any other, the monad undoubtedly contain very deep dialectic constructions, but they themselves are not referred to as dialectical logic.
Also, the whole philosophy of the new time was also a step forward to the awareness of what L. D. Empirics of the New Time (F. Bacon, Locke, Yum), with all its metaphysicality and dualism, gradually failed to see the reflection of reality in the categories . Rationalists, with all their subjectivism and formalistic. Metaphysics, nevertheless passed to find in categories some independent movement. There were even attempts to some synthesis of the other, but these attempts. They could not be successful in view of too much individualism, dualism and formalism of the bourgeois philosophy of the new time, arising on the basics of private entrepreneurship and too sharp opposition "I" and "non-me", and the primacy and the team always remained for. "I" as opposed to passively understood "non-me."
The achievements and failures of such a synthesis in the doctov philosophy can be demonstrated, for example, on Spinoz. The first definitions in its "ethics" are completely dialectical. If, the situation and existence coincides due to itself, this is the unity of opposites. The substance is what exists in itself and seems to be through itself. It is also unity, opposites - being and determined by him the very idea of \u200b\u200bit. The substance attribute is what the mind represents in it as its essence. This is a coincidence in the essence of what it is essentially, and its mental reflection. Two attributes of substances - thinking and stretching - there is the same. Attributes are an infinite amount, but each of them reflects the entire substance. Undoubtedly, we are not dealing with nothing with anything from L. d. And yet, even the spinozism is too blindly ontologica, too much teaches about reflection and understands the opposite reflection of being in being too little. And without it it is impossible to build the correct and systematically conscious L. d.
Classical for the new time form L. d created him. Idealism, which began with its negative and subjectivistism. Interpretations in Cant and switched through Fichte and Schelling to the objective idealism of Hegel. In Kant L. d. It is nothing more than the exposure of the illusions of human. Mind, who wants to achieve one-piece and absolute knowledge. Because Scientific knowledge, according to Kant, is only such knowledge, which relies on feelings. Experience and justified by the activities of reason, and the highest concept of mind (God, peace, soul, freedom) does not possess these properties, then L. d., according to Kant, and detects those inevitable contradictions, the mind will be confused, wishing to achieve absolute integrity. . However, this purely negative interpretation of L. d. In Kant had a huge historic. The value that I discovered in a human. Mind his necessary inconsistency. And this later led to the search for overcoming these contradictions of the mind, which was based on L. d. Already in a positive sense.
It should also be noted that the Cant for the first time uses the term "L. d", he attached so much and independent importance to this discipline. But the most interesting thing is that even Kant, like the whole world philosophy, unconsciously succumbed to the impression of the huge role, K, L. D. Plays in thinking. Contrary to his dualism, contrary to his metaphysics, contrary to his formalism, he, unnoticed for himself, still very often used the principle of unity of opposite. So, in chapter "On the schematics of pure concepts of the mind" of its basic work "Cleaits of pure mind", he suddenly sets himself a question: how are these sensual phenomena come under mind and its categories? After all, it is clear that meanwhile should be something in common. This is general, to-ry, he calls the scheme here, there is time. Time connects sensitly occurring phenomenon with categories of reason, because It is empirical, and a priori, (see "Cleaning Clean Mind", P., 1915, p. 119). Here in Kant, of course, confusion, because according to his main teaching, it is not something sensual, but a priori, so that this scheme does not give K.N. Combining sensuality and reason. However, there is no doubt that, unconsciously for himself, Kant understands the formation in time at all; And in the formation, of course, each category at each moment occurs and at the same moment is removed. So, the cause of this phenomenon, characterizing its origin, be sure to show itself differently and in different ways, i.e. Constantly arises and disappears. So, dialectich. Sensity synthesis and reason, and more precisely in the sense of L. d., actually built by Kant himself, but metaphysically dualistic. Prejudice prevented him to give a clear and simple concept.
Of the four groups of categories, quality and quantity, undoubtedly, dialectically merge into the group categories group; A group of categories of modality There is only the clarification of the obtained group of the relationship. Even within the deployment. Category groups are given in Kant on the principle of dialectical triad: unity and many merge into the unity of these opposites, the Kant himself calls in whole; As for reality and denial, then, of course, their dialectic. The synthesis is a restriction, since this last requires something to fix and it is necessary to have something extending for this reality in order to outline the border between approved and unconistent, i.e. limit approved. Finally, even the famous Antinomies of Kant (like, for example: the world is limited and implanious in space and in time) in the end, too, are removed by the same edge with the help of the formation method: the actual observed world is finite; However, we cannot find this end in time and space; Therefore, the world is not finite, and is not infinite, but there is only a quest for this end according to the regulatory requirement of the mind (see the Thamber, p. 310-15). "Criticism of the forces of judgment" also has an unconscious dialectich. The synthesis of "criticism of pure mind" and "criticism of the practical mind".
Fichte immediately facilitated the possibility of systematic. L. D. His understanding of things in itself as a subjective category, devoid of any objective existence. Absolute subjectivism turned out and thereby no dualism, but monism, which only contributed to a slender systematic. Allocation of some categories from others and approached L. d. To antimetaphysic. Monizma. It was worth only to make in this absolute spirit of the Ficht as well as the nature that we find from Schelling, as well as the story that we find from Hegel, as the system of objective idealism Hegel, K-paradium, within this absolute spirit, gave impeccable in his monism l . D., which covered the entire area of \u200b\u200breality, ranging from purely logic. Categories, passing through nature and spirit and ending with a categorical dialectic of the whole historical. process.
GEGEL'EVSKAYA, if not to talk about all other areas of knowledge, though, on Hegel, they also represent the movement of those or other categories created by the same world spirit, represents systematically developed science, in which there is an exhaustive and The meaningful picture of the general forms of dialectic movement (see K. Marx, Capital, 1955, vol. 1, p. 19). Hegel is absolutely right with his tons., When divides L. D. on being, essence and concept. Genesis is the first and most abstract definition of thought. It is specified in categories of quality, quantity and measures (and under the latter it understands just a qualitatively definite amount and quantitatively limited quality). Hegel understands its quality in the form of the initial being, which moves after its exhaustion into non-existence and formation as dialectich. The synthesis of being and non-existence (because in every formation is being always arises, but at the same time and destroyed). Having exhausted the category of Being, Hegel considers the same being, but with the oppression of this being to himself. It is naturally from here, a category of the essence of being is born, and in this essence Hegel, again, in complete agreement with its principles, the essence is most in itself, its phenomenon and dialectich. Synthesis of the original entity and phenomenon in the category of reality. This is exhausted by his essence. But the essence cannot be in the separation from being. Hegel explores the level of L. D., where the categories containing equally and being, and the essence appear. This is a concept. Hegel is an absolute idealist and therefore, it is precisely in the concept of the highest flourishing and being, and essence. Hegel considers his concept as a subject, as an object and as an absolute idea, the category of its L. d. Is the idea, and the Absolute. In addition, the hegelev concept can be done by Engels, interpret materialistically - as a common nature of things or, as Marx did, as the general law of the process or, as Lenin did, as knowledge. And then this section of Hegelian logic loses his mystical. Character and acquires rational meaning. In general, all these self-loaded categories are thought out by Hegel so deeply and comprehensively, that, for example, Lenin, concluding its abstracts of Gegelian "science of logic," says: "... in the u t o m s a m and d e A l and with t and ch e s to about m of the work of Hegel is only less idealism, in a sir of materialism. "Contradictory", but the fact! " (Op., Vol. 38, p. 227).
In Hegel, we have the highest achievement of all Western philosophy in the sense of creating exactly the logic of becoming when all logic. Categories are invariably taken in their dynamics and in their work. The interaction and when categories, although they turn out to be the span of only the spirit, however, as such an objective principle, nature, society and the whole story are presented in K-ROM.
From Domarxist philosophy 19 V. A huge step forward was the activity of Russian revolution. Democrats - Belinsky, Herzen, Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov, to their revolution. The theory and practice not only made it possible to move from idealism to materialism, but also led them to the dialectics of the formation, helped them create the most advanced concepts in different areas of cultural history. Lenin writes that Diagel's dialectic appeared for Herzen "Algebra Revolution" (see Op., Vol. 18, p. 10). As far as Herzen deeply understood L. d., For example. Regarding physical. The world, it can be seen from the following words: "The life of nature is continuous development, the development of an abstract simple, not complete, spontaneous in a specific complete, complex, development of the embryo to dismemberment of all the consideration in its concept, and the usual harassment to lead this development to it is possible to fully comply with the form of content - This is the dialectic of the physical world "(Coll. Op., Vol. 3, 1954, p. 127). Deep judgments about L. d. Expressed Chernyshevsky (see, for example, full. Coll. Op., Vol. 5, 1950, p. 391; t. 3, 1947, p. 207-09; t. 2, 1949, p. 165; t. 4, 1948, p. 70). Under the conditions of the revolution time. Democrats could only approach materialist. dialectic.
L. D. In the bourgeois philosophy of the 2nd p about l. 1 9 - 2 0 V. Bourgeois philosophy refuses those achievements in the area of \u200b\u200bdialectich. Logici, to-rye were in former philosophy. L. D. Hegel is rejected as "Sophisticatics", "logical error" and even the "painful perversion of the Spirit" (R. Gaim, Hegel and his time - R. Haym, Hegel und Seine Zeit 1857; A. Trendelenburg, logical research - a . Trendelenburg, Logische Untersuchungen, 1840; E. Hartman, about the dialectical method. Hartmann, Über Die Dialektische Methode, 1868). Attempts by Right Hegelians (Michelet, Rosencrancents) to protect L. D. turned out to be unsuccessful, both due to dogmatic to her relations and by virtue of metaphysic. The limitations of their own views. With others. Parties, the development of mathematics. The logic and her huge successes in the substantiation of mathematics lead to its absolutization as the only possible scientific logic.
Save to Sovr. Bourges. Philosophy elements L. d. They are primarily connected with criticism of the limitity of formal technology. Understanding the process of knowledge and reproduction of Hegel's teachings about the "concreteness of the concept." In the neocantianism to the place of the abstract concept, built on the basis of the law of the reverse ratio of the volume and content of the concept and therefore leading to increasingly empty abstractions, is a "concrete concept", understood by analogy with mathematics. Function, i.e. General law, to-ry covers everything off. Cases by applying a variable receiving any consecutive values. Having perceived this thought from the logic M. Drobish (new statement of logic ... - M. Drobisch, Neue Darstelung Der Logik ..., 1836), Neocantianism of the Marburg School (Kogen, Cassirer, Popper) generally replaces the logic of "abstract concepts" "logic Mathematics. Concepts about function. " This leads to the lack of understanding of the fact that the function is a way to reproduce reality by reason, and not she herself, to the denial of the concept of substance and "physical idealism". However, in Neokantian logic, a number of moments of idealist are preserved. L. d. - Understanding knowledge as the process of "creating" object (object as "infinite task"); The principle of "initial" (URSPRUNG), consisting of "preservation of the association in extraction and extraction in the association"; "Heterology of synthesis", i.e. subordination of it is not a formal law "α-a", but a meaningful "A-B" (see Kogen, the logic of pure knowledge - N. Cohen, Logik Der Reinen Erkenntnis, 1902; P. Natorp, logical foundations of exact sciences - p . Natorp, Die Logischen Grundlagen der Exakten Wissenschaften, 1910).
In Nehagelitz, the problem of L. d. Also rises in connection with the criticism of the traditions. Abstraction theories: if the only function of thought is distraction, then "the more we think, the less we will know" (T. X. Green). Therefore, a new logic is needed, subordinate to the principle of "integrity of consciousness": the mind carrying the unconscious idea of \u200b\u200bthe whole, leads its frequent ideas in accordance with it by "add-on" private to the whole. Puting the "Addition" principle of "negativeness" in the place of the Gegelevsky principle, Negheghelitiya comes to "negative dialectics": the contradictions found in the concepts indicate the unreality, "cable" of their objects (see F. Bradley, principles of logic - F. Bradley, The Principles of Logic, 1928; its own, phenomenon and reality - Appearance and Reality, 1893). Complementing this concept of the "theory of internal relations", K-Paradise, absoluting the universal relationship of phenomena, eliminates the possibility of true statements about isolated fragments of reality, Neaghegelism rolls to irrationalism, denies the legality of discursive and analytics. Thinking. The same tendency is in it. (R. Kroner) and Russian (I. A. Ilyin) Nehagelism, treating L. D. Hegel as "made by rational irrationalism", "Intuivism", etc.
The overall crisis of capitalism and rapid increases of contradictions of capitalist. Societies lead to attempts to revise L. D. In terms of recognizing the insoluability of the contradictions disclosed by it. There is a "tragic dialectic", differing from the Gegelian "ethos", i.e. The mood, excluding the "rationalistic faith in the final harmony of contradictions" (Liebert α, Geist Und Welt Der Dialektik, V., 1929, S. 328). Rejecting the reconciliation of the contradictions, "tragic. Dialectic" eliminates the possibility of resolving them, even by entering out the limits of the formation, within the framework of the swarm such permission is really impossible. It turns the "tragic dialectic" in the species of apology of the model. capitalism, but theoretically means a departure from L. d. Hegel to Kant's antihine. In "Critic. Dialectics" (Z. Mark), this thought is complemented by the statement of the impossibility of using L. D. to nature.
In pragmatism, criticism of the abstractness and formalistic traditions. and mathematics. Logic also leads to irrationalism (W. Jems) and Voluntarism (F. K. S. Schiller). Trying to replace the formal logic of "logic of research", Dewey perceives, however, some sides of L. D. Hegel, in particular, considering the relationship between the statements of various quality and quantity as evidence of the deepening of knowledge. Thus, contrastful judgments limit the study field and give referral to subsequent observations; Subcontrourisy - not the formal property that they cannot be simultaneously false, but by the fact that they specify the problem; Subalternative judgments, trivial in the course of thought from subordinate to subordination, are very important when moving from subordinate to subordination; The establishment of counterfeitator denial is a new step in the continuation of the study (see J. Dewey, logic. Research theory - J. Dewey, Logik. Theory of Inquiry, 1938). However, since the "logic of the study" Dewey is based on the concept of a "indivisible and unique situation", the forms and laws of logic are transformed into "useful fictions", and the process of knowledge is essentially in the "trial and error" method. Form Directions not related to traditions. L. d. In it. Classic. philosophy, usually interpret the limitations of formal logic as limited to scientific. knowledge at all. From here, it stems, for example, the requirement of Bergson about the need for "fluid concepts", capable of following the reality "in all its bends", which could combine the opposite parties of reality. However, "this is a compound, which enters into itself something wonderful, because it is not clear how two opposites can connect together, - will not be able to submit any diversity of degrees, no variability of forms: like all miracles, it can only be accepted or rejected" (Bergson α., Introduction to metaphysics, see the Camp. Cit., Vol. 5, St. Petersburg, 1914, p. 30). Consequently, the initial requirement of L. d. Turns into the requirement of the "miracle". Hence, a direct path to the recognition of irrationalistic intuition as unity, the means of genuine knowledge (German "Life Philosophy" A. Bergson) and to a straight mystics ("Dialectic. Theology" K. Barta, P. Tillya, and others, Mysticism W. T. States, "Polarity Philosophy" U. G. Shedon).
A considerable place occupy ideas idealist. L. D. in Sovr. existentialism. In general, to mysticism in the interpretation of knowledge, existentialism treats L. d. As "Dialogue I and you", where under the "you" is understood not only by Dr. person, but first of all "God" (Marseille, theological existentism. M. Buber). K. Yaspers, considering the highest form of knowledge of the intuition that coincides with the creation of its item itself and characteristic only by the Divine, at the same time perceives the hegelev opposition "reason" (VERSTAND) and "Mind" (VernunFT). The latter is worth the above reason, but below intuitive knowledge and is based on contradiction, it is used to break through the surrounding (Umgreifende) of our thought with the help of the contradiction itself as a consciousness. A person can get out of the prison of thought and mentality in Being itself. Transcendence by destroyed (Scheiternden) Thoughts are the path of mysticism in thinking (see C. Nospers, Von Der Wahrheit, 1958, S. 310). L. d., According to Jaspers, applies only to "existence", i.e. "The Being, which is the essence of ourselves," detecting yourself as "universal negativity" (ibid., S. 300). This thought was perceived in his interpretation L. D. And J. P. Sartre, who claims that the applicability of her to a person is connected with the fact that with him "Nothing" (Le Neant) comes to the world. Nature is the area of \u200b\u200bthe "positivist mind", based on formal logic, while society is a "dialectic mind". "Dialectic. Mind" is determined by Sartre as a "generalization movement" ("transformation into a whole", Totalization, as "logic of work". In this regard, dialectich. The mind turns into a means of knowing only the fact that he himself created. Real "whole", by sartra, exist only as a product of human. Activity, and the knowing and "constituting" of their "Totalizing" (Totalisateur) "dialectich. Mind" draws its principles not from dialectic nature and society, but from human. Consciousness and individual practitioners of a person opposed to both nature and society. This course of thought continues the conjecture of the Bourges. Ideologues of various kinds claiming that the connection of dialectics and materialism is impossible.
The development of neosopitivism and the absolutization of them mathematics. The logic as the only possible scientific logic slowed down the perception of the SCU. Bourges. The philosophy of even individual moments L. d. However, the crisis of the non-stage-off concept of "logic of science" generates attempts to go beyond her framework. Examples of this: "General theory of systems" L. Bertalanfi, "Genetic. Epistemology" J. Piaget, "Theory of Argumentation" X. Perelman. True, the lack of these logics any complete and clear dialectich. Concepts, as well as forgive empiricism in the logic study. techniques of scientific Thinkings do not allow to develop positive principles of L. d. However, their empiric. Studies are in line with a meaningful analysis of logic. Theories, thus approaching L. d. Interest is also the works of the so-called. "Dialectich. Schools", which grows around the Swiss magazine "Dialectika" (F. Gonzeth et al.) And adjacent to her philosophers and natural studies (Bashlar, P. and J. L. Retusch-Fevrie, etc.). However, their attempt to create L. d. As the logic of "dialectich. Opposites" is largely depreciated due to the pragmatist approach to the adoption of "alternative logic" on the basis of "convenience" and "utility" and absolute relativism in the understanding of truth (gonzeth), as well as Due to the fact that dialectich. The unity of anti-regulations is often replaced by an "complementary", postulating the sucking, and not the unity, "identity" of opposites.
So, in Sovr. Bourges. Philosophy are perceived only off. Parties, moments L. d.
None of the Sovr. Bourges. Form Theories have no scientific. Concepts L. d., and borrowed from the philosophy of the past dialectic logic. Ideas are increasingly leading to irrationalism and mysticism. However, the state of Sovr. Bourges. Philosophy suggests that the tradition of L. d. It did not stop at its framework, although on idealist. principles.
So, if you summarize the Domarxist and non-Marxist development of L. d., It is necessary to state that it performed: as the general formation of matter, nature, society, spirit (Greek. Naturophilosophy); As the formation of the same regions in the form of exact logic. categories (Platonism, Hegel); As the formation of mathematics. quantities, numbers and functions (mathematics, analysis); as a doctrine of the right questions and answers and disputes (Socrates, Stoics); as a criticism of any formation and replacing his discrete and unrecognizable multiplicity (Zenon Elayky); as a doctrine of naturally emerging probable concepts, judgments and conclusions (Aristotle); as a systematic. The destruction of all illusions of human. reason, irresistible to absolute integrity and therefore decaying contradictions (Kant); as subjectivistist. (Fichte), Objectivistist. (Shelling) and absolute (hegel) Philosophy of the Spirit, expressed in the formation of categories; as a doctrine of the relativity of human. Cognition and full logic. It is impossible to think and talk or about the possibility of at all any statements or denies (Greek. Sofists, skeptics); as replacing the unity of opposites by the unity of coexisting additional elements for the achievement of the integrity of knowledge (F. Bradley); as combining opposites with pure intuition (B. Kroce, R. Kroner, I. A. Ilyin); as irrationalist. and purely instinctive combination of opposites (A. Bergson); as relativistic understood and more or less random structure of consciousness (existentialism); And as a theologically interpreted system of questions and answers between Consciousness and Being (Marseille, M. Bubbub).
Consequently, in the Domarxist and non-Marxist philosophy L. d. I was interpreted from the standpoint of materialism and ending with the positions of extreme idealism. But the overall result of the history of L. d. Personal: Philos. The thought has already encountered a material being existing outside and regardless of human. consciousness; She already realized that the categories of human. thinking is the result of the reflection of this being; It turned out the need to recognize the relativity of these categories, their self-division and their complex character; MN. Form Systems also collided with the problem of the opposite influence of thinking on the world; And finally, the accounting of historicism in the teaching about the categories and their becoming began to speak. However, all these individual and often very large achievements of L. d. Remained more or less random historical and philosophical facts. There was no other social strength here, to-paradise would have been able to combine all these great achievements and associate with the Universal. Development, which would give them the most combined and generalized form and would cause to serve the needs of a freely developing person.
History L. d. It indicates that during the entire antiquity, the Middle Ages and even the new time to Kant L. d. Little differentiated from general exercises about being. Kant and him. Idealism, which opened independence L. d., was carried away in the opposite direction and began to interpret it either as a generation of human. Subject, or, as a last resort, as a generation of a certain world subject, the world spirit. It remained, however, another way, weakly used in the previous systems of philosophy, namely, the path of recognition L. d. As reflections of objective reality, but such a reflection, to-now itself through societies. Practice turns back to reality.
Single philos. The system that critically assumed all the conquest of previous philos. Thoughts in the field of L. d. From the standpoint of consistent materialism and who moved these conquest forward, only the philosophy of dialectich turned out to be. materialism. Marx and Engels who have made very high dialectic. The logic of Hegel, freed it from the teachings about the absolute spirit. They critically reworked the ideas of Feyerbach, also attempted to learn the achievements of Hegel in the field of logic with t. S. materialism, but not understood the role of labor for human spiritual development. Feuerbach proceeded from the fact that the real world is given to a person in the act of contemplation, and therefore saw the problem of materialist. Criticizing Gegelian logic in interpreting logic. Categories as the most common abstractions from a sensually contemplated by a person's picture of reality and this was limited.
Criticizing Feyerbach, Marx and Engels found that a person in his knowledge is not directly the outside world as it is in itself, but in the process of his change by man. Marx and Engels found the key to the problem of thinking and science on thinking in societies. practice. "Capital" of Marx was a triumph of materialistically understood by L. D. Economic. Categories as a reflection of economy. reality; They are abstractly generalized and at the same time concrete historic. character; Their self-development determined by the relevant self-development of the economy. reality; Their self-conflict and in general the contradiction as the driving force of historic. and logic. development; And finally, taking into account the revolution. The emergence of new historical. Periods, without any illusions, without any silence and accurate, - all this in the most distinct form makes itself felt in any dialectic. Categories in the "capital" of Marx. These are the categories of goods, concrete and abstract labor, consumer and exchange value, trade and money or formulas T - D - τ and D - D, surplus value, as well as the socio-economic itself. Formations - feudalism, capitalism and communism. Brilliant samples L. d. Del Engels in MN. His writings and especially in the "dialectics of nature". This was laid by the basics of Marxist L. d. Unprecedented development of natural science during the 19th century, on the one hand, and the development of the work movement, on the other, despite the small bourge. The reaction against Hegel, the minds constantly accustomed to L. d. and prepared the celebration of Marxist dialectics. In the 20th century Lenin, being fully armed with scientific achievements of the 19th and 20th centuries, gave a deep wording of Marxist L. d., Understanding it after Marx and Engels as a revolution. A coup in logic ("to the question of dialectic", see Op., Vol. 38, p. 353-61). It can be said that no economy., None of society.-Historic. and no cultural historic. The category did not remain in Lenin without dialectich. Processing. As examples, Lenin's teachings on the development of capitalism in Russia, on imperialism as the last stage of capitalist. Development, People and State, O Communist. Party, war and peace, to preserve the values \u200b\u200bof world culture and criticism of different periods of its development in the past, about trade unions, about the work of L. Tolstoy, etc.
L. d. In Soviet philosophy. In the Soviet Union, a lot of work is carried out on the dialectical analysis of individual categories, to combine them in a particular system, according to L. d. In general. Questions L. d. Designed by both Marxist philosophers of countries. A number of issues are discussion, in particular, it is understood in different ways the subject of L. d. And its attitude to formal. We note the most characteristic t. On the subject and content of dialectical logic, which was reflected in the owls. literature. T. Sz., For example, M. M. Rosental, E. P. Sitkovsky, I. S. Narso, etc. It comes from the fact that L. d. Does not exist outside dialectics, Kraya, being a science about the most General laws of development of nature, society and human. Thinking, acts simultaneously as the logic of Marxism-Leninism. "... dialectical logic should be considered not as something different from the dialectical method, but as one of the most important parties and aspects - exactly the side that explores what human thoughts should be - concepts, judgments and other mental shapes to express movement , development, change in the objective world "(Rosental μ. M., Principles of dialectical logic, 1960, p. 79).
There is a t. V., according to K-Roy L. d. It is part of the theory of knowledge, and the latter is part of dialectics. This concept is expressed by V. P. Roshina: "... The subject of dialectic logic is part of the subject of the Marxist theory of knowledge and dialectics ... In turn, the subject of the theory of knowledge is part of the subject of materialistic dialectics ..." ("Marxist-Leninsky dialectic as Philosophical Science ", 1957, p. 241). The same position adheres to μ. Η. Rutkevich (see "dialectical materialism", 1959, p. 302).
B. M. Kedrov comes from the fact that L. D. is "... a logical side or a logical function of dialectics" (see "Dialectics and logic. Thinking laws", 1962, p. 64) that she ".. . According to its essence, it coincides not only with the so-called subjective dialectic, i.e. dialectic of knowledge, but also with objective dialectics, dialectic of the outside world "(ibid, p. 65). At the same time, cedar recognizes that "... the problems of dialectical logic differs from the problem of the theory of cognition of materialism and on the general problematics of dialectics as science, although there is no sharp faces here. This difference is due to the fact that dialectical logic concerns special forms of thinking, in which The links of the objective world are specifically reflected (ibid, p. 66). In this regard, cedar considers it possible to talk about the specifics. The laws of L.,, by which he considers "... as the concretization of the laws of materialist dialectics in relation to the sphere of thinking, where the general laws of dialectics protrude in the form otherwise than in various fields of the outside world" (ibid).
A number of owls. Philosophers (S. B. Tsereteli, V.I. Cherkesov, V. I. Maltsev) go in this direction further, recognizing the existence of special, specifics. Forms of thinking: judgments, concepts, conclusions. Close to this t. Developing μ. Η. Alekseev, which is the subject of L. d. He considers dialectich. Thinking: "If the thinking learns the dialectic of the subject, aware of it, it will be dialectical, if he does not know, does not reproduce it, it cannot be called dialectic" ("dialectical logic", 1960, p. 22).
Finally, some recognize the existence of only one logic - formal, believing that the dialectic is not logic, but the philos. The method of knowledge and transformation of reality. So, K. S. Bakradze writes: "There are no two sciences about the forms and the laws of the correct m. There is one science, and this science is logic or formal logic ... Dialectical logic is not a doctrine of Forms and laws of proper, consistent thinking, and the general methodology of knowledge, methodology of practical activity. This is a method of studying the phenomena of nature, the method of knowledge of these phenomena "(" Logic ", TB., 1951, p. 79-80).
Creation. The development of any science is associated with the struggle of opinions, with attempts to resolve the tasks facing it, which is now being observed in the owls. logic. literature.
The basic principles and laws of L. D. From the point of view of L. d., Forms of thinking, categories are a reflection in the consciousness of universal forms of objective activities of societies. A person who transformative reality: "... the essential and nearest basis of human thinking is just a change in the nature of the Nature, and not one nature as such, and the human mind developed, respectively, as a person has been scientified to change the nature" (Engels F., see Marx K. and Engels F., Op., 2 ed., Vol. 20, p. 545). The subject of thinking is not just an individual, but a person in the system of societies. relationship. All forms of human vital activity are not just nature, but history, the process of becoming human. Culture. If the thing is made by a person or redone from others. Things, it means that it is made by someone, sometime for some purpose, i.e. Here the thing is a nodal point of very complex production and in general social and socio-historical. relationship. But if the thing is not even done by a person (the sun, the moon or stars), but only thinks to them, in this case, the social and historic. Practice also enters the definition of things. The principle of practice should be in itself the definition of the subject matter, since all items are either created by the subject, or they are redone from another, or, at least, for those or other life goals, they are allocated from the immense region of reality.
Being aware of the patterns of nature, in harmony with k-fish, a person changes any object, including himself, act as logic. Laws equally managed and the movement of the objective world, and the movement of human. Life. In consciousness, they act as the ideal image of objective reality: "The laws of the logic of the essence of the reflection of the objective in the subjective person's consciousness" (Lenin V. I., Op., Vol. 38, p. 174). L. d. It comes from the approval of the unity of the laws of objective peace and thinking. "Above all our theoretical thinking is dominated with the absolute force that our subjective thinking and the objective world are subordinated to the same laws and that therefore they cannot contradict each other in their results, but must agree between themselves" (Engels F. , Dialectic nature, 1955, p. 213). Any universal law of development of the objective and spiritual world in the definite. The sense is at the same time the law of knowledge: any law, reflecting what is in fact, also indicates how to think correctly about the relevant area of \u200b\u200breality (see thinking laws).
The main, the most general laws of development of reality are the unity and struggle of the opposites, the transition of quantitative changes to the qualitative and denial of denial of law.
The essential principles of L. d. Is the approval of universal communication and interchange-simplicity of phenomena, as well as their development through a contradiction. Hence, characteristic of L. d. The principle requiring the accounting of all (which can be allocated at this stage of knowledge) of the parties and the bonds of the subject with the other subjects; The principle requiring consideration of items in development. Development takes place only where every hour is the onset of everything new and new. But if in these upcoming new moments, it will not be present that it becomes new, and it is impossible to recognize it in all these new moments, it will be unknown what develops, and, therefore, the development itself will crush. The elimination of the difference in the moments of the formation leads to the death of the very formation, since it becomes only what moves from one to another. But the complete exclusion of the identity of different moments of the formation also annuls this last by replacing it with a discrete multiple fixed and no interference points. Thus, both the difference and the identity of certain moments of formation are necessary for any formation, without to-right it is made impossible. Taken in the definition The limits and in a specific content of development is history, L. d. There are primarily the logic of development, the logic is historical. About the dialectics of Lenin says that it is "... the doctrine of development in its most complete, deep and free from one-sidedness, the doctrine of the relativity of human knowledge, which gives us a reflection of the ever-growing matter" (op., Vol. 19, with . four). Historism is the essence of dialectics, and the dialectic is at the heart of its necessarily there is a historic. process.
The contradiction is the driving force of becoming, "the splitting of the united and the knowledge of the contradictory parts of it ... There is one of the main, if not the main, features or damns) of dialectics" (ibid, vol. 38 , p. 357). The development is the implementation of contradictions and opposites, which implies not only the identity and the difference between the abstract moments of formation, but also their mutual computiation, their association in this mutually exclusion. So, the real formation is not simply identity and the difference between opposites, but their unity and struggle L. d. He studies the development of categories, reflecting reality, K-Paradise "herself drives out" and no engine no engine, no engine, But there is nothing at all. Reflecting it categories have relative independence and internal movement logic. "The thinking mind (mind) sharpens the distinguished distinction of various, simple diversity of ideas to a significant difference, to the p r o t and in about l o l n o t i. Only raised to the top of contradictions, diversity becomes mobile (REGSAM) and Alive in relation to one to the other, - ... They acquire that negativity, which is in the nuclearness of self-duration and vitality "(ibid, p. 132). "Two main (or two possible? Or two in the history of the observed?) Development concepts (evolution) essence: development as a decrease and increase, as a repetition, and development as the unity of opposites (splitting together on mutually exclusive opposites and relationship between them). At the first The concept of movement remains in the shadows of self-effort, his strength, his source, his motive (or this source is transferred to about in N E - God, subject ETC.). With the second concept, the main attention It is rushed precisely on the knowledge of the source of "self" -dation. The first concept is dead, poor, dry. The second is life. But only the second gives the key to the "self-sufficiency" of all things, only it gives the key to "jumps", to the "gradual break", to "Transformity as opposed to", to the destruction of the old and the emergence of the new "(ibid, p. 358). "Movement and" S I M O D B and F E N E "[this is νβ! Spontaneous (independent), spontaneous, in n y t r e n e-about e b x o d and m ], "Change", "Movement and Vitality", "The Principle of All Self-Division", "Impulse" (TRIEB) to "Movement" and to "Activities" - the opposite, "Dead Being" - who will believe that this is the essence of Hegelevishchina ", Abstract and abstrusen (severe, ridiculous?) Hegelianshchina? ? This essence it was necessary to open, understand, Hinüberretten, to deprive, clear what Max and Engels did, "(ibid, p. 130).
The wonderful characteristic of L. d. The following arguments of Lenin are: "The glass is, undoubtedly, and a glass cylinder and a tool for drinking. But the glass has not only these two properties or quality or side, but an infinite number of other properties, qualities, sides, relationships, "Medium" with the rest of the world. A glass is a heavy item that can be a chain tool. A glass can serve as a press papier, like a room for caught butterfly, a glass can be value as an artistic thread or pattern, completely independently Is it better to drink whether it is made of glass, whether the form of its cylindrical or not quite, and so on, and the like.
Further. If I need a glass now, like a drinking tool, then it doesn't matter to know if it is quite a cylindrical form and whether it is made of glass, but it is important that there are no cracks in the bottom to be inhabited by drinking This glass, etc. If I need a glass of not for drinking, but for such an use, for which every glass cylinder is suitable, then a glass of cracks is suitable for me or even at all without the bottom, etc.
The logic is formal, which is limited in schools (and should be limited - with amendments - for lower school classes), takes formal definitions, guided by the fact that most commonly or that most often rushes into the eyes, and is limited to this. If there are two or more different definitions and connect together completely by chance (and a glass cylinder and tool for drinking), we obtain an eclectic definition indicating different sides of the subject and only.
The logic dialectical requires that we go further. To really know the subject, it is necessary to embrace, study all of his parties, all links and "mediation". We will never achieve this completely, but the requirement of comprehension will warn us from mistakes and from death. This is, in-1. The 2nd, dialectical logic requires to take the subject, in its development, "self-division" (as Hegel sometimes says), change. In relation to the glass, this is not immediately clear, but the glass does not remain unchanged, but in particular the appointment of the glass, consuming it, with in I be with the outside world. In-3, all human practices should enter the full "definition" of the subject and as a criterion of truth and as a practical determinant of the subject of the subject with what a person needs. In-4, dialectical logic teaches that "abstract truth is not, truth is always concrete," as she loved to speak after Hegel, the late Plekhanov ... I, of course, did not exhausted the concept of dialectical logic. But so far pretty and this "(cit., Vol. 32, p. 71-73).
One more judgment of Lenin is also given. Of the many other other judgments on this subject, but this judgment of Lenin has the character of exactly the pronounced system. It is about "dialectic elements." First of all, it is necessary to approve objective reality in itself, beyond all categories. In order for the thing to be learned, for this it is necessary to know her relationship to other things. This is fixed by Lenin in the first two "elements of dialectics": "1) about the b. E K and the meaning of consideration (not examples, not a retreat, but the thing in itself). 2) the whole set of multi-solid about tn o w E n and th about this thing to others. " However, the relations that exist between things in themselves cannot be dead and still. They are intended to move, because they are characteristic of the internal contradiction, leading to the unity of opposites in the future. "3) r and s and t and e of this thing (respective phenomena), its own movement, its own life. 4) Internal contradictory t e n d and and (and sides) in this thing. 5) thing (ETC phenomenon) as the sum and unity of opposites. 6) Fighting the deployment of these opposites, contradictory aspirations etc.. Instead of the initial and therefore an abstract thing in themselves there is a real thing, complete contradictory trends, so that it is potentially contained any other thing, although it is contained every time specifically. "7) Connection of the analysis and synthesis - disassembling individual parts and a set, summing these parts together. 8) The relationship of each thing (ETC phenomenon) is not only multi-minded, but universal, universal. Each thing (phenomenon, ETC process) are associated with Each. 9) Not only the unity of opposites, but transitions to a f d about the definition, quality, features, parties, properties in K a g d o e something [in his opposite?]. Finally, this process of live reality of things, endless in its diversity and endless in its existence; The unity of opposites is always burst in it, creating some forms and replacing them with others: "10) The infinite process of disclosing N about in the sides, relations Etc. 11) an infinite process of deepening knowledge of the man of things, phenomena, processes, etc. from phenomena To the essence and from the less deep to deeper essence. 12) on the existence of a causality and from one form of communication and interdependence to another, deeper, more general. 13) Repetition at the highest stage of known features, properties etc. , lower and 14) refund allegedly to the old (denial of denial). 15) Content struggle with form and back. Dropping form, alteration of content. 16) the transition of quantity in quality ... "(op., Vol. 38, p. 213-25).
These 16 elements of dialectic, formulated by Lenin, are the best picture of L. d. Here, Lenin in a certain way comes from the existence of matter through the wording of the essential relations to the living, self-consistent, eternally moving and raging concrete reality.
About dialectich system. K a T E G O P and Y. The structure of L. d. In general terms reflects the actual picture of human development. Cognition, the process of his movement from the immediate being of a thing to its essence. "The concept (cognition) in being (in direct phenomena) opens the essence (the law of the cause, identities, differences, etc.) - this is really a common course of all human knowledge (all science) in general" (ibid, p. 314).
In accordance with this, L. d. Has three main departments:
The Department of Genesis, Matters, in which problems are considered as the main question of philosophy, matter and form of its existence, space and time, finite and endless, matter and consciousness, etc.;
The entity department, the categories and laws of dialectics are considered in K-ROM: a mutual transition of quantitative changes to high-quality, dialectical contradiction, denial of denial, causality, shape and content, necessity, and accident, part and integer, possibility and reality, etc.;
Others, considering the problems of the cognition of the world, the role of practice in knowledge, empirical and theoretical. knowledge, questions of truth, form, techniques and methods of scientific knowledge, issues of scientific discovery, evidence, etc.
Sequence of logic development. Categories in the composition of L. d. It has objectively substantiated character and does not depend on the arbitrariness of people. It is dictated primarily by an objective sequence of knowledge development. Each category is a generalized reflection of matter, the result of a century-old social history. Practice. Logic. Categories "... The essence of the stage of allocation, i.e. knowledge of the world, nodal points in the network (natural phenomena, nature. - Ed.), Helping to know her and master it" (ibid., p. 81).
Explaining this understanding, Lenin is outlined by the overall sequence of logic development. Categories: "First, there is something more impressions, then something is allocated, then the concepts are developing to a (definition of things or phenomena) and to about l and h e s t a. Then studying and Reflection guide the idea of \u200b\u200bthe knowledge of the identity - the differences - the foundations - the essence of Versus (in relation to. - Ed.) The phenomena - causality etc. All these moments (steps, steps, processes) of cognition are sent from the subject to the object, checking the practice and coming through This check for truth ... "(ibid., p. 314-15).
Dialectic system. Categories have something mobile inside; It always changes and develops as well as historic. Plan. Each period in science and philosophy can be expressed in its specificity. Category system. And what is characteristic of one period may lose value for the other period.
Logic. Categories and laws - Stairs of knowledge, deploying an object in his own. Necessible, in the natural sequence of levels of its formation. Any of logic. Categories are determined only by systematics. Tracking her connection with all others, only inside the system and through it. The task of deploying logic definitions. Categories in a strict system is the only possible method of scientific and theoretical. Disclosures of the essence of each of them. Since such logic system. Categories reflecting the necessary sequence of knowledge development in agreement with the development of its subject is assimilated by man and thus turned into a conscious form of his thinking, it acts as a scientific research method.
All positions dialectich. materialism, i.e. L. d., Masciphered methodology, principles regarding ways to study a specific object - the value of the norms of true knowledge. This meant Marx, saying that it is possible to think about dialectic to think logically. Method. Only dialectic ensures the consent of the motion of thinking with the movement of objective reality.
About dialectic categories. The concepts "... should also be sick, broken, bending, moving, relatives, are interrelated, one in the opposites, in order to hug the world" (ibid, p. 136.). This "w and in and I am the connection of everything with everything" (Lenin's expression, ibid), obviously, should be disclosed in a certain sequence of categories so that their dialectic is visible. Any category, in view of its self-consistency, is moving towards the removal of this contradiction, which can occur only as a result of the emergence of a new category. This new category is also in contradiction with itself and as a result of the removal of this contradiction comes to the third category, etc.
Thus, any category becomes continuous and infinite until it exhausted all its internal opportunities. When these opportunities are exhausted, we come to her border, K-paradium already has its denial, the transition to its opposite, and that Infinity cannot be covered using a finite number of operations (eg, with the help of adding all new and new units), it is obvious that the specified limit of infinite becoming can only be achieved by jumping, i.e. The jump from the field of end values \u200b\u200bof this category is completely in new quality, to a new category, K-Paradise and is the limit of the infinite formation of the previous category.
The exhaustion of endless possibilities within this category, taken by itself, exactly nothing speaks of a contradiction underlying this exhaustion, nor about the exit to the limit of this exhaustion, which is the unity of the opposites of this category with the neighboring, in Ruya this category goes. Contradiction, as the driving force of becoming, is indispensable for no other force, and without it becoming scattered into a discrete multiplicity. However, here we are interested in the most dialectic mechanism. Transition, i.e. The most mechanism for the emergence of categories of contradiction. While we are moving within the category itself, a contradiction, although it remains at every step, but it is not necessary to fix it all the time. Only when we have exhausted all the internal content of this category and came across it on its border, on its limit, only here we first begin to quite clearly state the moment of real conflicting, because in the circle circumference, as we said, just coincide the opposites of the circle and the surrounding Background If the very simplest movement is the unity of contradictions (see V. I. Lenin, there, p. 130, 253, 342-43) and if there are contradictory forces in each phenomenon (see Tames, p. 213-15, 357 -58) And the most contradictions are movable (see the Tames, p. 97-98, 132), then it would naturally look for such a contradiction, which would speak for itself and appeared before us as an obvious fact and feelings. Perception and mind. Such a fact is that Lenin called the "border" or "limit." Lenin writes: "witty and clever!" Regarding the next reasoning of Hegel: "N E H T O, taken from the point of view of his immanent border - from the point of view of its contradiction with himself, what a contradiction pushes him (this is something) and takes it on its limits, there is to E which about things they say that they are finite, then they recognize that their non-existence there is their nature ("there is no existence of their being"). "They" (things) "with y t, but The truth of this being is their to about n e c "" (ibid, p. 98). Thus, not just the exhaustion of the internal content of the category and the transition to its limit, bordering the other category, is the essence of dialectich. transition, but it is only a specific mechanism of this latter and its specific picture, while the unity, the driving force of the category movement is its self-conflict, and the only force leading to the limit, and therefore to the other category everywhere and always remains only contradiction.
Thus, the polygon entered into the circle can have any large number of sides and at the same time do not merge with a circle circumference. And only with an infinite increase in the number of these sides in the limit, by jumping, we get a polygon already inscribed in the circle circumference, but the circle circumference itself. At the same time, the circle circumference removes the whole process of increasing the sides inscribed in this circle of the polygon and all the contradiction associated with it is the immediate boundary with other geometrich. Buildings already outside the circle. Therefore, translating accurate mathematics. The concept of limit into logic language. Categories, we must say that the secret dialectich. The transition consists in a jump-shaking transition from endless formation to the limit of this formation, to-ry, being a border with other categories, thereby incriminating it already contains in itself and to-ry, becoming a denial of this category, thereby begins to move to its opposite . Already to a new category, "the concepts usually seemingly dead, Hegel analyzes and shows that in them e with the movement. The final thing? So with me to the end! Something? - So, N E T O, what's the other. Genesis at all? - So, such an uncertainty that being \u003d non-existence "(ibid). So, Lenin teaches not only the movement of concepts, but also about moving them to the limit. And on the example of the category "Something", he stated that the achievement of the limit is already the beginning of the release of this limit. Lenin with approval quotes Hegel: "... it is through the definition of something like a limit, already comes out for this limit" (ibid., P. 99).
Take, for example, the category of being. Let's go through all its types and in general everything is included in it. After that, it turns out that there is nothing more than anything else. But since there is nothing else, then, therefore, this being does not differ from anything else; After all, after the exhaustion of all existence, as we said, nothing else remains. But if Genesis does not differ from anything, it does not have any sign and there is no something. Consequently, this being is non-existence. Dr. In words, non-existence there is that limit, to the to-ryomus is becoming being after its infinite formation and exhaustion and in K-ROM, it hits itself with an abruptly, moving in its opposite.
Consider further category of formation. When the formation has exhausted itself, it comes to its limit, to its border. And this means that the formation stopped and turned out to be now. Consequently, it became like a category, there is that limit, the formation of his infinite deployment turns to the way (we note that Hegel instead of the category that has become dasein, i.e. about "cash of being").
Take the category of becoming, i.e. Stopping becoming, and will also exhaust its infinite possibilities. Because Nothing but being existence does not exist and, therefore, there is nothing but that has become existence, then we have to spend the category of stops now to spend now on everything else, i.e. Inside him. And this means that the starting crushes on our deployment. stops, i.e. It will turn into a quantity, and thus all the quality (with its being, non-existence, becoming and becoming becoming becoming a quantity.
It is also not difficult to show that a changeless amount as a result of using all its endless possibilities will go to a quality quantity, i.e. least
The exhaustion of all the infinite possibilities of being at all, including all the qualitative and quantities, categories, will lead to the only possible way out - to comparison of all existence as such with it. To compare being with something else we can no longer, because All being is already exhausted and there is no longer anything else. As for the comparison of being with its individual moments, then this stage is also passed by us (in quantity and as least). It remains, therefore, to compare being with it by himself, but already with something else. Exhausting all the possibilities of some A, we begin to consider it as such, already outside of its internal transitions and begin to see that this is exactly what, but not something else. And when we were in this and found out exactly what it means that from being this and we moved to his essence. The identity is the first stage of the entity, because The essence is what is obtained by the ratio of being with it itself, his self-efforts or, as they say, its reflection and, in the first place, its reflection in it itself. The essence of being is, so on, nothing else, as itself, but only taken with m. His self-sufficiency.
Take the category of movement. Movement can be presented at any speed. It is possible to exhaust all these speeds only when we also take an infinite speed. But the body, moving with an infinite speed, immediately and at the same time is at all points of its infinitely long path. And this means that it rests. So, peace is moving with an infinitely high speed. And the fact that the peace is moving with zero speed, it is elementary. Therefore, the quiet category also appears by jumping to the limit from the infinite formation of its speeds.
Real thinking under the pressure of facts and experiments at every step shows actually and expresses in certain concepts precisely transitions, transformation of anti-positions in each other, formulates laws, on which these transitions are performed.
So, each of the categories of L. d. Reflects any side of the objective world, and all together they "... encompass conditionally, approximately the universal pattern of forever moving and developing nature" (Lenin V. I., Ibid, p. 173 ). Laws and categories of dialectics express universal properties, communications, shapes, paths and the driving force of the development of the objective peace and his knowledge. Expressing the objective dialectic of reality, categories and laws of dialectics, being disgraced by a person, act as universal philos. Method of knowledge of the world.
LIT: Marx K., Criticism of Gegelian dialectics and Gegelian philosophy in general, in the book: Mapleks K. and Engels F., From Early Works, M., 1956; his own, theses about Feyerbach, in the book: Marx K. and Engels F., Op., 2 ed., Vol. 3; His poverty of philosophy, there, t. 4; His introduction, there, t. 12; His, Grundrisse der Kritik Der Politischen Ökonomie. , M., 1939; Engels F., Karl Marx. To criticism of political economy, in the book: Marx K. and Engels F., Op., 2 ed., Vol. 13; His, anti-dub, is there, t. 20; its own, dialectic nature, there; His, Ludwig Feyerbach and the end of the classical German philosophy, there, t. 21; Lenin V.I., Materialism and empiriocriticism, Op., 4 ed., Vol. 14; His, once again about the trade unions, about the current moment and about the errors of Trotsky and Bukharin, there, T, 32; His, about the meaning of militant materialism, ibid, vol. 33; His philosophical notebooks, there, vol. 38; Debolsky N. G., About dialectic. method, t. 1, spb, 1872; Zhitlovsky X., Materialism and dialectic. Logic, M., 1907; Cassirer E., knowledge and reality, per. with him., St. Petersburg, 1912; Ilyin I. α., Hegel's philosophy, as a doctrine of the concreteness of God and man, t. 1-2, M., 1918; Asmus V. F., Dialectich. Materialism and logic, K., 1924; His dialectics of Kant, 2 ed., M., 1930; Orlov I., logic formal, natural-scientific and dialectic, "under the banner of Marxism." 1924, NO 6-7; Mushroom V., dialectic and logic as a scientific methodology (about the article Tov. Perlin), ibid, 1928, no 6; K.Lilov, to the question of the ratio of logic formal and dialectich., Ibid, 1937, NO 4-5; Losev A. F., Antique Cosmos and Sovr. Science, M., 1927; His dialectic art. Forms, M., 1927; his own, philosophy named, M., 1927; its own, dialectics of the number at the dam, M., 1928; His criticism of Platonism in Aristotle, M., 1929; His essays of ancient symbolism and mythology, vol. 1, M., 1930 (p. 468-592 about the dialectic of Plato); His history, the history of ancient aesthetics, M., 1963 (450-461 on a diamocrit dialectic); Varnash A. I., Logic and Dialectics, M.-L., 1928; Toporkov A. K., Dialectic elements. Logic, M., 1928; Melnik μ. Α., Dialectics of Heraclit Efesse, M., 1929; Hegel and dialectic. Materialism, M., 1932; Chernyshev V., about Hegel's logic, in Sat. Art.: Tr. Mosk. GOSID. In-she, philosophy and literature. Chernyshevsky. Form Factor, t. 9, 1941; Bakradze K. C, to the question of the relationship between logic and dialectics, "rep. Philosophy", 1950, NO 2; Astafev V. K., about two steps in the development of logic, ibid, 1951, NO 4; Lozovsky B. I., about the logic of formal and logic dialectich., Ibid; Alekseev M. H., discussion on the relationship of formal logic and dialectics, "Vest. MSU", 1951, NO 4; His dialectic forms of thinking, [M. ], 1959; His dialectich. Logic as science, M., 1961; Gokili L. P., relative to some issues of the theory of logic, in Sat. Art.: Tr. Tbilisk. State un-ta, vol. 45, 1951; its own, about the nature of logical, TB., 1958; Nutsubidze S. I., Dialectich. and formal logic, in Sat. Art.: Tr. Tbilisk. State un-ta, vol. 43, 1951; Τugarianov V. P., Marxist dialectic as the theory of knowledge and logic. Transcript of a public lecture. L., 1952; Gelashvili α. Α, to the question of the laws of thinking, TB.; 1953 (author.); Maltsev V. I., dialectical materialism and issues of logic, M., 1953 (abstract); His, about some of the features of dialectical logic, "Uch. Zap. Philosophical F-TA MSU", Vol. 190, 1958; Its, the place and role of categories in dialectich. materialism, M., 1960; Yusupov E., Logic laws and forms of thinking in the light of dialectical materialism, M., 1954 (Author's abstract); Rosenthal M., Questions of dialectics in the "capital" of Marx, M., 1955; His, about dialectich. logic, "communist", 1960, NO 11; His, Lenin and Dialectics, M., 1963; GAK G. M., On the ratio of dialectics, logic and theory of knowledge, "Uch. Zap. Mosk. Reg. Ped. In-Ta", vol. 42, 3, 1956; P. C, the question of the attitude of logic and dialectics in the works of progressive scientists of the West, in the same place; Categories materialist. dialectics, ed. M. M. Rosentale, M. Shotraza, M., 1956; Ρ ρ ожи ожи п П., Marxist-Leninsky dialectich. Logic, L., 1956; Tugarins V. P., ratio of categories of dialectich. materialism, L., 1956; Tsereteli S. B., About dialectich. Nature logic. Communication [for cargo. Yaz. ], TB., 1956; Sitkovsky E. P., Lenin about the coincidence in dialectich. materialism of dialectics, logic and theory of knowledge, "Vopr. Philosophy", 1956, NO 2; Zinoviev α. Α, on developing dialectics as logic, ibid, 1957, no 4; Jovchuk M. T., Dialectics of Hegel and Rus. Philosophy of the XIX century, Ibid; Ilyenkov E. β., Κ the question of contradiction in thinking, there; its own, dialectic abstract and concrete in the "capital" of Marx, M., 1960; Shur E. B., the doctrine of the concept in formal and dialectic. logic, "rep. Philosophy", 1958, NO 3; Tavadze I., to the Marxist-Leninist understanding of categories, TB., 1957 (abstract); Bibller V. C, about the system of categories dialectich. logic, [Dushanbe], 1958; Kopnun P. V., dialectic and contradictions in thinking, "rep. Philosophy", 1958, NO 7; His dialectic as logic, K. , 1961; Savinov A.V., Logic. Laws of thinking. (On the structure and laws of logic. Process), L., 1958; Larkers El De, Introduction to Dialectich. logic, lane. C is away, total. ed. and entry Art. Voikhvilo E. K., M., 1959; Gorsky D. P., concept as a subject of learning dialectich. logic, "rep. Philosophy", 1959, NO 10; Its, the problem is formal logic. and dialectic. identities, ibid, 1960, no 8; Hropp R. O., to the question of Marxist dialectich. logic as a system of categories, ibid, 1959, no 1; Kalandarishvili c. M., on the ratio of dialectich. logic and logic formal, Vladivostok, 1959; His dialectich. The logic on the reflection in the thinking of objective contradictions, TB., 1961 (author.); Kolzhansky, logic, dialectics and problems of knowledge, "Vestn. The history of world culture", 1959, NO 2; Logic. Research. Sat Art. [Editorgia E. Colman, etc.], M., 1959; Mankovsky L. α., Β. I. Lenin about dialectics, logic and theory of knowledge, μ., 1959; Problems dialectich. logic. Sat Art., M., 1959; Georgiev F. I., category materialist. Dialectics, M., 1960; Gritsenko I. I., Dialectich. materialism about the coincidence of the logic and history of knowledge, M., 1960 (author.); Kuravkovskaya ε. Α., Dialectics of the process of knowledge. Lecture, M., 1960; Sarajian V. Kh., On the unity of dialectics, the logic and theory of knowledge, in Sat. Art.: Tr. In-ta philosophy hair cargo. SSR, t. 9, 1960; Zuev I. E., Dialectich. Logic in classic. it. philosophy and in Marxism-Leninism, M., 1961; Ρebane Ya. K., to the question of reflecting objective reality in logic. The structure of thinking, "uk. Zap. Tartu State. University. Proceedings on philosophy", 1961, vol. 5, no 3; His role of dialectich. logic in connection with the social nature of thinking, [M. ], 1963 (author.); Dialectics and logic. Forms of thinking, M., 1962; Dialectic. Logic in economy. Science, M., 1962; Loose α, β. I. Lenin about the development of dialectich. logic in connection with the general development of logic, "Philos. Science" (Scientific. Dokl. Higher School), 1962, NO 1, 2; Armorenikova S. V., logic. The function of the categories of dialectics, ibid, 1963, NO 3; Kasymzhanov A. X., The problem of coincidence of dialectics, logic and theory of knowledge. (According to "Philosophical notebooks" V. I. Lenin), Alma-Ata, 1962; Stace W. T., Mysticism and Logic, "America", 1962, NO 68; Sheldon U. G., the principle of polarity, in the same place; Circassians V. I., Materialist. Dialectics as logic and the theory of knowledge. Edited by Nikitina P. I., [M. ], 1962; Batishchev G. C, contradiction as a category of dialectich. Logic, M., 1963; Gabrielian G., Marxist logic as a dialectic and the theory of knowledge, EP. , 1963; Ivanov ε. Α., On the ratio of the laws of formal and dialectic. logic in the process of operating concepts, M., 1963; Kedrov V., Unity of dialectics, logic and theory of knowledge, M., 1963; Kursanov G. α., Dialectich. materialism about the concept, M., 1963; Problems of logic and dialectics of knowledge, Alma-Ata, 1963; Sadovsky V.I., Crisis of the Neastivist Concept of "Logic Science" and antipositivistic flows in the SDU. Foreign logic and methodology of science, in the book: Philosophy of Marxism and Nezozitimism. Sat Art., 1963; Tourovsky M. B., Labor and Thinking, M., 1963; Uvarov A. I., Leninsky principle of objectivity in knowledge and some questions of dialectic. logic, Tomsk, 1963; Bogomolov A. C, Anglo-Amer. Bourges. Philosophy of the Epoch of Imperialism, M., 1964; BRADLEY F.N., The Principles of Logic, L., 1883; His Gue, Appearance and Reality: A Metaphysical Essay. 7-Th Impression, L., 1920; Green T. H., Works, Vol. 2 ..., 1900; Sohen H., System Der Philosophie. BD 1, Logik Der Reinen Erkenntnis, V., 1902; OVestreet M. α., The Dialactic of Plotinus, Berkley, 1909 (DISS); Εndres J. α., Forschungen Zur Geschichte der FrühmitTelalterischen Philosophie, Münster, 1915; Stenzel J., Studien Zur Entwicklung der Platonischen Dialektik Von Sokrates Zu Aristotees, Breslau, 1917; Grabmann M., Geschichte der Philosophie. Die Philosophie des Mittelalters, V., 1921; his own, Die Geschichte der Scholastischen Methode, BD 1-2, V., 1957; NatOrp R., Die Logischen Grundlagen der Exakten Wissenschaften, 2 aufl., Lpz.-b., 1921; Kroner R., Von Kant Bis Hegel, BD 1-2, Tübingen, 1921-1924; SoHn J., Theorie Der Dialektik, LPZ., 1923; Theodorakopulos J., Platons Dialektik Des Seins, Tübingen, 1927; WST P., Die Dialektik Der Geistes, Augsburg, 1928; Liebert α., Geist Und Welt Dialektik, B.-LPZ., 1929; Marck S., Die Dialektik In Der Philosophie Der Gegenwart, Tübingen, 1929; Sannwald α .. Der Begriff der "Dialektik" und der Antropologie, Bern, 1931; Hartmann N., Hegel Und Die Probleme der Realdialektik, "BLÄTER FÜR DEUTSCHE PHILOSOPHIE", IX, 1935; FoulQuie P., La Dialetique ..., 1949; Guardini R., Dialektische Gegensatz 1955; Bröcker W., Dialektik. Positivismus. Mythologie, FR./M., 1958; Ogiermann η., Zur Frage Nach Dem Wahrheitsgehalt Von Dialektik, "Festschrift E. Przywara", 1959, S. 106-125; Wald H., Introducere in Logica Dialactică, [VUs. ], 1959; Sartre J. P., Critique De La Raison Dialetique, v. I, Théorie Des Ensembles Pratiques, P., 1960; Its, L "être et Le Néant. P. ,; Jasný J., Kategorie Marxistické Dialektiky, Praha, 1961; ζelený j. , About Logické Strukture Marxova "Kapitálu", Praha, 1962; Bachelard G., La Philosophie du Non, 3 éd., P., 1962.
← Logic statement
- Didactic material in mathematics
- Research work "What secrets keep my name"
- One of the 7 Archangels 5. Holy Archangels. Names and meanings
- Is it possible to give icons as a gift?
- What prayer will help let go of a person how to pray to survive parting
- Strong prayers for reconciliation with a beloved person of prayer after parting with her beloved
- Confession and sacrament: how is the inseparable connection between them?
- My soul dies. Can the soul die. Signs of spiritual death
- How to recognize the witch in our time
- Baptists of their faith. Myths about Baptists. Splitters, heretics and sectarians
- Conspiracies in order to establish relations of mother and children
- Omichka - about life in the sect: in the punishment of my husband a pregnant woman in his stomach, and the son of his naked put me to the frost take me, otherwise I will put hands on myself!
- God does not give a person a person more than his strength, but why sometimes people do not stand?
- Sophisticated Words by Human Language: Simulacro Copy Not Holding Original
- Prayer to return a loved one
- Prayers for the return of your beloved man
- How did the state of Israel have been created?
- How to attract money and good luck to the house: Secret ways, signs and advice
- How to protect yourself from envy
- After the baptism of the child. What is needed for baptism. What clothes are needed for baptism