期刊文献+

“思维”的逻辑与“认知”的方法——“逻辑可否被修正”再检讨

Logic of "Thinking" and Method of "Cognizing"——A Rethink of "Whether Logic Can Be Corrected"
下载PDF
导出
摘要 在"逻辑可否被修正"问题上,学术界争论不休。本文拟从"体"上论证普通逻辑与现代逻辑的差异,以"思维"的逻辑与"认知"的方法以区别。前者是不可被修正的,后者则可以被修正。这样,逻辑不可被修正,唯有在普通逻辑的意义上是可被接受的,而逻辑可被修正,唯有在现代逻辑意义上是可被接受的。 Concerning "whether logic can be corrected," the academia has been in an endless debate. This paper attempts to identify the differences between common logic and modern logic from the standpoint of "substance" by differentiating the logic of thinking from the method of cognizing. The logic of thinking can not be corrected while the method of cognizing can. Therefore, the belief that logic cannot be corrected only holds water in terms of common logic. On the other hand, that logic can be corrected is true only in terms of modern logic.
作者 张晚林
出处 《上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2010年第6期58-64,共7页 Journal of Shanghai Jiao tong University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)
关键词 康德 罗素 苏珊·哈克 普通逻辑 现代逻辑 Kant Russell Susan Haack common logic modern logic
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献21

  • 1周礼全.形式逻辑和自然语言[J].哲学研究,1993(12):29-35. 被引量:16
  • 2陈波.一个与归纳问题类似的演绎问题——演绎的证成[J].中国社会科学,2005(2):84-95. 被引量:18
  • 3塔尔斯基,语义性真理概念和语义学的基础,语言哲学[M],商务印书馆,1988.
  • 4牟宗三,认识心之批判[M]上册,(香港)友联出版社,1956.
  • 5康德 邓晓芒译.《纯粹理性批判》[M].人民出版社,2004年.第471页.
  • 6《弗雷格哲学论著选辑》(王路译),商务印书馆1994年版,第90-12页.
  • 7Frege, Gottlob, 1997, "The thought", translated by Peter Geach and R. H. Stoothoff, in Michael Beaney( ed. ) , The Frege Reader, Oxford: Blackwell.
  • 8Haack, Susan, 1978, Philosophy of Logic, Cambridge University Press.
  • 91996, Deviant Logic and Fuzzy Logic:Beyond the Formalism, The University of Chicago Press.
  • 10Waal, Cornelis de (ed.), 2007, Susan Haack :A Lady of Distinctions The Philosoper Responds to Her Critics, Prometheus Books.

共引文献218

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部