Mojtaba Ghorbani Hamedani
Abstract
Most Muslim logicians divide the acquired science into the obvious and theoretical with the criterion of thought. The purpose of this study is to investigate the usefulness of this division in the logic of affirmations. The main benefit of this division, with the aim of finding out the truth in the science ...
Read More
Most Muslim logicians divide the acquired science into the obvious and theoretical with the criterion of thought. The purpose of this study is to investigate the usefulness of this division in the logic of affirmations. The main benefit of this division, with the aim of finding out the truth in the science of logic, is to show the need to the science of logic in moving from the obvious propositions to theoretical ones; but in relation to the obvious immediate perceptions, because of their being certain, there is no need for this science. Analyzing the thought and various obvious propositions, we can conclude that "obviousness" cannot be a factor in the certainty of affirmation, because some of other people's immediate perceptions are false in our view. The certainty of each immediate perception is related to factors other than their being obvious. Although all our immediate perceptions are certain for us, we do not pay attention to the other people's acknowledgment factor in evaluating their thoughts. We examine their arguments in terms of the formal and material rules of reasoning. The thought is not discussed anywhere in the science of logic except in the division of science into the obvious and the theoretical, and this is a proof of the uselessness of this division. An alternative division, based on the existence or absence of argument, divide science into sub-structural and super-structural. The validity of the argument in super-structural affirmations is checked in the science of logic. The logic of affirmations is the science of error detection in reasoning, not thought.
mojtaba ghorbani; Ahmad ghaffari gharebagh
Volume 19, Issue 3 , January 0, , Pages 1-16
Abstract
In one classification, all of the sciences are divided into instrumental and original. Sciences such as logic, the principles of jurisprudence and algebra are classified as instrumental sciences, and other sciences such as philosophy, jurisprudence and arithmetic as the original ones. Instrumentality ...
Read More
In one classification, all of the sciences are divided into instrumental and original. Sciences such as logic, the principles of jurisprudence and algebra are classified as instrumental sciences, and other sciences such as philosophy, jurisprudence and arithmetic as the original ones. Instrumentality and originality are two terms that are in fact not defined clearly. To understand the criterion which distinguishes these two sciences, one must rely on the common sense of the scientologists of the two terms. Different sciences have a cooperative relationship with each other and in solving the issues of one science other sciences are involved; however, the use of one science in another cannot be regarded as a criterion of instrumentality of that science. Also, personal aims of the creators and users of the sciences cannot be a true criterion for this categorization. In the present article, by rejecting personal opinion and relativity, a general criterion for a science to be instrumental is presented. The main benefit of a science because of which the wise agree on its necessity in the body of human knowledge can be a criterion for this classification. In this article, the science of logic as an instrumental science has been the focus of discussion, although the criteria presented has nothing to do with logic.
