|
Arabic
Bengali
Chinese
English
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Malay
Polish
Portuguese
Spanish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese|
Lecture notes, cheat sheets
Логика. Суждение (конспект лекций)
Directory / Lecture notes, cheat sheets Table of contents (expand) LECTURE No. 10. Judgment 1. General characteristics of judgments This is a form of thinking in which something is affirmed or denied about the surrounding world, objects, phenomena, as well as the relationships and connections between them. Judgments are expressed in the form of statements regarding a specific subject. For example, the following expressions are propositions: “Mars is called the red planet”; "Man is a mammal"; "Moscow is capital of Russia". All these statements assert something about their subject, but the judgment can also deny it. For example, “Plato did not live in China”; “The driving force of a trolleybus is not fuel,” etc. Judgments are both true and false, and the truth or falsity of judgments depends on the objectivity of the reflection of the surrounding world. If objects, processes, phenomena of our world are reflected in the judgment correctly, correctly, the judgment is called true. Based on the foregoing, it can be noted that all the above judgments are true, since they reflect the state of affairs that exists in reality. If the judgment reflects the surrounding world with distortions, incorrectly determines the place of objects in relation to each other and does not correspond to reality at all, it is called false. False judgments can arise due to a person's oversight or with his direct intent. The falsity of judgments is not always obvious, but in most cases it is obvious. For example, the proposition "From the Earth the far side of the Moon is visible" is false. Also, for example, the proposition "All vehicles are equipped with an engine" will be false. All of the above refers to traditional logic, which is characterized by ambiguity of judgments. In other words, every proposition can be either true or false. In this case, no other options are allowed. However, since the birth of logic, it has been known that some judgments are of an indefinite nature. At the moment they are neither true nor false. One of the most famous such judgments is the proposition “God exists.” Not supported by anything other than faith, this expression does not make it possible to reliably verify the truth or falsity of the information contained in it. Other such judgments include the following: “There is life on Mars” or “The Universe is infinite.” Today, it is not possible to reliably verify and approve or refute these judgments. Judgments about future phenomena for which it is not yet known whether they will occur or not can also be considered uncertain. For example, the judgment “It will snow tomorrow.” It cannot be true, because there may not be snow, in which case the true nature of this judgment will necessarily be refuted. However, this judgment is not false, because there is a possibility that snow will still fall. Since it is unknown whether there will be precipitation or not, we cannot determine in advance the nature of the judgment (whether it is true or false). Such an approach to determining the nature of judgments is inherent in one of the varieties of many-valued logic - three-valued logic. Judgments consist of a subject (denoted by the Latin letter S), a predicate (denoted by P) and a connective. It is also possible to have a quantified word. Subject of judgment is his subject. Namely, this is what the judgment says. The predicate gives the concept of the attributes of the subject. The link is expressed by the words "is", "is", "essence". Sometimes it is replaced by a dash. Any subject of judgment is reflected in some concept. As we remember, the concept is characterized by content and volume. It is to determine the part that the judgment occupies in the scope of the concept that reflects its subject (subject), and the quantified word is intended. In a language, such a quantifier could be the words "all", "some", "none", etc. 2. Language expression of judgments In language, judgments are expressed in the form of sentences. As is known, a sentence consists of linguistic units - words. This means that the meaning of a sentence depends on the words, their meaning, and the coloring with which we express our thoughts. According to the purpose of utterance, sentences can be narrative, motivating, or interrogative. Each type of offer has its own specifics. When examining each individual proposal for the presence or absence of judgment in it, it is necessary to be guided primarily by the information that it carries. Every sentence carries information, but not every sentence contains a judgment.. This means that a judgment is not just information, but has features characteristic only of judgments. Such features are the way information is presented in judgments: firstly, judgments confirm the presence or absence of an object, and secondly, judgments may contain a denial of the existence of a particular fact, phenomenon, process. From the point of view of the convenience of expressing judgments, the most suitable declarative sentence. As is known from the Russian language course studied in high school, a narrative sentence contains actively conveyed information. That is, the narrative contains a direct reflection of the subject in question. For example, “The sun is shining brightly today” is a true (if the sun really is shining) proposition expressed in a declarative sentence. As an example, we can cite a few more narrative sentences: “L.N. Tolstoy is a great Russian writer”; "The morning fog penetrates to the bones"; "Sugar is not the opposite of salt." All these sentences contain a judgment about a particular object and affirm its existence or deny this fact. Since declarative sentences are convenient for expressing judgments, they are most often used for this purpose. However, there is controversy among scientists about the ability to convey judgments of other types of sentences. One-part impersonal sentences, such as "Shives"; "Skid"; "It's baking"; "Hurts", may contain judgments. However, by considering such sentences, it is impossible to determine the truth or falsity of these judgments. This situation is associated with an extreme lack of information, because such sentences consist of one word and are intended more to reflect the mood than to accurately convey information. In this regard, it is necessary to recognize that a one-part impersonal sentence can be considered as a judgment only if it is clarified and supplemented with the necessary data. All of the above also applies to denomination sentences, such as "Summer"; "Sea". Nominal sentences, in addition to coinciding with one-component impersonal sentences, have their own specifics. It lies in the fact that such proposals cannot be considered at all in isolation from the context. Most often, noun sentences play the role of a response to a previously spoken phrase. For example: “A multi-colored arc after the rain, what is it?” - "Rainbow". It should be mentioned that some narrative sentences also need to be supplemented and clarified, since otherwise they cannot contain judgments. For example: "It's always cold in our area in summer" needs to be clarified as to which regions we are talking about. Otherwise, it is not clear whether the proposition is true or does not reflect reality. Just like the sentence "This team is the best in science" does not give us an idea of what kind of science we are talking about and what kind of team is named the best. Accordingly, additions and clarifications regarding these subjects are required. The declarative sentences discussed above arise most often due to the separation of a specific sentence from the main statement, without making changes to its composition. In other words, when a sentence is taken out of context. Currently, there is no unambiguous point of view on the problem of judgments in incentive sentences. Incentive sentences are intended to convey information about the desire, impulse, general direction of the activity of the person pronouncing them. Probably, every person knows examples of such sentences from childhood. For example, slogans, calls like "Protect nature - your mother!", "Motherland is calling!", "Peace to the world!" are incentives. Such sentences are not judgments, despite the fact that they contain an affirmation or negation of something. For example: "Don't smoke!", "Go in for sports!" - these are incentive proposals, the first of which is aimed at denying a bad habit, and the second affirms the correct way of life. However, a number of scientists argue that orders, commands, appeals, slogans contain modal judgments. They are considered within the framework of modal logic (this is non-classical logic). Modal propositions contain so-called modal operators. These are words such as “possible”, “proven”, “necessary”, etc. Modal judgments will be discussed in more detail in the corresponding topic. Thus, the calls "Be hardened!", "Don't make a fuss", "Full speed ahead!", according to a number of researchers, contain judgment. As mentioned above, a single point of view on the issue under consideration has not been reached, and some scientists do not deny the presence of judgments in incentive sentences at all. This position is argued by the fact that incentive sentences do not contain negation or affirmation, and it is impossible to say about them whether they are true or false. The question is the main way to learn something new from a person who knows more than you do. Questions are expressed in the form of interrogative sentences. Do these sentences contain judgments? There is no definite answer to this question. Most of the interrogative sentences do not deny anything, just as they do not affirm anything, and it is not possible to determine the truth of such a sentence, and, accordingly, its falsity. From this point of view, interrogative sentences clearly cannot be carriers of judgments. However, we must not forget about sentences that contain rhetorical questions. Such questions definitely fill the sentence with meaning and new information. Such a sentence, although not explicitly, but with sufficient obviousness, expresses some truths. For example, this information may indicate the desire of each person to be happy, people's attitudes towards war and peace, poverty and wealth. This makes the interrogative sentence capable of expressing a judgment. An example of such interrogative sentences can be: "Will the war end?", "Who does not want happiness?" etc. Author: Shadrin D.A. << Back: Division of concepts (General characteristics. Rules for dividing concepts. Dichotomy) >> Forward: Simple judgments. Concept and types (The concept and types of simple judgments. Categorical judgments. General, particular, individual judgments)
▪ Metrology, standardization and certification. Crib ▪ Theory of learning. Lecture notes ▪ Informatics and information technologies. Crib
The existence of an entropy rule for quantum entanglement has been proven
09.05.2024 Mini air conditioner Sony Reon Pocket 5
09.05.2024 Energy from space for Starship
08.05.2024
▪ Quantum processor for 127 qubits ▪ Artificial intelligence will predict magnetic storms
▪ site section Electric meters. Article selection ▪ article And a smile of knowledge played on the fool's happy face. Popular expression ▪ article What is Kevlar? Detailed answer ▪ article Bird cherry virgin. Legends, cultivation, methods of application ▪ article Security system for home. Encyclopedia of radio electronics and electrical engineering ▪ article Azerbaijani proverbs and sayings. Large selection
Home page | Library | Articles | Website map | Site Reviews
www.diagram.com.ua |
We recommend interesting articles Section 
See other articles Section 
Latest news of science and technology, new electronics:
All languages of this page