Therefore, logic has long been closely linked with rhetoric, the theory of oratory.
The role of sophists in the development of logic is at least that the need to combat their intentional logical errors (so-called tricks) forced the defenders of strictly logical thinking to clearly articulate those of its norms that avoid deliberate, professionally constructed violations of logic …
10/17/2011
The logic of ancient India: periods of development. Abstract
The abstract provides information about the three periods of development of the logic of ancient India
Already in the ancient Upanishads ("Chandogya" "Mundaka") "… it is a question of existence of several independent kinds of a rank … in which list besides Vedas and various magical arts chronology, logic (rhetoric), etymology , grammar, science of numbers are mentioned., astronomy, military science ".
The emergence of logic in India was facilitated by philosophical debates, in which representatives of various currents defended their views and refuted the views of opponents. Therefore, logic has long been closely linked with rhetoric, the theory of oratory.
In the history of Indian logic, there are three main periods, differently outlining the chronological boundaries.
According to V. Donchenko:
first period: VI century. BC e. – II-III st. N. is .; second period: II-III centuries. – X century; third period: XII-XVII centuries.
According to M. Kondakov:
first period (early Buddhist logic) – VI-V centuries. BC e. – II st. N. is .; second period (activity of Vaisheshika and Nyaya schools) – III-V centuries; the third period (the flowering of Buddhist logic) – VI-VIII centuries.
The first period
Already in the early Buddhist period (Buddhist logic to Dignaga) treatises were written on how to effectively conduct disputes. At the same time, the focus was on the nature, types and place of speeches. Important importance was attached to the psychology of thinking (it was not advisable to make speeches in a state of fatigue, sadness, anger or any other strong arousal) and the actual oratorical aspect of speech (by what means to influence the audience). Attention was also paid to the logical persuasiveness of speeches and the need to follow the rules of logic.
Thinkers of that time distinguished six types of speeches:
speech about yourself; beautiful speech that gives pleasure (artistic word); speeches of debates in which the interlocutors involved in the discussion express opposing views on a particular thesis; "stupid speech" in which false teaching is taught; correct speech that is consistent with true teaching and aims to convey true knowledge to listeners; a speech in which the true doctrine is taught.
It was believed that the first and second types of speeches could be both "reasonable" and "unreasonable"; and this must be taken into account.
The third and fourth are always "stupid" so they should be avoided.
And the fifth and sixth – always "smart" they should always be used.
There were speeches and the place of utterance:
before the king; before the rulers; at a large meeting; before those who know the doctrine well; before the brahmanas; before those who love to listen to true teaching.
The topic of "speech decoration" was developed in detail. It was believed that speech is decorated, firstly, with perfect knowledge of both their system and those students against whom it is necessary to oppose, and secondly – the perfection of external form. Perfect speech was recognized, free from rude, clumsy, illiterate expressions; light, natural, simple; gums; complex, consistent; interesting in content.
The decoration of the speech was considered the following moments: the high authority of its author, trust and commitment to him; willingness to listen to the audience; lack of fear of the speaker; knowledge of opponents’ mistakes and belief in the advantages of one’s own thesis; the ability to quickly perceive what is said by opponents; the ability to quickly delve into their thoughts and find answers to them; the ability to capture the audience with the "charms" of speech; the ability to best convey the meaning of arguments; not to show depression during the discussion; do not be embarrassed; do not stumble; not to lose self-control; do not show fatigue.
There were the following requirements for speeches: expressiveness (including clarity of diction), avoidance of stinging remarks, irritability, anger, rudeness. During the discussion, memory and reason should work well, and intelligence should be shown.
The doctrine of the shortcomings of speech was also developed in detail. There were several groups of shortcomings, the first included:
recognition of one’s own mistake and the truth of the opponent’s thesis; various forms of 123helpme.me evasion from continuing the discussion; synthetic flaw, which contained the following nine types of speeches: random speech, crazy, dark, excessive (too short or too long), thoughtless (containing ten varieties, including a report, a proof that needs proof, a report based on illogical or false doctrines), contradictory, unclear, simple.
Before starting the discussion, it was recommended to determine the following circumstances in advance:
whether the discussion will be of any use; or an honest, impartial participant in the discussion; whether he has the knowledge and is able to conduct the discussion properly.
If the answer to these questions was in the negative, it was advised to avoid discussion.
Regarding the actual logical content of the speech ("basis" or "support" of the participants in the discussion), in the latter there were two elements: what needs to be proved, and the proof itself.
Provable can be either a subject, an entity, or an attribute, a quality. In the first case, the existence of something is asserted or denied (these are judgments that are now called existential), and in the second case, it is asserted or denied that a certain property or quality belongs or does not belong to the subject ( modern attributive judgments).
Proof consists of eight components (their list and definition in different sources are different): sentence, basis (basis), example, homogeneity, heterogeneity, direct (immediate) perception, conclusion, authority.
A sentence is a thesis in which a certain point of view is expressed on what must be proved2.
It is either based on scientific knowledge, or is the result of independent intuition, or heard from someone.
A sentence is a position that a participant in a discussion accepts voluntarily and that needs to be proved. Speaking, you need to make sure that it is clear to other people.
The basis is a logical basis, which follows from example, homogeneity, heterogeneity, direct perception, conclusion and authority.
When the object to be proved is not obvious, the basis is to find such moments that will make it known.
An example is the presentation of generally defined or accepted by science provisions.
Homogeneity is a component of proof, which is manifested in the similarity of essence, attributes, cause and effect.
Homogeneity was also considered "application" – a logical rule, which consisted of citing other facts belonging to the same class or genus, to prove the attribute of a logical subject.
Diversity is a component of proof, which consists in the mutual distinction of essence, attributes, cause and effect.
It means a logical subject, the concept of the object of thought, the object that is the carrier of properties and qualities.
The terms are given according to their interpretation by the science of that time.
Direct perception – the direct perception of the subject.
Its distinctive features are obviousness, independence from imagination and mistakes. Such errors included:
identification of one object with another (for example, a mirage – with reality); tendency to see in the elementary some complex (yes, in a dream a person can see two months instead of one); giving the object a certain shape in the imagination, when in fact it does not have it (for example, to see a wheel of fire at the rapid rotation of a burning object); error of perception (in disorders of the senses); attributing an unusual action to something (for example, the imaginary movement of trees when you pass them quickly).
The conclusion is the recognition of the object, provided that it is not directly perceived.
The following types of conclusions were called:
conclusion about the presence of the object on the basis of the presence of its feature (for example, the presence of fire on the basis of the presence of smoke); conclusion about the existence of the unperceived from the existence of the perceived or from a part of some essence about the unperceived part (say, to deduce the past from the present or the existence of a cart from the existence of its part, for example, wheels, etc.); inference through the derivation of its cause (for example, if the object we see from afar is motionless, we conclude that it is a tree, and if it moves, it is a person); conclusion about the existence of some things from the presence of others, when we know about their relationship (for example, from the fact of birth we conclude about death); conclusion-derivation of concepts that relate as cause and effect.
The conclusion expresses our belief in something beyond what follows from direct perception.
Authority – the teachings of the sages, the provisions set forth in the sacred books.
From all this it follows that early Buddhist logic was woven into general philosophical concepts, depended on their principles. In addition, even in the system of the theory of oratory, the rhetoric elements of logic were minor episodic infusions.
The second period. The logic of the nyaya school
The second period of development of Indian logic includes the activities of related philosophical schools of Vaisheshika and Nyaya. The first dealt mainly with natural philosophical problems, and the second – logic.
The source of the nyaya system is seen in the propensity of Hindus, which has been observed since the time of the Upanishads, and which has intensified with the disintegration of Indian philosophy and the emergence of numerous schools. As a result, there was a need for a generally accepted canon, which could be referred to, justifying the correctness of their own and the erroneousness of opposing arguments.
Such a canon of logic was the nyaya system. The oldest surviving nyaya logic is a collection of 538 Gothic sutras in five books. The first of them consists of two parts. The first sets out the doctrine of nine categories, which reveal the structure of the dispute and the sequence of its following components:
"certification of their weapons" ie knowledge of the canon of logic; consideration of the object of the dispute; refutation by the opponent of the thesis of the proponent (in modern terminology); proclamation of the motive of refutation; focusing on example and reaching an agreement on what is clearly recognized in advance by the parties to the dispute; formulation of the position that determines the subject of discussion; proving by the proponent of his thesis according to all the rules of the relevant art; refutation by the proponent of the opposite statement by proving that it implies impossible consequences; obtaining proven truth.
In the second part of the first book, the Goths, in addition to the above nine categories, give seven more, which consider the errors that occur in the verbal competition.