Basic laws of logic and normative rules of thinking in management activities
Our thoughts are very mobile. And this is not bad, since it is precisely this property of thinking that allows reflecting a continuously changing reality. It is important only that the variability of thought is not chaotic, but orderly, not accidental, but necessary, not skipping from one subject to another, but consistent.
At first glance, it may seem: what to say here, there is nothing easier than to argue this way. Sometimes there is not enough skill, desire and will to bring one thought to the end, without starting a conversation about another subject. An unscrupulous interlocutor can use a number of tricks to confuse the case. The logical culture of thinking is achieved by observing formal-logical laws.
The basic laws include:
• The law of identity;
• the law of non-contradiction;
• The law of the excluded third;
• the law of sufficient reason.
The law of identity requires compliance with one of the sides of logical, specific thinking. Symbolically, the law can be represented in different ways:
In natural language, this means: "A is (identically) L".
This means that every statement must be identical, equal to itself. In other words, the law requires that concepts be not substituted in the process of reasoning.
Obviously, the concept and the judgment can be identical to itself in a particular situation. Outside of a specific situation, the law makes no sense. We can mentally identify the concept with the object, then the law of identity will be formulated: Every object is what it is K
It is possible to express the law more specifically: "When a thought about an object appears in a reasoning or conclusion, we will think precisely this very object and in the same content of its signs." As Ivlev writes: "In the process of reasoning, using a certain term, we must use it in one and the same sense, to understand something definite under it." In other words, every thought about an object must remain identical, equal to itself, unchanged throughout the reasoning about this subject.
The last wording clearly divided the thing and the notion of it. Obviously, the law refers only to concepts, judgments, that is, to logical objects. In the first formulation of the law of identity, there is an apparent identification of a thing and the concept of it. In the differences of formulations, the complexity of the law manifests itself.
One of the erroneous interpretations of the law is the transfer of the law from concepts to things, the interpretation of law as the law of being, talking about the relative stability and certainty of being. From the standpoint of formal logic, we, first of all, speak of the manifestation of being i! head of a person in terms. In the hallway reasoning should not change the meaning of concepts and statements. The law can be misunderstood as a requirement to always think of an object with the same set of characteristics. No, in different situations, an object can be thought of in different ways, it is only necessary to adhere to the requirements of this law in one particular situation.
Violations of the law of identity are associated with errors such as substitution of the thesis and substitution of concepts.
The first kind of such situations arises when the speaker himself imperceptibly substitutes the subject of reasoning for others (starting with health, moving to rest).
Another case occurs when two speakers use the same term, but put a different meaning into it. They, the participants in the discussion, had to discuss in advance the meaning of the concepts used.
From the law of identity follows a number of normative rules of thinking.
First, the concepts and utterances used in reasoning must be initially clear, clear, not containing internal contradictions. If the proponent (the presenter of the conversation) logically correctly determines the main terms he uses in the dialogue, then the opponent (the interlocutor in the dispute) must proceed in assessing the truth of his statements only from these definitions. If the opponent unclearly determines the content of the main terms, then the opponent is forced: either immediately to clarify their content; or consider these statements as meaningless enough; or to invest in these terms a meaning known to him; or try to identify the meaning of the leader's statements from the context. In any case, this makes it difficult to dialogue or makes it generally impossible.
Secondly, it is prohibited to unofficially substitute the subject of thought. Its content should be equivalent, identical, identical throughout the conversation about this subject. Even Aristotle said that it is impossible to think anything about the subject, if you do not think every time something one. From the law of identity follows the principle of reservations: if you change the meaning of the term, then specify this, otherwise you will be misunderstood.
Thirdly, should be especially careful when using homonyms and synonyms. In this case, there is a danger of either identifying different objects or distinguishing identical ones.
Compliance with the regulatory requirements of the law of identity is one of the conditions for effective management and business communication. A characteristic and instructive example is given by the Soviet party and state figure
L. I. Brezhnev (1906-1982) in his book "Revival". In particular, an episode of the postwar recovery of the national economy is described, when the vagueness and ambiguity of the formulation of the task and the establishment of the performer gave rise to a paradoxical situation.
The incident was funny, - recalls Leonid Brezhnev. - I got a drawing to them, and there was a categorical resolution on it: "It's a disaster! Make it today. Livshits & quot ;. Well, the installers looked and were horrified: according to the strictest standards of work, there were about three days. It was not without strong words, but there is nowhere to go, piled on the smart and mounted everything on the same day. Here runs to them a girl from the design office: "Where is the drawing?" It turned out that the resolution of Comrade Livshits, the head of the energy sector of Gipromez, did not concern installers at all. He asked to do just a copy of the drawing .
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay